"WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama plans to repeal a Bush administration rule that has become a flash point in the debate over a doctor's right not to participate in abortions. The regulation, instituted in the last days of the Bush administration, strengthened job protections for doctors and nurses who refuse to provide a medical service because of moral qualms.A Health and Human Services official said Friday the administration will publish notice of its intentions early next week, opening a 30-day comment period for advocates on both sides, medical groups and the public." The rest of the article is here.
Z: Isn't a doctor who can't bring himself to kill an unborn entitled to his principles? Aren't there so many doctors who would commit abortions that this shouldn't even be an issue? "Hey, if you must, go to someone else, okay?"
Why the big move to get this rescinded? WHY FORCE SOMEONE TO ABORT ANOTHER'S BABY? What am I missing? Please help me here!
z
32 comments:
It is puzzling isn't it!
Your question:
"Z: Isn't a doctor who can't bring himself to kill an unborn entitled to his principles? Aren't there so many doctors who would commit abortions that this shouldn't even be an issue? "Hey, if you must, go to someone else, okay?"
Sums up my feelings on the matter. Also, doesn't this violate the Hypocratic Oath that doctors take? "First, do no harm."
People who favor Obie's approach will make the argument that there's a slippery slope when doctors can pick and choose their procedures based on moral qualms instead of expertise. And unlike most leftist arguments, this one has a tiny bit credibility.
This time I'll side with the Hypocratic Oath. First, TAKE NO INNOCENT LIVES!
Morgan
One more thought Z. The political left is pushing this little gem, of course. I have always maintained that serious leftists are members of a nihilistic death cult, just like their jihadist brothers. Abortion is an article of faith to leftists; every bit as important as HUMAN FREEDOM is to us Conservatives. Read this freom FPM:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=1FDD71E4-B9E4-4FAD-9868-2936193BF8F1
Margaret Sanger-the founder of Planned Parenthood-was an unashamed racist and eugenicist. She spoke at more than one Klan rally and made it CRYSTAL clear that one of her goals was to rid the human race of "weaker" races, and blacks were on the TOP of that list!
You can you just hear her spouting psuedoscience and vile racism, "since we can't lynch 'em anymore, let's just tell 'em how much better off they'll be if the doctor rids them of this little inconvenience."
She was a favorite of the Kluxers and the Nazis.
The abortion sacrament AND the Global Warming BIG Lie are both tied to Eugenics, believe it or not.
Morgan
It's not puzzling at all. Only true believers will have jobs in the future. If you aren't a true believer, you must not be placed into a position of responsibility.
This makes my blood boil. As far as I'm concerned, they should have to go to the closet for a coat hanger and take their chances if they want to kill their baby. Meanwhile, Roe v Wade is being invoked as defense in Detroit lawsuit.
I agree with FJ ... this isn't puzzling in the least. It is what they call totalitarianism under a communist government.
I've never seen so many try so hard to make it OK to kill. This administration will hide behind anything. They use the scapegoat that the law makes it possible for a pharmacist to deny selling birth control and such so we have to repeal the whole thing and force doctors to give abortions even if they don't believe in giving abortions...amazing how twisted this "logic" is.
What ever the law may be, I doubt medical personnel can be coerced by the government into doing something against their core beliefs. However, such a law could be used to run anti abortion people out of medicine, leaving only those who will perform such deeds for cash.
yep FJ litmus test...especially if in the future you're going to work for government scale.
I'm I missing something here, are they saying doctors have to perform abortions even if they don't believe in them?
How can someone make you do what you don't want to do?
So, now our convictions mean nothing?
Blessings.
FJ..Elbro...that's SCARY.
I.H.S....This is a NEW AMERICAN WORLD.
Funny, when it comes to ABORTION...the Left wants CHOICE!
But, when it comes to a doctor who doesn't CHOOSE to do this, his CHOICE IS GONE!
I have NO IDEA why so many "conservatives" voted for a man who farther left than even any candidate has ever been. They had to have known how rabidly pro-murder he is. Unbelievable & maddening.
I have expected BHO to repeal this particular provision of GWB's. However, I am surprised that it took so long for this likely possibility to come up.
Perhaps BHO has even more confidence now after that cult-like display of adoration in Congress on Tuesday evening.
How bold has BHO become? Please take a look at this, about China's demanding collateral and getting eminent domain as that collateral for T Bills. You'll note in the comments there that I am skeptical. However, could it be a done deal that BHO and Hillary have committed to such a deal? I know that rumors fly all over the Internet and that Rense is hardly a reliable news source, but these days so many former impossibilities are indeed happening.
Morgan has a good point:
People who favor Obie's approach will make the argument that there's a slippery slope when doctors can pick and choose their procedures based on moral qualms instead of expertise. And unlike most leftist arguments, this one has a tiny bit credibility.
For example, Moslem doctors here in the West might decide to prescribe only shari'a medicine if they are allowed to follow their own consciences -- or what passes for consciences.
Sure, Always....FINE to prescribe Sharia medicine for Islamists, but to allow an American Christian doctor not to do abortions?
After all, it would be restrictive and unfair and putting our beliefs ON THEM to force the Muslims to adhere to American medicine, right? (oh, brother!)
As for Emminent Domain..I'm afraid to look. What, China can have Manhattan if we can't pay up?
Okay. I just looked ..I WAS RIGHT!?
ARE WE FREEEEEEEEEEEKIN' INSANE? ARE WE GIVING THEM THEIR PICK OF AMERICAN BUSINESS AND REAL ESTATE IF WE CAN'T PAY? WHICH WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO, OF COURSE.
WHAT THE?
AND AMERICANS ARE GOING TO TAKE THIS? WILL THE MEDIA TELL US?
it is an amazingly slippery slope when we start taking away the freedom of the doctor to fulfill his ethical beliefs. i am also hearing tell of legislation in the works that will eventually only allow doctors to do procedures if the age, cost and total benefit fit a certain mathematical range. i am beginning to think i have moved to a foreign country.
If a doctor correctly believes an unborn child to be indeed a human child then wouldn't that doctor be going against the oath that he swore to uphold when he became a doctor?
check this out: It's a comment on the holocaust denying Bishop but fits so well here, too......
"if someone murders a pregnant woman,
he is charged with 2 murders: the woman and the baby. fair enough!
BUT if that same woman were to choose to have an abortion , then it is not murder. am i missing something here? oh yes! i am!
i forgot about a woman's right to choose to kill her baby.
therefore it's only murder if someone other than the woman kills the baby.
BEDIG"
interesting, isn't it?
Hi, Franks!
Mystic..I agree...I'd heard that "Look, the woman's 82, she has breast cancer, but she probably won't live till she's 90 anyway, so let's not do the surgery" Imagine?
Euthanasia will be something that comes up soon, too, I'm sure. Just wait for it.
Pops..your point is absolutely correct.
BUT, A WOMAN has the RIGHT TO CHOOSE. A doctor hasn't.
Z,
Here's the mistake we're making, you and I.
We're looking for some kind of logical thinking in leftism. Can't be found and is an exercise in futility.
There is absolutely no credible arguement from the left on this issue other than they are pushing their own agenda.
If a woman has a right to choose and they fight for that right, then a doctor has the same right to choose what procedures he does and does not believe in performing. End of story. Doesn't matter what that procedure is.
If you want a procedure performed on you, find a doctor that will do it. Sadly, there is not a shortage on doctors who DO perform abortions so leave the choice to the doctors.
You will see a huge exodus of doctors if this is rolled backed. And rightly so. Let the new administration deal with a sudden shortage of doctors...he is going to throw us into socialized medicine anyway...
But everyone had to know this was coming with his comment on the campaign trail: remember? He said if his daughters did make a "mistake" he didn't want them "Punished with a child."
Leslie -- I do remember that comment and it was a very telling admission by THE ONE. It's very important that we make gains in the House and Senate in two years time so as to minimize the damage.
Folks, the Hypocratic Oath has NOT been administered for OVER A DECADE...
And know this too, evil is real, it rejoices in teaching others to do evil, it applaudes evil done and intended...and it KNOWS that it is evil, therefore(like satan in his rebellion and dragging humanity down the tube)it WANTS and CRAVES others to share the consequences.
It is NOT surprising...
tmw
TMW..I did not know they don't administer the Hypocratic Oath! Who did THAT? wow
I believe this is part of the ruling that also does not allow pharmacists to refuse to sell birth control.
You don't want to honor a legitimate prescription for a legitimate product? Then get another job.
You're the only hospital within a large radius and a rape victim requests the "morning after" pill and you try to deny it and leave her hostage to your principles? Then get arrested and sued.
You take a job where abortion procedures are part of the description? Then if that isn't acceptable, leave.
Ducky, you said
"You take a job where abortion procedures are part of the description? Then if that isn't acceptable, leave."
Oops! Weird point there. Why would any mature, responsible doctor work where he had to do abortions?
No, Ducky, some people take control of their own lives and live by their principles...a CHOICE a doctor like this would make is not hiring on where he'd have to do abortions!!
As for the pharmacy? I don't know, it's not my issue here but, yes, it is in the bill.
You pick the rape issue but it's obviously a rare situation with which to make a point.
I guess we'd better just shove principled doctors out of their jobs because someone might not get birth control and one girl a year on an ugly night in Podunk might have been raped and just happened to pick the one hospital where there WAS a man with his own strong convictions there. She rocks, he'd better be fired, right?
Ducky, what woman you know who has been raped is going straight to the pharmacy for the morning after pill?
Any woman who does this hasn't been raped, she's just realized how stupid she was not using protection lastnight. So, she would probably go to the pharmacy claiming to have been raped, but like the Wise Women who I was raised around always said: 'You can't rape the willing'
Blessings.
IHS...a rape victim should go to the POLICE, right? NOt a hospital or pharmacy!
And the cops are equipped to know who to send them to for the morning after pill, should the 'need it'..
you're right.
I.H.S. whether I no a rape victim who has asked for the pill or not is irrelevant.
Fact is the some women request it. The morning after pill is part of the standard rape in many municipalities.
No some require it be offered so what the right wing did was wait till Chuckles was leaving office and issued an executive order making it possible for an employee to disobey the law.
Now, here in Massachusetts Catholic hospitals objected but if a Catholic hospital is the closest trauma center then a woman was not required to risk bearing a rapists child simply because she did not agree with the hospital's doctrine. In this conflict of interest the ruling went for the woman.
Of course Bush tried to sneak in an executive order but as you on the right know, there is a new sheriff in town and Bush's end around attempt is being negated.
z, I take it you've never had a rape kit administered.
They aren't administered in the squad room. Ya' know?
Ducky, first I wasn't asking if you knew one or not it was kind of rhetorical, you know? Also, you said,'You're the only hospital within a large radius and a rape victim requests the "morning after" pill and you try to deny it and leave her hostage to your principles? Then get arrested and sued.' And, the hospital should be sued for what reason exactly?
Blessings.
No, Ducky, I never did.
And, I'd have gone straight to the police if I'd been raped and, as I said, they know exactly who to send the victims too. As a matter of fact, if I remember correctly, some female police are equipped to help in that arena.
I don't think you need to be a rape victim to know what to do about it.
For goodness sake....doctors shouldn't have to kill unborn babies. How hard is that to understand?
And, I'm quite sure that any woman going to a police department or ER will be able to find someone who can dispense whatever she wants.
NO need to take the strangest scenario and capitalize on it.
z, I take it you've never had a rape kit administered. They aren't administered in the squad room. Ya' know?
Post a Comment