R's Using the Law to Force "Religion" Down Peoples' Throats AGAIN

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

. . . If a "customer" gets out of line, curses, or is abusive in any way it's my decision on whether or not to walk away from that situation. I get to use my own better judgement. This seems like the same thing in my book.

For starters, no one is going to die without your advice (as a rule that is )

[Musicman408]

It frustrates me when people are like this....forcing religion on people.....

[David]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Moreover, imagine for a moment if you lived in a small town in a mostly rural state and were poor. You go to the doctor to get some procedure done (again, the new rule is limitless) and the one doctor in the town says no based on a moral objection and so do the doctors in the closest towns. The only way to get the medical attention you want is to go out of state and at a cost you cannot afford. What do you do then?

Start the car!

[mylittledemon]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

For starters, no one is going to die without your advice (as a rule that is )

Well, like I said "not that I work in the medical field"...haha...and yes, people won't die. Although they ACT like they might. People act like their flat panel TVs are the be-all, end-all. On a daily basis I come across the most spoiled, thankless, rude people you can possibly imagine.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

Well, like I said "not that I work in the medical field"...haha...and yes, people won't die. Although they ACT like they might. People act like their flat panel TVs are the be-all, end-all. On a daily basis I come across the most spoiled, thankless, rude people you can possibly imagine.

I know - - I cannot imagine working in customer service. Personally, I think you should all be called a supervisor as that certainly would steal the thunder of the people you mentioned

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by David

Start the car!

I my scenario, there is no car, though a bicycle could be a possibility.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I my scenario, there is no car, though a bicycle could be a possibility.

In that case, the person chose not to have a car. Cars are not expensive and not hard to come by, neither is public transportation.

Although, you'd have to say that your fictitious person wouldn't have any friends with cars either, as well as no social workers in the area and no one else in the entire area that believes in abortion and no one with any sympathy at all. Oh yeah, this person must have no thumbs to hitchhike with, no family and no telephone. So, I guess this person must be a real loner with no social skills, no money at all, no means of transportation and no public transit system, in which case I would wonder how this person got pregnant in the first place. We must be talking about Ted Kaczynski then.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

He does not really care about what you said because he has not refuted it with anything having to do with it. Rather, he insults you by asserting that some article says some alleged survey says that Britons in general were mistaken about literary figures, etc. Therefore, you must also be an idiot and anything you say about your own personal healthcare choice is incorrect because of the results of this survey, which have nothing to do with you.

I gues you must be confused too. Churchill was not a "literary figure". Also, I cited the survey. I also cited an example of Pravda misreporting things. But, to agree with him, I think the general education of level of BOTH Europeans and Americans is deplorable. This "Chit Chat" section, as well as your post, is a great melting pot of just that. Ypou've demonstrated the Western Cultural phenomenon known as selective reading, where you read one sentence of my post and disregarded where I cited an actual example.

Again, i cited something and you made the post aboue me instead of about what I said. Too predictable.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I agree a doctor should not be compelled to perform an abortion ande there are many laws already stating that. So why is there a need for this new rule. Well, giving the option re abortions was not enough for the far religious right. They want their control go way beyond that. Moreover, imagine for a moment if you lived in a small town in a mostly rural state and were poor. You go to the doctor to get some procedure done (again, the new rule is limitless) and the one doctor in the town says no based on a moral objection and so do the doctors in the closest towns. The only way to get the medical attention you want is to go out of state and at a cost you cannot afford. What do you do then?

Again, this is not a small issue limited to abortion.

Finally, let's say you live in a state full of wiccans. Would you want their religious tenets controlling your medical care? Of course you wouldn't.

In the end, this is just another tactic by the far religious right to infiltrate and then dominate American life all while taking away autonomy.

One of the reasons for this law was a therapist who was sued because she said she didn't have appropriate expertise to deal with gay relationships and referred her gay patient elsewhere. Apparently, a guy came into a therapists office and asked for help with his gay relationship. She didn't know how to deal with the dynamics and referred him elsewhere. He ended up suing her and her church membership became an issue. THAT is a case of someone assuming a religious objection, when none may have existed at all. My understanding was that she was Methodist, which allows gays for membership.

No doubt, you'll say I'm not addressing the issue, despite giving an example directly on point as to why the rule may be necessary, and you will make your response all about me. Heck, I've been able to post this prediction and have it come true.

[David]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Many circumstances unrelated to reproductive health could also fall under the umbrella of “other medical procedures.” Could physicians object to helping patients whose sexual orientation they find objectionable? Could a receptionist refuse to book an appointment for an H.I.V. test? What about an emergency room doctor who wishes to deny emergency contraception to a rape victim? Or a pharmacist who prefers not to refill a birth control prescription?

I answer Yes to all these -- as long as the service or procedure has not yet been paid for. Once the patient pays, it's a contract & it's binding.

I support prayer in schools. Kids are supposed to learn how to read, write, & cipher. That's pie-in-the-sky for millions nowadays. So if I were in school for twelve years & still hadn't learned how to read & write, I'd pray, too.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by David

I answer Yes to all these -- as long as the service or procedure has not yet been paid for. Once the patient pays, it's a contract & it's binding.

I support prayer in schools. Kids are supposed to learn how to read, write, & cipher. That's pie-in-the-sky for millions nowadays. So if I were in school for twelve years & still hadn't learned how to read & write, I'd pray, too.

I'd add something else here too. INTERVIEW YOUR DOCTOR BEFORE YOU PICK ONE?! What the hell happened to personal responsibility!

[estranged4life]

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

I'd add something else here too. INTERVIEW YOUR DOCTOR BEFORE YOU PICK ONE?! What the hell happened to personal responsibility!

I decided to (Easily) seek a "second opinion" when my ASSIGNED (By IHS) doctor (or Quacks as I refer to their host of "doctors") looked at my MRI results (Which confirmed the tumor in my head) and told me "Nothing to worry about, I wont need to see you again for this".

The physician I saw the next day was shocked when I told him HOW the IHS ASSIGNED "doctor" told me not to worry, his response was "you SHOULD be concerned". I was, which was why I IMMEDIATELY saught a second opinion on the matter.

How can a person be told NOT to worry when they have a growth in their head is beyond me. But not surprising either, Unless you are ASSIGNED a quality physician through IHS (A quality physician available through the IHS are ALWAYS medical staff of the US Armed Forces who are serving their country by treating civilians as well as soldiers - IHS Lawton used the US Marine Corp., Unfortunately I was assigned a non-military "quack") you are literally and figuratively F**KED!

[trackaghost]

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

Well, Pravda has reported that The Washington Post was a "state run" newspaper, despite the fact that we don't have any state run newspapers in this country. This is especially ridiculous considering that Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein worked under Ben Bradlee for The Washington Post to take down the Nixon Administration. Last I checked, state run newspapers didn't take down the President. I mean, do you think we should take newspapers that report that kind of crap seriously! ]

Wow. I called you xenophobic before but I guess you really are. One mistake in a Russian newspaper. Big deal.

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

Besides, a survey was taken last year of Europeans who roundly believed that Sherlock Holmes was real and that Winston Churchill was a myth. I'm sorry, but considering the results, I can't take much of Europe seriously. I mean, come on now, Biggles was real?! Naw, I'll stick to reality rather than social constructs, thank you.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/arc...k_holmes_real/

What's that got to do with anything? Some crappy survey that shows a few Europeans in a poor light means that I don't know anything about my own country and you who live in America knows better than me? Wow, could you be any more patronising? That's not the first time you've mentioned that survey, so obviously you've got this view of Europeans being stupid that you love to keep touting with this "evidence". You get yourself in a little hissy fit if anyone calls you stupid but then bring out this crap.

Btw, what that link fails to mention is that it was a survey by a TV channel in the UK only where only 3,000 people were surveyed, so not exactly a large number of Europeans (out of around 700 million who live in Europe). You obviously want to believe that people in Europe are stupid.

Originally Posted by rubytuesday

Trust me you don't want to compare average general knowledge between europeans and americans. you'd be in for a major embarassment.

Amen to that.

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

He does not really care about what you said because he has not refuted it with anything having to do with it. Rather, he insults you by asserting that some article says some alleged survey says that Britons in general were mistaken about literary figures, etc. Therefore, you must also be an idiot and anything you say about your own personal healthcare choice is incorrect because of the results of this survey, which have nothing to do with you.

I know. For someone who hates being called an idiot he sure loves to call other people stupid. Besides that poll is throwaway at best. It was done by UKGold who wanted to get some press for their channel. A news release stating "Britons know Sherlock Holmes wasn't real" wouldn't exactly get much attention in the press.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by trackaghost

Wow. I called you xenophobic before but I guess you really are. One mistake in a Russian newspaper. Big deal.



What's that got to do with anything? Some crappy survey that shows a few Europeans in a poor light means that I don't know anything about my own country and you who live in America knows better than me? Wow, could you be any more patronising? That's not the first time you've mentioned that survey, so obviously you've got this view of Europeans being stupid that you love to keep touting with this "evidence". You get yourself in a little hissy fit if anyone calls you stupid but then bring out this crap.

Btw, what that link fails to mention is that it was a survey by a TV channel in the UK only where only 3,000 people were surveyed, so not exactly a large number of Europeans (out of around 700 million who live in Europe). You obviously want to believe that people in Europe are stupid.



Amen to that.



I know. For someone who hates being called an idiot he sure loves to call other people stupid. Besides that poll is throwaway at best. It was done by UKGold who wanted to get some press for their channel. A news release stating "Britons know Sherlock Holmes wasn't real" wouldn't exactly get much attention in the press.

Again, you post was mostly personal attacks. Maybe cite something that says that Europeans do well on math tests or something to support your position?

The Pravda quote was not just one occasion, but was illustrative of something that they routinely do. It was the one occasion that I could think of off the top of my head that was plainly a lie that REALLY stuck with me as truly ridiculous. I mean, who doesn't know that Putin controls the press in Russia anymore? It is nothing more than government spin. They have no compunction about reporting lies. I used to read the dispatches sent by a guy in another group from the foreign press, but they reports usually bore no resemblance to what was actually going on here. They were full of anti-American bias and slant, yet, you call me xenophobic?! Europeans tend to be the most hostile to Americans, snobbish, and condescending people. Try going somewhere in Paris as an American without running into someone being rude because you are American. Me xenophobic? Whatever?!

[Zombie]

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

They were full of anti-American bias and slant, yet, you call me xenophobic?! Europeans tend to be the most hostile to Americans, snobbish, and condescending people. Try going somewhere in Paris as an American without running into someone being rude because you are American. Me xenophobic? Whatever?!

Allow me to paraphrase - "Oh yeah? Well, tu quoque!"

I think that's much easier. Saves time typing.