For Immediate Release
Harrisburg, PA
Gender-affirming care, reproductive rights, bodily autonomy, marriage equality, mental health care and addiction care are all enshrined by the Contemplative Order of Compassion as religious, sacramental rituals. As such they are protected under the First Amendment (Free Exercise clause).
In 1962, a New York state judge ruled that a 69-year-old Jehovah’s Witness could refuse a blood transfusion, based on religious grounds, under the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause.
Three years later, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled in the case of In re Estate of Brooks (1965) that a county judge’s ordered transfusion for a Jehovah’s Witness was an unconstitutional invasion of a person’s religious beliefs. In similar cases, a Milwaukee judge refused to order blood transfusions for a 6-year-old boy whose mother objected.
In Commonwealth v. David R. Twitchell and Commonwealth v. Ginger Twitchell (Mass. 1993), Massachusetts’s highest court overturned a ruling against a Christian Scientist couple, whose 2-year-old son died after their refusal to submit him to medical treatment that violated their religious beliefs.
In the Child Abuse Prevention Treatment Act of 1996, Congress legislated that there was no federal requirement that a child must be provided “medical service or treatment against the religious beliefs of the parent or legal guardian.”
This establishes a long series of historic precedents, on which the Contemplative Order of Compassion will continue to provide a safe haven for those seeking (but not limited to) the sacramental rites described above. Consistent with our core guiding principles, the Contemplative Order of Compassion Sanctuary is joining other religious institutions in taking action to address reproductive laws that violate our religious conscience by inflicting guilt and shame in one’s decision and being inconsistent with necessary health and safety standards.
