Pediatrician refuses to care for lesbians' baby

[genuineoriginal]

I think any physician who would base their treatment of a child on whether or not they despise his/her parents should not be trusted to treat children.

I think any person that is so morally degenerate that they would enter into a homosexual relationship should not be trusted to raise children.

Your turn.

 

[Tinark]

because it's the one that's trying to sell the lie that they're "normal"

it's the one that's trying to gain the acceptance of society

Having sex and children while unmarried is "normal", being gluttonous is "normal", two adulterous lovers marrying each other is "normal", no fault divorce is "normal". No one is buying your lies that this one is unique.

 

[resodko]

I think any person that is so morally degenerate that they would enter into a homosexual relationship should not be trusted to raise children.

:first:

Your turn.

too late


you win

 

[resodko]

Having sex and children while unmarried is "normal",

not to God

being gluttonous is "normal",

not to God

two adulterous lovers marrying each other is "normal

not to God

no fault divorce is "normal".

not to God

 

[GFR7]

I think any physician who would base their treatment of a child on whether or not they despise his/her parents should not be trusted to treat children.

DISAPPROVAL is NOT the same as despising.

What about a nurse who is assigned to a patient's room, who is getting aftercare , post-second trimester abortion? (I know of such a case, personally). How should this nurse act, if she is very anti-abortion?

 

[Tinark]

not to God




not to God



not to God



not to God

That's exactly my point!

You fundie Christians treat these as normal/don't discriminate against them when they bring in their children for medical treatment, purchase flowers and cakes, etc.

 

[Granite]

DISAPPROVAL is NOT the same as despising.

What about a nurse who is assigned to a patient's room, who is getting aftercare , post-second trimester abortion? (I know of such a case, personally). How should this nurse act, if she is very anti-abortion?

Like a professional. She should do her job.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Having sex and children while unmarried is "normal", being gluttonous is "normal", two adulterous lovers marrying each other is "normal", no fault divorce is "normal".

_____
normal
the usual, average, or typical state or condition.
_____​

Let me see if I am understanding you.

You are claiming that the average person has sex and children while unmarried, is gluttonous, and is an adulterous lover marrying another adulterous lover either before or after getting a no fault divorce?

 

[GFR7]

Like a professional. She should do her job.

I agree; she ought to have recused herself or acted professionally. Instead, she sulked and cried and would not speak to the patient or family.

 

[Tinark]

_____
normal
the usual, average, or typical state or condition.
_____​

Let me see if I am understanding you.

You are claiming that the average person has sex and children while unmarried, is gluttonous, and is an adulterous lover marrying another adulterous lover either before or after getting a no fault divorce?

Did you not read resodko's posts? He is defining "normal" as being accepted by society, and accepted by society means not illegal.

Is the average person homosexual? If not, then it's not normal either based on your completely different definition.

 

[Rusha]

DISAPPROVAL is NOT the same as despising.

What about a nurse who is assigned to a patient's room, who is getting aftercare , post-second trimester abortion? (I know of such a case, personally). How should this nurse act, if she is very anti-abortion?

Is the CHILD her patient? Is the child who is being refused care GAY? You pretend as though you do not understand the difference.

We are not discussing treatment of homosexuals or women or any one else who does not meet your approval but rather an innocent CHILD.

It's not okay to use children against their parents due to a personal bias or vendetta.

 

[resodko]

That's exactly my point!

You fundie Christians treat these as normal/don't discriminate against them when they bring in their children for medical treatment, purchase flowers and cakes, etc.

"you fundie Christians" ?

:darwinsm:


sorry to disappoint you, but i don't represent anyone but me




you'd think you retarded Christ-haters would know that by now

 

[GFR7]

Is the CHILD her patient? Is the child who is being refused care GAY? You pretend as though you do not understand the difference.

We are not discussing treatment of homosexuals or women or any one else who does not meet your approval but rather an innocent CHILD.

It's not okay to use children against their parents due to a personal bias or vendetta.

I don't think this physician did not want to see the child. She knew she would have to engage with the parents, and that she would feel awful doing so.

So she prayed, and believed God told her to apologize and refer them to another doctor, which she did.

Perfectly legal, and in this case, perhaps the moral thing to do. The infant is in good hands now, and the doctor knows this (she is the one who made the referral).

 

[PureX]

So is this different than the whole "wedding" cake issue for same-sex couples? My take is that it is different - a pediatrician cares for a child who finds itself in the situation it's in through no choice of its own. This is about caring for the child, not the guardians of the child. Early Christians would do something similar when they would go to the cliffs where the Romans would leave babies they didn't want - and take them in themselves. They weren't validating the choice to abandon a baby, but doing what they could for it.

Well, there that, and the Hippocratic Oath:

With regard to healing the sick, I will devise and order for them the best treatment, according to my judgment and means; and I will take care that they suffer no hurt or damage.

Nor shall any man's entreaty prevail upon me to administer maltreatment to anyone; neither will I counsel any man to do so.

 

[resodko]

DISAPPROVAL is NOT the same as despising.

What about a nurse who is assigned to a patient's room, who is getting aftercare , post-second trimester abortion? (I know of such a case, personally). How should this nurse act, if she is very anti-abortion?

how should a nurse act when required to care for a convicted rapist in prison?


especially if she is the victim of rape herself?

 

[genuineoriginal]

Did you not read resodko's posts? He is defining "normal" as being accepted by society, and accepted by society means not illegal.

I read his post, are you sure you did?

because it's the one that's trying to sell the lie that they're "normal"

it's the one that's trying to gain the acceptance of society

He said that homosexuals are selling the lie that homosexuality is "normal" in order to gain acceptance by society.
He did not define "normal" as being accepted by society.

Is the average person homosexual? If not, then it's not normal either based on your completely different definition.

My definition came from an online dictionary.
Since it is not the usual, average, or typical state or condition for a person to be a homosexual, then homosexuality is not normal by definition.

 

[GFR7]

how should a nurse act when required to care for a convicted rapist in prison?


especially if she is the victim of rape herself?

She should recuse herself. :BRAVO::angel:

 

[genuineoriginal]

It's not okay to use children against their parents due to a personal bias or vendetta.

Then it is a good thing that the doctor recused herself instead of agreeing to take the child on as a patient, isn't it.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Well, there that, and the Hippocratic Oath:

With regard to healing the sick, I will devise and order for them the best treatment, according to my judgment and means; and I will take care that they suffer no hurt or damage.

Nor shall any man's entreaty prevail upon me to administer maltreatment to anyone; neither will I counsel any man to do so.

It looks like the doctor in the OP was following the Hippocratic Oath by recusing herself.

 

[Rusha]

I don't think this physician did not want to see the child. She knew she would have to engage with the parents, and that she would feel awful doing so.

So she prayed, and believed God told her to apologize and refer them to another doctor, which she did.

Perfectly legal, and in this case, perhaps the moral thing to do. The infant is in good hands now, and the doctor knows this (she is the one who made the referral).

Again, the CHILD is the patient regardless of how you try to spin it.