Hypothetical

[levi501]

yah, I edited my post... I meant shouldn't.

 

[Argent]

Well...was there anywhere else she could have gone? I know that we're talking about a TV show, but in real life often there is not just another hospital or pharmacy down the street that a rape victim (or any other patient who needs plan B) can go to.

I'm inclined to say that if you don't want to dispense medicine, you shouldn't be in the health profession.

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.

 

[Belk]

yah, I edited my post... I meant shouldn't.

No worrys, I understood what you meant.

 

[Argent]

I don't know enough about the case, however time may have been an issues, since there are treatments you can give someone that may have come in contact with HIV to prevent them from contracting it, but they are very time sensitive, in which case going to another hospital would have been too long.

I personally feel that if a hospital is going to practice emergency medicine, then they better be prepared to dispense with all meds, not just the ones they think are moral.

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

 

[Lynden1000]

There is an episode of Boston Legal that has a girl that gets raped, and gets pregnant.

She then sues the Catholic Hospital that doesnt issue birth control (in this case the morning after pill).

Knowing that Catholics do not give that kind of treatment...do you think they should have sued the hospital, or could they simply have gone elsewhere or gone and got the pill from another pharmacy?

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.

 

[Argent]

In the episode, IIRC, she was unconscious and didn't have a choice which hospital to go to.

She was completely just is suing to hospital. Her medical care shouldn't be determined by someone else's morality. I find that sick, and in this country, we should have some sort of federal guideline that forces hospital to stock those kinds of meds, if they want to continue being a hospital.

And not to spoil the episode for anyone, but I find it ironic how in the end, she had to get an abortion because of an ignorant policy that stopped her from getting the medicine to stop the pregnancy when she needed it.

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.

 

[Argent]

What's the big issue? She had the kid ripped out of her later. As long as abortion is legal, the issue is moot.

 

[levi501]

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.

 

[Argent]

complete strawman.

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.

Then let the state open hospitals.

 

[levi501]

Then let the state open hospitals.

The state funds hospitals... same thing.

 

[Argent]

complete strawman.

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.

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

 

[Argent]

The state funds hospitals... same thing.

Not when it says "Baptist", "Catholic" "Lutheran" or "Prebyterian" in the name. Big difference.

 

[levi501]

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

Have them divest themselves from all public assistance and then they'll simply be a christian organization.

 

[levi501]

Not when it says "Baptist", "Catholic" "Lutheran" or "Prebyterian" in the name. Big difference.

Having that in their name doesn't mean they don't receive public assistance.

 

[Argent]

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.

 

[Argent]

Having that in their name doesn't mean they don't receive public assistance.

I never said they didn't.

 

[bammertheblue]

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.

 

[Argent]

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.

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.

 

[Blackguard_]

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?

 

[bammertheblue]

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?