Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
Doing it in the Latin makes you sound smarter. Duh.
As for the principal argument, I might address it, but I forgot what it was after the second or third post.
Oh wait - I remember. Whether or not we should let medical professionals deny care based on personal feelings, yeah?
Here's the problem with it:
You can't legislate morality.
One of the points of a "free" society is to let everyone have enough room to have their own beliefs and lead their lives how they see fit in certain respects.
The way we uphold that lofty goal is to allow everyone that courtesy - and those we don't agree with, especially. I may not like what you say, but I like my own First Amendment rights, so I am not going to tell you that you can't say it.
If we are to attempt to legislate morality in the medical sector, where does it end? Does it end after refusing to dispense contraception, or does it end after denying a child a blood transfusion because someone has a bee in his or her bonnet?
Further, how do we make sure it's being enforced "correctly," and not used as a weapon against those we don't like? How do we make sure it doesn't cause harm, even if the doctor in question believes he's doing the right thing and sticking by his idea of what the Hippocratic Oath means? People all over the world, every day, hurt others because of their personal ideas of what's right and what's wrong.
Obviously, it's a good idea to check out your healthcare provider beforehand, but it is an overly simplistic generalization to assume everyone has the realistic means to suss that out and choose another, more ideal doctor before the doctor's legislated morality comes into play.
|
We DO legislate morality. I mean, all of our laws are someone's morality. There are some that exist for purely moral reasons, such as laws against public nudity, public drunkenness, prostitution, slavery, et al. To say a doctor has to do something IS legislating morality. You cannot divorce morality from law. Take a look at financial law, such as Sarbannes Oxley, there are a bunch of rules there that are in existence simply because they are supposed to be fair to all parties, such as laws about what payments to owners can be loans or distributions, which are of no consequence to anyone in the public sphere. Take a look at the tax law and see if there is no sense of morality there. By definition laws are public morality agreed upon by our collective representatives.
Also, I'd rather BE smarter than simply sound smarter. Saying things in latin when most people don't understand it just makes you look like you're trying to put on airs.