I wouldn’t consider Catholic hospitals abortions to be the same situation. They don’t give abortions to anyone. That’s not the same as refusing a particular patient because they don’t like things that patient has said in the past.

But they treat pregnant women, and somethings things go wrong. Very wrong.

The procedures to deal with incomplete miscarriages are the same as for abortion. Delaying such procedures can have horrible consequences. Some Catholic hospitals have played this game, delaying and delaying until sepsis or some other condition becomes life threatening. If they wait too long, the pregnant woman may die.

I agree that abortion is sometimes necessary but that’s not really what I’m asking. Since we are talking about cancel culture I am asking what the spectrum of consequences should be for unpopular speech. One potential consequence could be that a hospital refuses to treat someone who has said something unpopular. For example Alex Jones has a heart attack, should a hospital deny him because of who he is? Note that my question is also not about what the law says, but what it should be.

My question is, should a hospital be able to deny treatment to a person based on that person’s previous speech? Is potentially being denied at the emergency room just another “consequence” of saying unpopular things? What if the hospital is privately owned, and the potential patient has slandered the owner or doctor in the past?

But there have been CVS/Walgreens pharmacists who refuse to offer birth control or the morning after pill.

Still, that’s not refusing service to a particular customer based on that customer’s speech. I believe that pharmacist would refuse any customer. My question is about a pharmacy which would refuse e.g. Alex Jones because of things he’s said in the past.