What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Smart Guys Keep Their Faces Looking Young view!
howlifeworks.com - Why men have finally started to use certain anti-aging skin care products...
845 Comments
- niradg, on 02/27/2009, -35/+185Amazing how so many idiot conservatives are complaining about Obama rescinding an executive order that Bush ordered days before he left office. If it was so important to Bush, and not just a political football, then why did he wait until the end of his term? You fundies are so easily manipulated.
- Jektal, on 02/27/2009, -34/+159Stop lumping religion and morality together. The two are not correlated.
- Jektal, on 02/27/2009, -38/+154Find out? This is the sort of stuff I voted for the guy based on.
- lokai, on 02/27/2009, -63/+167This is a good thing. If doctors and nurses were able to say "No. I won't do that, even though I am qualified and trained to do it, because I disagree with it", all sorts of problems could arise. If a woman who was raped became pregnant and decided to abort, she should have every right to make that choice, and doctors who are capable of performing the abortion shouldn't be able to say "No, thanks, I don't agree with it."
- inactive, on 02/27/2009, -84/+174Mmmm, nothing tastes better with popcorn that fundie tears!
Cry some more! - akatsuki, on 02/27/2009, -13/+102Well, Digg is definitely declining fast with these oh-so-obvious posts and comments.
- Jektal, on 02/27/2009, -14/+91@PuterPrsn : Go read TFA again...
"Federal law has long forbidden discrimination against health care professionals who refuse to perform abortions or provide referrals for them on religious or moral grounds. The Obama administration supports those laws..."
"The administration supports a tightly written conscience clause..."
The issue here is not that Obama is going to mandate that all physicians MUST perform abortions if asked. Also FTFA:
"...the Obama administration was concerned that the Bush regulation could also be used to refuse birth control, family planning services and counseling for vaccines and transfusions."
Am I the only one seeing those words in the article?! - wishninja, on 02/27/2009, -61/+133Sounds good to me. It's was like affirmative action for the religiously handicapped. There is a long way to go yet to reverse what has happened to freedom over the last 8 years and this is a good start.
Next big attack should be the so called "informed consent" laws and waiting periods.
Government might be getting bigger under the democrats but at least it seems to get back out of our faces. - Totalchaos02, on 02/27/2009, -24/+8677 comments before hitting the front page, and almost all of them are hard right supporting comments. Wing nuts are getting organized on Digg.
- LilRabbitFooFoo, on 02/27/2009, -35/+89Yup, there is a massive right-wing digg/bury brigade acting daily here in an effort to sabotage the progress this nation has made. It's a real shame they didn't care enough about this nation to actually help during the 8 disastrous Bush years and just sat back idly watching his administration morally and financially bankrupt our great nation.
All we can do is digg/bury them back. Have at it, patriots and intellectuals. - DeathRay2K, on 02/27/2009, -9/+57It's all right, the far-right conservatives just got here first, all will be fixed soon enough.
- inactive, on 02/27/2009, -5/+52Goddamn, people's stupidity amazes me. Doctors aren't required to perform abortions against their will. Don't want to perform abortions? DON'T WORK IN AN ABORTION CLINIC! This is just un-*****-believable that people actually fell for this *****. Bush's rule was nothing more than a pointless gesture. It served absolutely no real function.
- jhbarr, on 02/27/2009, -16/+61So you think someone who is raped should not be allowed to get the morning after pill because a random pharmacist says so? Just checking.
- inactive, on 02/27/2009, -32/+75medical professionals need to show objectivity on all matters, not force their religion and conscience upon the patients
- LilRabbitFooFoo, on 02/27/2009, -10/+52Heaven forbid doctors should be required to do their JOBS, regardless of whatever brainwashed mumbo-jumbo they might have been brainwashed with. It's only their Hippocratic oath, after all. /sarcasm
- mbelrose, on 02/27/2009, -18/+59If pregnancy was something that only happened to men, abortion would be a civil right, and doctors would lose their licenses for refusing to do it.
- falcyn, on 02/27/2009, -8/+48Did anyone read this article? I think not, because if you did you would see there's more to this than meets the eye. Here's the pertinent section - and of course I fully expect to be dugg down because nobody's even going to bother reading this, but what the hey:
"Federal law has long forbidden discrimination against health care professionals who refuse to perform abortions or provide referrals for them on religious or moral grounds. The Obama administration supports those laws, said the HHS official.
The Bush administration's rule adds a requirement that institutions that get federal money certify their compliance with laws protecting the rights of moral objectors. It was intended to block the flow of federal funds to hospitals and other institutions that ignore those rights.
But the Obama administration was concerned that the Bush regulation could also be used to refuse birth control, family planning services and counseling for vaccines and transfusions."
The article goes on to go that under the poorly worded Bush law, a drug store clerk could refuse to sell birth control pills and be fully legally protected. That's just not right. This isn't about not agreeing with the moral conscience section of the law, its about other unintended side effects the wording allows. - jhbarr, on 02/27/2009, -6/+41Doctors? It God-damned pharmacists pulling this crap.
- inactive, on 02/27/2009, -20/+52Trying to paint a picture of a fetus or embryo as = to a child that has emerged from it's mother's womb has been a nasty war of semantics and definitions and philosophy. When does life begin, what constitutes being alive, is it a human, is it a person, blah blah blah. The rightwingnutjobs have done a good job of distorting facts and playing on emotions.
The decision regarding abortion is as private and personal as one can be. Period.
Thank god he rescinded this ridiculous gag rule.
This eliminated the gag rule. Nothing more. Nothing less. No loss of liberty, no constitutional rights. You rightwingnutjobs are hee-larious. - jarfmardisen, on 02/27/2009, -8/+40Why the hell is this getting dugg down? What in the ***** ***** is wrong with this absolutely true statement, thumbs-downers? Please enlighten me.
- reed311, on 02/27/2009, -17/+48I'm glad that Obama got rid of this. It isn't the job of the doctor to be an ethics judge. Abortions are perfectly legal and just because a doctor may not agree with the 4th Amendment or the implied right to privacy which the Supreme Court affirmed, that doesn't give them the right to deny someone a perfectly 100% legal procedure. I don't see doctors/nurses up in arms about having to treat criminals who are brought in by police and prison guards. This is just one of those stupid ***** fundamentalist issues that are used to distract the country when more important things are going.
You guys did a great job of distracting the country for eight years, while it went down the tubes financially and morally. I've got to give you that. - LittleDas, on 02/27/2009, -4/+35dude, did you even read the comments? they beat you here by a wide margin
- inactive, on 02/27/2009, -5/+35The last jerk already did that.
- NyteStarNyne, on 02/27/2009, -35/+63LOL. I love it when the rightwingnuts start mobbing the comments first. Pathetic, but funny.
- Kahnza, on 02/27/2009, -51/+78Its the womens choice. Unless she wants a child its just an unwanted growth, like a tumor.
- DeathRay2K, on 02/27/2009, -18/+45Because it's the woman's body. Why does it make sense for someone else, in this case a doctor, to decide what a woman does to her body? The government shouldn't have intervened in the first place, Obama's just fixing that.
- 3gibberish4q57, on 02/27/2009, -8/+35He's obviously in the pocket of Big Abortion for all the sweet, sweet abortion money.
- DistantSecond, on 02/27/2009, -1/+27But they can do exactly that ... FTA:
"Federal law has long forbidden discrimination against health care professionals who refuse to perform abortions or provide referrals for them on religious or moral grounds. The Obama administration supports those laws, said the HHS official."
The real issue the administration had with Bush's rule was that it extended conscience protections to cover access to birth control and counseling related to family planning. That is all this revokes; health care providers can still object to assisting in an abortion.
- jarfmardisen, on 02/27/2009, -0/+24IglooBurner
Using your impeccable logic:
Mother Teresa is a woman and is dead, therefore all women are dead.
- Jeepinator, on 02/27/2009, -3/+25http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_bill_cli ...
Clinton quote is way out of context.
Joe Biden's quote was a complaint, not a game plan. - inactive, on 02/27/2009, -4/+26They can choose not to work at an abortion clinic. It's really simple, really. Unless you work at an abortion clinic, performing abortions generally isn't part of the job. I just really can't imagine a situation where a doctor would have to perform an abortion against his will - hence, I fail to see what purpose this rule serves.
- BlackJackJester, on 02/27/2009, -35/+56So the woman gets a choice, but the doctor doesn't? How does that make any sense at all?
- jhbarr, on 02/27/2009, -6/+27@Junebug75: I know that. Some fundie pharmacists do not. http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/12/illinois-pharmaci ...
- inactive, on 02/27/2009, -5/+26As long as my doctor isn't morally opposed to the operation I need, I guess. And I hope my current doctor isn't morally opposed to performing blood tests on me. Or cancer screenings.
- inactive, on 02/27/2009, -15/+34He's a doctor, not a moral crusader. Who cares what he believes? It's what's best for his patient - it's not his place to say.
So what, I get declined treatment because some whack job operates based on his spiritual faith? That's like someone's doc saying, "I won't prescribe you meds for your anxiety because I'm a Scientologist and don't believe in medication."
It's irresponsible. - FreddieD, on 02/27/2009, -3/+21If it makes you feel any better, there are plenty of men (including myself) who feel that a woman has the right to do what she wishes with her body.
- Batfishy, on 02/27/2009, -11/+29Now, I can't speak for Mad, of course, but I'll cross that imaginary bridge when I get to it, Ben.
- dexter411, on 02/27/2009, -8/+26"What if a vegetarian doctor refused to give out drugs tested on animals? Would his "values" be so important then?"
Sure, and I'd have the right to go see a different doctor. - LilRabbitFooFoo, on 02/27/2009, -4/+22Don't be. The Hippocratic Oath makes it crystal clear that doctors and nurses are to help all those in need regardless of whether they agree with them. Enemies, criminals, etc. makes no difference.
- BellaVitaGirl, on 02/27/2009, -4/+21There needs to be a middle ground though--if you refuse to do a procedure you should be able to refer the patient to someone who can do the procedure. However, you shouldn't be forced into doing something that is so completely against your moral foundation, if that's the kind of belief system you have--if the doctor can't force belief on the patient, then patients cannot force belief on the doctors.
- tmonsta1, on 02/27/2009, -24/+41and aren't you the ***** that sit around and say ***** like
"If you don't like what they're paying you... go find another job... it's not the government's job to make your employer give you a raise... blah blah blah"
well... hey, if you don't want to have to perform abortions GO FIND ANOTHER JOB... it's not the governments place to make an employer hire you when a part of that job goes against YOUR morals
Don't want to do abortions... don't be an OBGYN or a nurse that works for an OBGYN
it's really not that tough.
you people are rediculous, and kings of the double standard - niradg, on 02/27/2009, -5/+22LOL @ your complete and total *****. 40%= A COMPLETE LIE. Did they threaten to close their doors for the 7.9 years that Bush was in office before he issued this executive order at the last minute while walking out the door to the Whitehouse?
- darkism, on 02/27/2009, -13/+30The one good thing that Blagojevich did before being thrown out was require pharmacists to fill prescriptions for BC regardless of any "objections" they had to it.
It's good to see that we're no longer going to stand for the god-wads dictating their flawed morality to others. - inactive, on 02/27/2009, -3/+20it appears they were here first on this one.
- JDoorjam, on 02/27/2009, -2/+18RTFA.
"Federal law has long forbidden discrimination against health care professionals who refuse to perform abortions or provide referrals for them on religious or moral grounds. The Obama administration supports those laws, said the HHS official."
They were concerned that pharmacists could refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control, and that family counseling services could be refused to patients. Doctors and nurses, despite the somewhat misleading article description, can still refuse to perform abortions. - Quick2822, on 02/27/2009, -5/+21If you're a doctor/nurse and don't want to give abortions, how about you go work a field of medicine that doesn't deal with abortions. The body has many parts. Pick another one.
- inactive, on 02/27/2009, -0/+16Only abortion clinic doctors generally perform abortions, so no, it doesn't really apply to all doctors, except in the hypothetical. I mean, if it's an emergency, like there's a health complication or something, it might be performed at a general hospital, but generally not.
- WasabiBomb, on 02/27/2009, -3/+18Bingo. They're playing right into the Conservatives' hands.
- inactive, on 02/27/2009, -15/+30Are you ***** serious? If you want to live within your conscience, GET A DIFFERENT JOB. The job REQUIREMENTS are the rule here, not your silly beliefs. There is no rights being taken away. The right of the PATIENT/CUSTOMER comes first. The rest is *****.
Maybe I should go to work at a Catholic hospital, start a pro-choice group, then complain my rights are being violated when they won't let me offer alternatives.
Or, I can be a Muslim, work at a meat produce place, but refuse to sell Pork.
You support both of those too, right?
If your job offends your religious beliefs, get the ***** out. Pretty simple. - inactive, on 02/27/2009, -1/+16I think you misunderstand. Doctors already have the right to refuse to perform an abortion of they object. Besides that, unless you work at an abortion clinic, there generally wouldn't be too many situations where a doctor would be asked to perform an abortion, anyway. Maybe in a life-threatening situation, but aside from that, I really fail to see what purpose the rule served anyway.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 870 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is