Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 2, 2024, 6:36 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
#71
RE: Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
Still haven't addressed the oath I see, heywood. You're fine with people breaking it for arbitrary religious reasons as they see fit?

When I was a teacher, I could have made up a religion where I asked my god each day if I was permitted to work that day. Any day he would have happened to say no, through no fault of my own, I'd not be able to work that day. Should I be forced to work against my will? You can't fire me because it's religious discrimination.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply
#72
RE: Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
(April 7, 2015 at 5:32 am)robvalue Wrote: Still haven't addressed the oath I see, heywood. You're fine with people breaking it for arbitrary religious reasons as they see fit?

When I was a teacher, I could have made up a religion where I asked my god each day if I was permitted to work that day. Any day he would have happened to say no, through no fault of my own, I'd not be able to work that day. Should I be forced to work against my will? You can't fire me because it's religious discrimination.

Employees have to fulfill their conditions of employment or risk getting fired.  I have no problem whatsoever if the doctor gets fired by the clinic because she refused to see this baby.  Your criticism here is simply retarded.
Reply
#73
RE: Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
Heywood has reached troll levels.
'The more I learn about people the more I like my dog'- Mark Twain

'You can have all the faith you want in spirits, and the afterlife, and heaven and hell, but when it comes to this world, don't be an idiot. Cause you can tell me you put your faith in God to put you through the day, but when it comes time to cross the road, I know you look both ways.' - Dr House

“Young earth creationism is essentially the position that all of modern science, 90% of living scientists and 98% of living biologists, all major university biology departments, every major science journal, the American Academy of Sciences, and every major science organization in the world, are all wrong regarding the origins and development of life….but one particular tribe of uneducated, bronze aged, goat herders got it exactly right.” - Chuck Easttom

"If my good friend Doctor Gasparri speaks badly of my mother, he can expect to get punched.....You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others. There is a limit." - Pope Francis on freedom of speech
Reply
#74
RE: Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
Heywood: OK! So we can fire people if they don't do their job because of religious objection then. That seems entirely opposite to what you've been saying up until now, so I don't know what you've been complaining about.

At the start of this thread you were defending this woman, not saying she should be fired. You said she should have the right to "be an asshole". Or did you mean she has that right, but we should fire here none the less? All you are saying in that case is that we can't physically force her to do something. Which really didn't seem like your point, and has nothing to do with religion.

Have you changed your opinion then? It would be great if you have!

Are you actually suggesting that we wanted her to be physically forced to see the patient, like we grab her, put her in the room and threaten her until she does it? Is that what you think our position is? If that is what you think, it would explain the talking at cross purposes. I doubt anyone here is suggesting she be physically forced to do something by threats.

I feel like I'm losing my mind this morning. Have I lost it?
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply
#75
RE: Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
Rrriiiight. Because they want to control us... Never mind that the people who are elected into office who instate those programs were elected on the platforms of instating those programs and those programs don't get repealed because the American voters don't want them repealed...

The Religious Right and their corporate cronies would you believing that if you free the marketplace of regulation, everything will be alllllriiiiight. Funny thing is, though, they seem to forget the reasons for why those regulations were put in place to begin with. They seem to forget the days of Robber Baron. They seem to forget that the Great Depression was caused by businesses hoarding money because of their single-minded drive to maximize profits and their tunnel-visioned focus on speculation and short-term growth, resulting in lowering interest rates and refusal to invest for the long-term because all they care about is money now because the idea of any short-term loss of profits is abhorrent and terrifying because the majority of business enterprises are fucking retarded and cowardly. The Federal Government's off-hand approach to the market [you know, that hands-off approach you rightists trumpet as being such a terrific idea] exacerbated the problem, rather than fixing it; if it HAD stepped in, the Great Depression probably would not have happened! The Fed's refusal to prop up the banks [again, the government NOT stepping into the financial market] exacerbated the problem even more. Had those businesses taken the opportunity to take advantage of those lowered interest rates to invest in future growth at a reduced price, they could have and SHOULD HAVE focused on the common idea of supply and demand; you have lowered demand, so lower your prices, which will entice consumers to buy more since they will be able to have more for less, but they didn't. Why? Because the free market is not comprised of brilliant intellectuals, it's comprised of greedy idiots who are successful only by the virtue of their businesses rising at times of higher consumer spending and not by innovation; the businesses that DO innovate are not nearly as numerous, but they ARE the ones led by those who actually have some intelligence and foresight. But the focus of big businesses is not on innovating, it's focused on the short-term profits and what money that they have NOW. You see this even now, but the effects of such tunnel-vision are greatly reduced because, thanks to government interference in the marketplace, a lot of businesses were able to grow and profit and nowadays have much more financial leeway to cut their production and employment numbers to cover for their short-term losses; they do not succeed on innovation, they succeed on having so much money that they don't need to innovate, they can just fuck people over to deal with it and the big wigs at the top don't need to worry about feeling a damn thing.

Government laws and regulations are full of unintended consequences but by and large they are more successful than they are failures. No program is without its flaws and if they were able to refine and update their services, the problems they suffer from would not be as bad, or maybe even would not exist, but because of conservative ideology being so pervasive, any attempts to increase spending to those programs or expand on them are shot down and instead they are cut, resulting in them being even LESS effective. Then, once their effectiveness starts tanking, they bemoan it as the programs themselves being failures at their very cores, despite the fact that they are the fucking idiots who exacerbated the problems and flaws to begin with.

If you let people be free, they will act optimally SOCIALLY. But capitalistically? HA! HAHAHAH! AHHH hahahaha!! PLEASE! Wanna know why the EPA was formed? Because businesses were dumping toxic waste in the cheapest ways possible without a care in the world, and those cheap methods meant dumping their waste into areas wherein it affected ground-water, causing numerous health problems for huge numbers of people. They made no efforts to curtail their belching of toxic fumes and gases into the atmosphere because they had no profit-driven motives to do so. Why would they care about the rest of the world, and everyone else? They don't care, curbing those tendencies means cutting into their profits with no payoffs coming from those actions. So the government had to force limitations of toxic waste dumping and polluting by-products, because those businesses sure as fuck weren't going to do it on their own!

How do the conservatives treat the EPA? Like the redheaded step-child. They abuse it and try to cut it off because oh those poor multi-billion dollar companies! Instead of making $10,000,000,000 in profits, the EPA's intervention is causing them to only make $9,999,000,000 a year! OH THE FUCKING HORROR.

Look at the governments' hands-off approach to oil companies! Look at all those tax breaks they get! WE'RE PAYING FOR CORPORATIONS TO GET MORE MONEY. Whenever the government is big-business-friendly, we all get fucked over. When the government is populace-friendly, we all benefit. Look at the food stamps program! For every dollar spent from the food stamps program, two dollars gets added into the economy via increased demand and higher consumer spending, increasing profits and allowing for more money cycling.

The government doesn't need to step in EVERYWHERE. It just needs to step in when shit's not working to the benefit of the American people, and that's what it does, because that's what its job is. The government had to step in to force businesses to pay a minimum wage because before it did, businesses were paying people as little as they possibly could, and forcing people who otherwise couldn't find jobs elsewhere to remain in destitution. Why? Not because they want people in bread lines, but because they only give their fucks for their own selfish reasons, NOT because they're looking out for the average person. Nowadays, companies pay higher than the minimum wage because it's good PR, and yet nevertheless there's fucktons of businesses that continue to pay the minimum wage to huge numbers of their employees.

Before the government stepped in, businesses were allowed to discriminate against anyone they desired, both in employment concerns AND in service concerns. When they were forced to stop discriminating, they had to hire more people, which meant that more people were working and making money, and as a whole, the economy at large and society at large benefited. But you can't expect one business to look at the whole; they only look at themselves and what THEY can personally gain. Because that is what businesses do.

Now we have businesses discriminating all over again, and in so doing, they are inadvertently harming the economy as a whole by cycling less money through it because of the guys at the top having their own personal feelings interfering with their professional lives.

If the government must step in to force the economy to behave so that the American people as a whole benefit, then so be it. If it means trodding on the toes of a select few, so fucking be it. The needs of the money outweigh the needs of the few, and the individual's importance only extends so far. We as individuals have privileges of freedoms that most of the world wishes it could have. A few people who are far more successful than most others are get a tiny paper-cut in what they perceive as liberties to ensure that the liberties and happiness of the vast majority can continue, and suddenly the conservatives are up in arms about the reduction of personal liberties, never mind that the many benefit.

The balance of the scales is complex and highly nuanced. Conservatives pay almost no attention to things that are complex because conservatives are fucking idiots. You need only look at how many conservative politicians say that global warming is an "alarmist myth" despite nearly the entire scientific community saying the exact opposite to see this. You need only look at how many conservative politicians say that the world is only a few thousand years old, despite the entire scientific community with its nigh-endless barrage of facts and proofs saying it's billions of years old to see this. You need only look at how many conservative politicians talk about personal liberties, but then when it comes to abortion, they trod on the rights of women to get an abortion despite the woman being the self-aware, cognitive, self-determining, and self-functioning entity while the fetus is not even remotely close to any of those things to see that they're both idiots and hypocrites. You need only look at all the conservatives who, after cutting government aid programs, then say those programs are total failures once the performance of those programs suffers further to see that they're idiots and hypocrites.

Your average conservative voter scores less on test scores, IQ scores, political awareness, and awareness of national and international affairs than your average liberal voter.

Why?

Because conservatives are idiots.

If conservatives had their way and progressives were forced to have no say, women would still be inferior to men, blacks would continue to be second-class citizens, the environment would be getting abused to such a reckless extent that it might have caused global warming to have already reached an absolutely catastrophic state as of this present moment, unskilled laborers would practically be corporate slaves, and Christianity would be firmly established as a state religion at the expense of every non-Christian individual in direct defiance of the idea of personal liberties and equality.

Problems that progressives rail against are not invented to justify controlling anyone. Where the fuck would you even get that idea to begin with? Progressives work for the progression of society as a whole, the BETTERMENT of everyone, not the control of everyone, and we're well-aware of where to cut government interference [Guantanamo, the NSA spying programs, the NDAA are all things that progressives are at the very front when it comes to confronting those programs of government interference into personal lives, along with the legalization of substances that people wish to partake in in their personal lives] and where to increase it [the marketplace wherein it will otherwise continue to work as a disparate, self-centered mess that will fuck over the vast majority of the people]. Conservatives just want everything to stay as it is. They want stagnation. That's the very definition of conservatism; the lack of action. Stagnation. Culturally, socially, even economically. They want the status quo, ignoring the lessons of history in regards to stagnation and the status quo [Look at the middle east]. Why? Because conservatives are not only idiots and hypocrites, they're all cowards. The idea of their lives changing at all because of the outside world is terrifying because they're all a bunch of pussies. But get this! The world doesn't give two fucks what you want. We progressives want a government that both allows us all to change and evolve as a society, and prevents us from being jerked into a chaotic maelstrom wherein our choices mean nothing. Conservatives want a government where we don't change...and in so doing, inevitably will lead to a chaotic maelstrom wherein our choices mean nothing.

Besides, if you wanna talk about progressives wanting the government to control you, how about we talk about that conservative-installed invasion of privacy program.

What was it called again? Something Act...uh...Minuteman Act-? No, no, it wasn't called that...but it was something evocative of that general idea...

OH, RIGHT! THE PATRIOT ACT! Big Grin

Take your bullshit and cram it. You don't wanna live in the real world, that's fine, we don't expect you to. I mean, you believe that a burning bush talked to a guy, that millions of jewish slaves went on an exodus from Egypt even though that should have meant Egypt would have collapsed as a civilization overnight instead of continuing on as a powerful civilization for centuries more, that a dude was nailed to the cross and died and then came back to life on the third day following (or was it after that third day? That stupid fucking book can't seem to agree on when that happened) and floated into the sky (even though ever since the advent of flight we've discovered that heaven is NOT in the clouds...), that a dude built a boat and loaded it with two of every animal and somehow genetic variability is still an incredibly strong and present facet of the natural world to avoid a massive world-consuming flood that no archeological evidence exists to support, and a fuckton of other fantastical shit that taken out of the context of religion sounds like a very dry, long-winded, and boring work of fiction. But please, don't you dare insult progressives by suggesting we want a government controls everyone including ourselves and that we don't give a rat's ass about others when that's the exact opposite of what we want.

I need a fucking cigarette...
Reply
#76
RE: Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
(April 6, 2015 at 2:34 pm)Heywood Wrote:
(April 6, 2015 at 2:15 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: Good old reliable. Defending everyone's right to be an asshole with one side of his mouth, griping about people being assholes in a way he doesn't like with the other.




I imagine he's aware of African Americans dying from lack of care in the USA when last we let healthcare providers pick and choose who they would treat based on to which demographic otherwise unrelated to the provision of medical care the patient belonged. I would like to think that his position is that the slope just isn't THAT slippery any more.

Do you have any evidence to show that African Americans were dying cause doctors would not see them because they were black?
Apparently I was giving you too much credit for optimism when ignorance (and a broken Google finger, apparently) was the actual explanation. 

(April 6, 2015 at 2:34 pm)Heywood Wrote: If you do, how do you know it was because they were black and not because they were poor and couldn't pay?
 Already preparing your defense of letting black people die, I see. Of course, such behavior is perfectly understandable if they committed the double sin of being poor in addition to being black, eh?  
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Reply
#77
RE: Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
Another opportunity to share the gospel wasted.
Reply
#78
RE: Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
(April 6, 2015 at 2:34 pm)Heywood Wrote: If you have any evidence to support your claim I would like to see it. 
Sure you would. That's why you decided to sit on your thumbs until I came along to spoonfeed you rather than lift a finger to look into it yourself.

(April 6, 2015 at 2:34 pm)Heywood Wrote: Now if you could convince me that the market isn't going to serve gays then maybe there is a problem that can only be corrected by infringing on the freedom of others.
 A lot of Christian business owners are fairly salivating at the prospect of being able to deny goods and services to gay people. The ludicrous RFRA law as initially written in Indiana would fold at the first constitutional challenge, so I'm not too worried about it's implementation. It's up to people who can actually learn from history and think through the consequences of an action to protect zealous idiots from the disaster of getting what they want. 

(April 6, 2015 at 2:34 pm)Heywood Wrote: I don't know what challenges the black community faced but I am alive today and simply do not believe a gay person can't easily find a florist, or a photographer, or obtain medical care when they need it.  I take the position that before we start limiting peoples individual rights, we need a damn good reason.  Preventing butthurt is not a good reason.

In this day an age such ignorance is appalling and so easily correctable that I can only assume you are proud of it for some reason. In addtion to your admitted ignorance (which a sincere person would have corrected before proceeding to share their opinion, admittedly formulated in ignorance) you show a deficiency in imagining scenarios, and I'm not sure whether it would be worse because of the blinders you're wearing or actual lack of ability. I suppose the former has the benefit of being potentially curable, in theory. Is it so hard to think this problem through to foresee that in small towns there may be only one florist, photographer, or doctor?

But I agree the free market can take care of this problem: Allow any store to refuse service to anyone they want, as long as they post the list of people they won't serve prominently in a location easily seen before anyone enters the store. The proprieters won't even have to see the people they despise, the people they despise won't have to deal with going into a store expecting normal service only to be treated like a second-class citizen, and the majority of Americans who have actually reached the point of despising douchebags who won't treat customers the same will know who to boycott.

Of course, if being that open about their bigotry was the price of engaging in discrimination, it would be hard to find a business owner with the conviction to do so: not if it makes a noticeable dent in their revenue. The main problem with my version of the law is that it's a lot of trouble to go through to make a point, and like the RFRA, there's no reason to pass it in the first place, because no one's religious freedom was taken away in the first place.

(April 7, 2015 at 3:39 am)You_remember Wrote: lmaooo I just dont get you Caucasians your smart people are atheist and your other people still believe jesus is a white guy that is hiding in texas.


them arabics gata go back to were thw came from


(April 7, 2015 at 3:22 am)Iroscato Wrote: Mm. kinda sounds like it from where I'm sitting, yes. On account of them being, y'know, doctors.
Yes

What?

I was hoping someone else had provided the evidence Heywood is too lazy or too incapable to find on his own, but having read the rest of the thread and seen that is not the case, here we go:

Blacks were routinely turned away from hospitals during segregation either because they were 'white hospitals' or if they admitted blacks, because there weren't enough 'Negro beds' ('black wards' were typically in the basement or attic). So-called 'black hospitals' were typically poor in resources and as a result, poorer in care, on average. By 1960, only 6% of Southern hospitals were integrated (and about 17% of Northern hospitals still weren't).

It is hard to find the names of critically injured black people who were turned away from a hospital because they were black, AND died before they could receive proper care as a result, unless they were prominent: blues singer Bessie Smith, Juliette Derricott (dean of admittance as Fisk), and the father-in-law of NAACP director Walter White. But it was routine for a black person who was, say, hit by a car to have delayed care because they had to wait to go to a black hospital or a black ward; and sometimes they dies by the time they got to someone to take care of their injuries.

Furthermore, the idea that black people died because the closest hospital wouldn't serve them or they couldn't be served until they were transferred to a black ward should be self evident. It would be a miracle if it didn't happen under those conditions. And that's not even going into the ones that would have survived if they had been able to get care at a better-funded 'white hospital'.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Reply
#79
RE: Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
(April 7, 2015 at 2:11 am)Heywood Wrote: I am okay with doctors getting punished for committing fraud or violating the terms of their employment.  What part about that is difficult for you to understand?  Are you really this dense?

I understand your arbitrary, self serving rationale, I just think it's weak, like everything else you say. You're fine with doctors being punished for the event in question, just so long as the clinic doesn't hurt your pride by punishing them for stated reasons you might find offensive. It's pathetic.

Quote:However the progressotards.....like Esquilax....will invent problems to justify controlling you.  Because in the end that is their goal...They don't give a rats ass about you....they only care about controlling you.

Reported. Don't say I didn't warn you, you dishonest fuck.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee

Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Reply
#80
RE: Pediatrician Refuses Treatment of Baby of Lesbian Parents
Doctors have a moral and ethical obligation to see and treat/refer every patient that comes to see them regardless of their positions on sexuality/religion or their financial position etc.

A doctor who refuses to see, treat or refer a patient is in violation of the oath and hence acting unethically. This would be grounds to be struck off the medical register in the UK, so I'm surprised it's not the same in the US.
Love atheistforums.org? Consider becoming a patreon and helping towards our server costs.

[Image: 146748944129044_zpsomrzyn3d.gif]
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Irish government to apologise over mother-and-baby homes zebo-the-fat 6 736 January 12, 2021 at 6:32 pm
Last Post: Pat Mustard
  Black female Dr. dies of covid. Treatment in question. brewer 2 590 December 30, 2020 at 7:46 pm
Last Post: arewethereyet
  George Zimmerman suing parents of Trayvon Martin among others Cecelia 140 11028 December 11, 2019 at 11:13 pm
Last Post: EgoDeath
  Pregnant Alabama Woman who was shot charged with Manslaughter of her unborn baby Cecelia 94 9914 July 3, 2019 at 4:27 pm
Last Post: tackattack
  Baby T-rex for sale brewer 4 623 April 18, 2019 at 5:16 pm
Last Post: Athene
  Aborting Baby Hitler... Rev. Rye 71 9286 January 20, 2019 at 4:14 pm
Last Post: Yonadav
  Parents form "prayer circle" over gay stage kiss Silver 14 2147 November 13, 2018 at 6:53 pm
Last Post: Fireball
  t.A.T.u.'s Faux-Lesbian Singer Wouldn't Accept a Gay Son WinterHold 15 2063 August 3, 2018 at 4:53 am
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  Does Baby Formula Contain Neurotoxins? brewer 6 1269 July 10, 2018 at 12:54 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Preist slaps crying baby in the face at baptism LadyForCamus 46 6918 June 25, 2018 at 11:29 pm
Last Post: Fireball



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)