Quote Originally Posted by Atmosfear View Post
At the end of the day, nothing prevents them from getting it; they just go to a different doctor.

You're basically arguing a theoretical principle that has no practical application because it's not a real-world issue. It amounts to a politician trying to regulate morality just the same as when conservative Christians try to have their morals enforced.
I'm not really arguing one way or another, I'm just advocating the patient having a choice. And since the doctor is the only choice available, I'm not comfortable with a doctor blocking a patient's wishes on a whim.

But yes if it's feasible that another doctor will offer a 'better' service, then it's no big deal, but I'm not familiar enough with the distribution of doctors in the US to really have an opinion.

The similar argument in the UK is that people who smoke/drink heavily/whatever should be denied NHS treatment. And my argument against that is that there is no second option available because government has socialised the entire industry, so denying the service is simply trampling all over that person's freedoms. Turns out in this thread's instance, there IS a second choice, it just might not be the easiest option.