Religious freedom vs. "reproductive rights"

One of the points I touch on in my talks is that Roe vs. Wade created something called "reproductive rights."  The Supreme Court looked at the Constitution and read between the lines and discovered that the Founding Fathers wanted us all to have these "reproductive rights" even though they were not expressly written.  Among these rights was the right of a woman to terminate the life growing inside her for any reason whatsoever.

These "reproductive rights" that the Founding Fathers found so important that they wrote a whole section about it...oh wait that is right, they didn't...are not just about abortion.  They extend to everything "reproductive" including having or not having offspring anyway we can dream of.  Many ethicists and Americans take this "right" to its logical end and assert this right extends to human cloning when the technology becomes available.  One of my favorite quotes points to where these "rights" are going:

"My decision to clone myself should not be the government's business, or Cardinal O'Conner's, anymore than a woman's decision to have an abortion is.  Cloning is highly significant.  Its part of the reproductive rights of every human being."  --Randy Wicher, cloning activist

With the outcry that has come from President Bush's Provider Conscience Rule that would allow health care workers to abstain from providing services that are against their religious beliefs without fear of backlash, I have realized that these "reproductive rights" go even further.  Not only do they include having or not having offspring anyway we can dream of, but also forcing health care workers participate in our "right" even if it conflicts with their right to religious freedom.

Being that the Constitution actually has a whole section on the right to religious freedom in America and says nothing about "reproductive freedoms", you would think that religious freedom would trump "reproductive freedom" every time.  Not according to the ACLU.  From the Courant.com:

Andrew Schneider, executive director of the ACLU of Connecticut, drew a distinction between religious rights and the Provider Conscience Rule. "We have long protected religious liberty rights, but not when it curtails basic rights to reproductive freedom," he said.

So when human reproductive cloning becomes a reality, will IVF clinic workers be able to refuse to participate in the procedure on religious grounds without fear of losing their jobs?  I wouldn't count on it.  I also wouldn't count on the ACLU to come to the rescue.

Hat Tip: Wesley J. Smith