It is usual to understand conscientious objection as a doctor's refusal to perform a legitimate intervention, for subjective personal reasons unrelated to medicine. It is then accepted only by respect to professional autonomy and freedom of beliefs. Understood in that way it would be thus reasonable to limit it, curtail it or delete it, since the objector would not be willing to grant benefits that correspond to his medical profession. This work aims to show exactly the opposite, taking as an example the project of law that pretends to decriminalize abortion in some situations in Chile. Is the objector who defends medical activity relying on ethic codes that seek to preserve the values and principles of our profession.It is usual to understand conscientious objection as a doctor's refusal to perform a legitimate intervention, for subjective personal reasons unrelated to medicine. It is then accepted only by respect to professional autonomy and freedom of beliefs. Understood in that way it would be thus reasonable to limit it, curtail it or delete it, since the objector would not be willing to grant benefits that correspond to his medical profession. This work aims to show exactly the opposite, taking as an example the project of law that pretends to decriminalize abortion in some situations in Chile. Is the objector who defends medical activity relying on ethic codes that seek to preserve the values and principles of our profession.