Religion and medicine have historically gone hand in hand, but increasingly have come into conflict in the U.S. as health care has become both more secular and more heavily regulated. Law has a dual role here, simultaneously generating conflict between religion and health care, for example through new coverage mandates or legally permissible medical interventions that violate religious norms, while also acting as a tool for religious accommodation and protection of conscience. This conference identified the various ways in which law intersects with religion and health care in the United States, examined the role of law in creating or mediating conflict between religion and health care, and explored potential legal solutions to allow religion and health care to simultaneously flourish in a culturally diverse nation.

1. The Natural Person as the Limiting
Principle for Conscience:
Can a Hospital have a Conscience if it
Doesn’t Have an Intellect and Will?
Ryan Meade
Loyola University Chicago School of Law
Beazley Institute for Health Law and Policy

2. u 1: Conscience is a mental act.
u 2: A mental act requires a mind.
u 3: A mind has two essential powers, intellect and will.
u 4: Only humans have intellect and will.
u C: A non-human does not have a conscience.

3. Linguistic Framework
u Univocal
• X has the same form in A and B
• X in A is the same form of X in B
u Analogical
• Imperfect likeness, but sufficiently identical to use the same term
• X in A::X’ in B
u Metaphorical
• A figure of speech; non-literal

4. Classical conception of conscience
u Conscience is an act
u A human act necessitates a mind
u The two central powers of the mind are:
u Intellect
u Will
u Intellect deliberates and presents judgment to the will
u Intellect judges whether p is good or bad

5. u 1: Conscience is a mental act.
u 2: A mental act requires a mind.
u 3: A mind has two essential powers, intellect and will.
u 4: Only humans have intellect and will.
u C: A non-human does not have a conscience.