• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Argent

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2005
2,162
140
66
New York, NY
✟18,121.00
Faith
Baptist
Politics
US-Libertarian

Of course, what you acutally mean is that if one doesn't want to dispense medicine according to liberal beliefs, then one shouldn't be in the health profession. So, you are saying an organization shouldn't be allowed to provide medical ministry unless it does it to the approval of the liberal left?

Odd. Where is the voice demanding civil rights now?

Of course, leberal left organizations could join and start their own medical ministry. Or, they could just try to force Christian organizations to do it according to liberal dictates.
 
Upvote 0

Argent

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2005
2,162
140
66
New York, NY
✟18,121.00
Faith
Baptist
Politics
US-Libertarian

Sounds like somone is telling someone else what to do with thier beliefs. How odd.
 
Upvote 0

Lynden1000

Senior Veteran
Nov 6, 2005
2,454
196
54
Orlando, Florida
✟3,628.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian


I can't imagine they would win such a lawsuit. The hospital was not negligent. *They* were negligent for failing to utilize another provider.

I don't think a catholic hospital should be forced to dispense birth control unless medically necessary- for use in shrinking ovarian cysts for example.
 
Upvote 0

Argent

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2005
2,162
140
66
New York, NY
✟18,121.00
Faith
Baptist
Politics
US-Libertarian
Let the liberals find the wherewithall in themselves to start their own hospitals, instead of trying to force Christian organizations to do what they want.
 
Upvote 0

levi501

Senior Veteran
Apr 19, 2004
3,286
226
✟27,190.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If the hospital has an emergency area open to the public then it receives some public funding and assistance. Since this is the case it's operating policies should be controlled by the state. That is unless you are suggesting tax payers pay for something and then have no say in how it's operated? -- Of course you don't, because that would put this country under corporate fascism. Are you a fascist? If not then you must recognize that a publicly funded service shouldn't be allowed to discriminate based on religion.
 
Upvote 0

Argent

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2005
2,162
140
66
New York, NY
✟18,121.00
Faith
Baptist
Politics
US-Libertarian
Then let the state open hospitals.
 
Upvote 0

Argent

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2005
2,162
140
66
New York, NY
✟18,121.00
Faith
Baptist
Politics
US-Libertarian

And letting the state tell Christian organizations what to do with their ministries is liberal dictatorship.
 
Upvote 0

Argent

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2005
2,162
140
66
New York, NY
✟18,121.00
Faith
Baptist
Politics
US-Libertarian
Have them divest themselves from all public assistance and then they'll simply be a christian organization.
It's our "right" to engage in ministires (service) to others. If the state wants to compete in that, then go ahead. We all know how efficient the state is at delivering services.
 
Upvote 0

bammertheblue

Veteran
Feb 10, 2006
1,798
161
41
Washington, DC
✟17,877.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Here's the problem I have with this. If we say "Okay, Catholic hospitals don't have to provide people with medical treatment that they say is against their beliefs", that's all well and good IF there are other hospitals that people can go to to get appropriate treatment. However, this is not always the case. In some towns, there is only one hospital or pharmacy or whatever, and it puts undue pressure on the patient to locate someone willing to give them appropriate medical care.
 
Upvote 0

Argent

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2005
2,162
140
66
New York, NY
✟18,121.00
Faith
Baptist
Politics
US-Libertarian
Well, you've discovered a "ministry" for yourself: You can start hospitals and pharmacies in small towns to compete with those evil, selfish Christian institutions.
 
Upvote 0

Blackguard_

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Feb 9, 2004
9,468
374
42
Tucson
✟26,492.00
Faith
Lutheran
Pregnancy wreaks a serious toll on a woman's body, and can prove fatal in certain cases.
Yes, but was the woman in a coma for a few months? Yeah, I'm sure those 64 cells or whatever were such a burden.

Abortion also wreaks a serious toll on a woman's body. It's much safer for the woman to take the morning after pill. It's aso a good deal cheaper.
This changes it from a voluntary to emergency procedure how? Yes, a prenancy can be potentially dangerous, so could a small cut. Should the hospital amputate a leg to prevent it getting infected from a scrape?

Except that she would have a choice as to whether or not she wanted it, so that wouldn't be much of a conflict.
So how did this episode happen? I thought she was unconcious until some deadline? From what I gather we woke up pregant a few days after the rape and was mad at the hospital for not giving her the pill while she was out. How would she have a choice in the matter if the doctors gave her the pill while unconcious, even if the woman turns out to have wanted it?
 
Upvote 0

bammertheblue

Veteran
Feb 10, 2006
1,798
161
41
Washington, DC
✟17,877.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Well, you've discovered a "ministry" for yourself: You can start hospitals and pharmacies in small towns to compete with those evil, selfish Christian institutions.

So you'd be okay with a hospital refusing to provide chemotherapy or radiation treatment if they said it was against their beliefs? Or is this "too bad for you for living in the wrong town, you don't get medical treatment" attitude just limited to women who need abortions or birth control?
 
Upvote 0