Any affiliations entered into by a publicly funded system that allow religious considerations to outweigh scientific and medical judgments are improper — and according to the state constitution and statutes, quite possibly illegal. Instead of reaching an agreement, the working group splintered. It ended up submitting two options for the UC administration and regents to choose from: Option 1, favored by those who think the university should find a way to collaborate with religious healthcare institutions, and Option 2, which explicitly places UC’s nondiscriminatory values above any and all religious restrictions.

Read full article [here].
by Michael Hiltzik, The Los Angeles Times.

Posted: January 30th, 2020, by: admin. Categories: . Awaiting Comments.