Why should I believe the trend would suddenly be reversed if he took a Federal job?

The litmus test is not religion per se, but the influence of ones's religion on the practice of one's profession.

I do know the difference. Just say the word and I will post entirely too much information about my reproductive life right here explaining what it means to have a doctor who is personally opposed to particular medical options but will provide information, testing and referrals to a patient so she can make the decision herself.

Dr. Hager is entitled to put his private beliefs into the way he conducts his private practice in his private life. Let's keep him in private life.

Women's health care has become a political issue that constantly veers close to crossing the First Amendment separations between church and state, because our reproductive tracts excite more religious and legal interest than men's. Both sides have grievances.

Why make it worse by putting someone in charge of testing and approving women's medications who has helped file a petition with the FDA to recind permission to prescribe RU-486?

I would also like to know why the two previously suggested nominees were rejected. Is there something wrong with any of their qualifications, or aren't they acceptable enough to the anti-abortion wing of the Republican Party?

I admire Dr. Koop, too. Please remember that his job was to educate the public and to identify important health problems and advances for the nation, which he did wonderfully well. The Surgeon General is to national health policy as the UN Ambassador is to foreign policy. The Surgeon General's office enunciates policy; it doesn't have licensing power over medications. The FDA does.

Regards--
Mary Anne