Anti Gay healthcare legislation passed in Michigan

Former Member

.

Former Member

It makes a mockery of the so called 'freedoms' there.

Former Member

There was a minister for health or whatever they call it who was actually a far right bishop who was strongly anti-abortion. Don't know if he's still in power, but you know...

Former Member

it's actually quite amazing when you think about it. The Republican Party is one of the most effective in the world right now. In the last election every major swing state had an amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage. This helped to bring out all the religious nuts and changed the outcome of the election.

"congratulations America, we rocked the vote, and smeared the queers!"

Can't say i'm very proud of my country at the moment. :grump:

Former Member

AllAmericanRageJunky wrote:

it's actually quite amazing when you think about it. The Republican Party is one of the most effective in the world right now. In the last election every major swing state had an amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage. This helped to bring out all the religious nuts and changed the outcome of the election.

"congratulations America, we rocked the vote, and smeared the queers!"

Can't say i'm very proud of my country at the moment. :grump:

If you're to beleive the conspiracy theories people who voted for John Kerry were more likely to have their vote discounted but that's all conspiracy theories. Everyone loves a good hate anyway, look how Hitler brought all the Germans together. With a bit of spin Bush could easily lead a campaign against homosexuality altogether.

Former Member

girl with sharp teeth wrote:

I didn't realise doctors in the US were allowed to break their hippocratic oaths so publicly...

I don't know the oath well enough, but the proposed law does not allow the doctor to refuse emergency treatment which cover it I think.

I have a problem with this law, doctors are not supposed to be moral guardians. End Of.

Former Member

I fear the United States more and more. It worries me to think what it will be like in four years time.

Former Member

girl with sharp teeth wrote:

Story

I didn't realise doctors in the US were allowed to break their hippocratic oaths so publicly...

This story obviously follows on from doctors and pharmacists being allowed to refuse to fill Pill prescriptions on the grounds that it's a form of abortion. Personally, I would think that contraception would be a pro-lifer's best friend but there you go.

I am ever glad that I don't live in America.

Astonishing!

Medical staff picking and choosing who and how they provide treatment? Only in America :rolleyes: .

Former Member

Renzo wrote:

I fear the United States more and more. It worries me to think what it will be like in four years time.

I'm just waiting for them to rename it Gilead.

Former Member

Or Jesusland.

Former Member

Why should docters treat gays if they do not want to? I certainly would not. There is nothing in their contracts stating they have to offer treatment to this type of people, it is their human right to refuse.

"the bills promote the constitutional right to religious freedom"

:yes:

Former Member

Born Slippy wrote:

Why should docters treat gays if they do not want to? I certainly would not.

Well there's a surprise.

There is nothing in their contracts stating they have to offer treatment to this type of people

"This type of people"?

"the bills promote the constitutional right to religious freedom"

:yes:

No, it promotes stupidity, prejudice, ignorance, bigotry and homophobia.

Former Member

I always thought Doctors had to treat everyone without exception. its not the only job where your professional obligations have to take precedence over your personal feelings.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

No, it promotes stupidity, prejudice, ignorance, bigotry and homophobia.

But is it not their human right to refuse?

Former Member

no

Former Member

Born Slippy wrote:

But is it not their human right to refuse?

No - by becoming Doctors they sacrified that bit of their human rights.

Former Member

NQA wrote:

I always thought Doctors had to treat everyone without exception. its not the only job where your professional obligations have to take precedence over your personal feelings.

Not strictly true.

There are gynaecologists and anesthetists who will not carry out terminations, for example.

My understanding, as I said earlier, is that they cannot refuse emergency treatment. Kentish should be able to clarify this one. WHere is the bugger when you need him?

Former Member

I hate homophobes, why is it anyone elses business who people choose to love? Gay, straight bi sexuality is fluid we just go with the flow.

Former Member

All I can say is I think that's fucking stupid. Catholics aren't supposed to hate gay people, they're supposed to accept it but disagree with the actual sexual side of it. The fact that they can refuse treatement to me sounds like mass homophobia. Fucking Americans :rolleyes:

Former Member

chaos_insomniac wrote:

All I can say is I think that's fucking stupid. Catholics aren't supposed to hate gay people, they're supposed to accept it but disagree with the actual sexual side of it. The fact that they can refuse treatement to me sounds like mass homophobia. Fucking Americans :rolleyes:

:yes: Whatever happend to loving and accepting everyone? Isn't that what Jesus was trying to teach us?? FFS he was even friendly with a prostitute!

Former Member

Born Slippy wrote:

"the bills promote the constitutional right to religious freedom"

And do fuck all for my "type of people"'s right to health care. What if every doctor in Michigan refused to treat an HIV+ man because they found out he's gay and it wasn't an "emergency"? The guy's quality of life would be severely affected and the chances are he would develop AIDS more quickly and therefore die sooner. It's sick.

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

Not strictly true.

There are gynaecologists and anesthetists who will not carry out terminations, for example.

My understanding, as I said earlier, is that they cannot refuse emergency treatment. Kentish should be able to clarify this one. WHere is the bugger when you need him?

I think Kentish is on holiday.

I assume though if they agree to carry out terminations they can't withold them because they don't like the morals of the women. Correct me if I'm wrong but they wouldn't be able to refuse to carry out a termination on a woman who had a one night stand (because she's 'easy'), but carry them out on a married woman (because it was an accident within a committed relationship).

Former Member

Those whom I have dealt with in the past refused on all counts.

Former Member

chaos_insomniac wrote:

Fucking Americans :rolleyes:

... :impissed:

Former Member

AllAmericanRageJunky wrote:

... :impissed:

I wouldn't take it personally, it's a common mistake of people on this forum for mistake some of the inadequate American government for the general American population - although it's more normally just a simplification, of rather saying GWB and his cronies, they say Americans.

Former Member

meh i know it. It's just a little irritating when you consider that 49% of Americans spend most of the day swearing under our breaths (probably more).

Former Member

Should have voted then

Former Member

lol, yeah to bad the voting age is 18 round these parts.

Former Member

AllAmericanRageJunky wrote:

meh i know it. It's just a little irritating when you consider that 49% of Americans spend most of the day swearing under our breaths (probably more).

Probably more than that, if you take the discounted black votes into account