So, you approve of the hospital allowing patients to die rather than performing abortions?Originally Posted by larryselbows
So, you approve of the hospital allowing patients to die rather than performing abortions?
Of course. The myth of the uber-consumer, who is always rational, and has sufficient time and resources to always make the correct decision, even about issues that professionals train in for nearly a decade. I agree it's not worth arguing over religious concepts.
I don't believe in an uber-consumer myth. People don't have to be rational or make rational decisions to validate their right to make those decisions.
I agree. Real people die when when they get substandard care. That is completely unlike fictional gods being angry at a doctor for providing that medical care.
Then, who has the responsibility to make clear what is the rational choice in the doctor-patient relationship? You don't want the doctor to be required to adhere to the standards fo the medical profession. You don't think the patient should be expected know those standards. Who is left to make sure the patient knows what the best standards of care really are?
Tear up your libertarian card.
Democrat motto:
It's just an ought/is question. If I thought there was the slightest chance the U.S. would go the libertarian route I'd get behind it 100%, but libertarianism doesn't always mesh when you try to shove it into a non-libertarian system. It's sort of like trying to put diesel components on a gas car. Even if those diesel components are better than their gas engine counterparts they simply don't work when they're not part of a diesel engine.
How's that for a stupid analogy.
P.S. Pearl, this site is a lot less fun when our fellow posters get banned all the time.
What is the libertarian route? Not being sarcastic, I'm just not familiar enough with the platform to know what they want to do with healthcare.
Nothing. It's super simple.
So basically what we had before Obamacare?
No, again there's no point in saying how libertarian plans will fix one issue. I don't see libertarian ideals as something that can be added one piece at a time. Look at my analogy about the diesel engine. We can't get there from here. We would have to start over and rewrite the constitution. If you just threw health care to the wolves and called it a libertarian plan that would be dishonest.
As it happens,
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...326575203.html
How many people in here are relieved that those Irish doctors weren't expected to jeopardize their consciences?
A true "Darwiniac" as Pearl would phrase it. . . . .is someone who is just content to let the stupids die off before reproducing, and who might even call that "progress".
I really don't get "progressives" who want to solve everybody's problems and feel it's their social responsibility to make sure evolution stops here. . . . . lol
Social forces, like a growing sense of altruism and interdependency, are evolutionary forces.
That's really a tragedy, I feel for the husband and his family.
One Brow, I realize that our discussion has deteriorated from a open discussion where we consider one another's points, to simply poking holes in one another's arguments, so I'm going to finalize my participation in this discussion by saying that I appreciate where you're coming from, I really do. In no way am I condoning a Catholic State in the United States, rather I am simply saying that people should have the right to follow their own religions - as stated in the first amendment - and I realize that we're probably not going to agree on this point. Luckily, in the United States that woman would have been able to get the treatment she needed from doctors that would have been comfortable doing the procedure, which is a comforting notion to me.
The original intent of this thread is to discuss various points and the specifics of the Affordable Care Act and I propose that we get back on track!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote