Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
I am grateful to Dr Stammers and Professor Vacek for their thoughtful commentaries on my paper.1 I will take their points one by one, though in no special order. Given the space available, I will confine myself to their most important remarks.
Dr Stammers accuses me of aligning religion and conscience too closely.2 I agree with him that conscience is broader than religion and that the issue of conscientious objection should be framed so as to handle wholly non-religious ethical objections. I wrote, ‘It is essential for the ethics of cooperation not to be seen as necessarily religious in nature in order for it to have proper application to disputed cases, whether or not brought by religious litigants’.3 A potential draftee might be a pacifist and not a religious adherent; the same in healthcare, where one might oppose abortion or euthanasia, say, on secular grounds. The main purpose of my paper is to show that a viable ‘ethics of cooperation’ can be used in all conscientious objection cases where complicity is at stake, whether the objection is religious or not.
It is of course right, as Dr Stammers observes, that my ‘methodological neutralist’ will likely bridle at the claim that a top-level primary ethical or religious belief, such as that abortion at 12 weeks is immoral, is beyond a reasonableness test. Notoriously, in our secularised and diverse liberal society, a proposition that seems patently clear to one side of a major ethical debate can seem anything but clear to the other side, who will …
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Further clarity on cooperation and morality
- Why medical professionals have no moral claim to conscientious objection accommodation in liberal democracies
- Selling conscience short: a response to Schuklenk and Smalling on conscientious objections by medical professionals
- The BMA's guidance on conscientious objection may be contrary to human rights law
- A critical review of conscientious objection and decriminalisation of abortion in Chile
- The truth behind conscientious objection in medicine
- Public reason and the limited right to conscientious objection: a response to Magelssen
- Conscientious objection should not be equated with moral objection: a response to Ben-Moshe
- Freedom of conscience in Europe? An analysis of three cases of midwives with conscientious objection to abortion
- Conscientious objection and medical tribunals