Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 175

Thread: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

  1. #131
    King Conspiratard
    Dr. Chuckles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-14 @ 03:04 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    12,895

    Re: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

    wasn't their argument based on current state law?

    they are arguing state law protects doctors from liability concerning unborn fetuses on grounds that those fetuses are not persons with legal rights
    also, I would love someone to explain the claim in the OP how arguing contrary to this would help establish some legal precedent against abortion

  2. #132
    Sage
    minnie616's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,952

    Re: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Chuckles View Post
    wasn't their argument based on current state law?



    also, I would love someone to explain the claim in the OP how arguing contrary to this would help establish some legal precedent against abortion
    Arguing contrary to current law and saying a fetus is a person might (not likely...but just might) get the Supreme court to revisit Roe vs Wade.

    A few states have tried and failed to pass personhood laws for a fetus.
    When it comes to matters of reproduce health, Politicians and the religious dogma of another faith should never interfere with religious liberty of an individual or her faith.

  3. #133
    Guru

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,488

    Re: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

    Quote Originally Posted by madman View Post
    So, the church uses a law that goes against their teaching for defense? Doesn't sound like principle to me.
    This is more picking and choosing even though it goes against their principles. And i wonder why the church is is suing the fed over Obamacare.
    Catholic Health Initiatives is not "the Church." Like any other hospital, those with "Catholic" in their name are run by boards of lay persons. But, it can be stripped of its Catholic affiliation and any clergy involved in this can even be excommunicated by the Diocese. It will be interesting to see how this develops and what the Diocese's response will be.
    Last edited by Napoleon; 01-26-13 at 12:10 PM.

  4. #134
    King Conspiratard
    Dr. Chuckles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-14 @ 03:04 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    12,895

    Re: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

    Quote Originally Posted by minnie616 View Post
    Arguing contrary to current law and saying a fetus is a person might (not likely...but just might) get the Supreme court to revisit Roe vs Wade.
    First: P'fffft~!!! Second, what they are arguing is that under current state law the charge of wrongful death doesn't apply. I'm not sure it's realistic to expect them to argue contrary, or even if they are in a position to do so. Third, I'm talking about an actual legal opinion on how it would shape future precedence under the law, not a fantasy about taking this to the Supreme and overturning RvW



    Quote Originally Posted by minnie616 View Post
    A few states have tried and failed to pass personhood laws for a fetus.
    If such a law existed they could probably base an argument on it. But what would their argument be based on absent such a law and how would it even be applicable to the case?

  5. #135
    User RadioactiveLego's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    03-04-13 @ 08:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    30

    Re: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

    Bear with me and my obtusity. This strays a bit from the topic.

    If
    A. The state decides a fetus is a live human w/ rights, at the moment of conception.
    and
    B. The parents decide to relinquish responsibility of the child to the custody of the state, at any point during the pregnancy.
    Than
    C. Couldn't the mother force the state to remove the child from her property (body)?
    OR
    D. Couldn't the mother force the state to provide and care for the mother during her pregnancy to ensure the child is properly cared for, since removal would harm the human life?

    Lego
    "Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion." -Edmund Burke

  6. #136
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    This is not an abortion case.
    True enough. In fact the name of the thread is "In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people".
    It is an instance of medical malpractice - the doctor was on call, that obligates him to answer emergencies when notified by the hospital AND the hospital had no Plan B in place for those times Plan A (doctor on-call) didn't work.
    Yes, the doctor was on call.

    Aborting the foetuses in this one case might have brought criminal charges as they were viable, (7 months) and had shown no problems during the pregnancy.
    It was quite legal for the now defunct "Tiller the baby killer" to carry on with his practice, with a lot of support from the pro-abortionists, and there are still a few more doctors doing the same thing.

    This was a case of a doctor not answering the phone when he had promised to do so, particularly bad in this one case as the mother was one of his own patients.
    So not answering the phone is a criminal offense but aborting a baby in its third trimester isn't. That was my point.

  7. #137
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    Re: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

    Quote Originally Posted by madman View Post
    rut rohhh!
    This cant be good for the business of religion.
    I mean, you use the defense of "those fetuses are not persons with legal rights"?


    Maybe a "pro-lifer" would like to make an excuse for this.

    This should be good.




    In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people | The Colorado Independent


    my two cents

    a hospital is not within a religious realm and in most cases religious freedom is not extended to it, and this is exactly how it should be.
    With that being said the opposite is also true, thier religious views dont really matter since this is a LEGAL/HOSPITAL/PUBLIC matter.

    do i find it grossly hypocritical? of course, its a pure example of being extremely hypocritically two faced

    BUT

    that also deosnt matter

    not sure how the case will go but their argument is a perfectly legal one
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  8. #138
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

    Quote Originally Posted by austrianecon View Post
    How about you look at the comments between Dr. Chuckles and I again.
    You mean like this one?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Chuckles View Post
    I understand you point but I never even implied a disagreement with it
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  9. #139
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    And yet, you can't name one non-religious reason why a fetus should be protected by law
    "I believe it's a child, even if it's not 'born' yet, and children are deserving of protection on the part of the government".

    That's a legitimate, reasonable, statement that says NOTHING about a persons religious beliefs. Simply because YOU disagree with it does not mean it's enforcing their religious views against you. It's enforcing their VIEWS against you, but you have ZERO proof or evidence that it's a view made SPECIFICALLY due to their religious beliefs.

  10. #140
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses arenít people

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    "I believe it's a child, even if it's not 'born' yet, and children are deserving of protection on the part of the government".

    That's a legitimate, reasonable, statement that says NOTHING about a persons religious beliefs. Simply because YOU disagree with it does not mean it's enforcing their religious views against you. It's enforcing their VIEWS against you, but you have ZERO proof or evidence that it's a view made SPECIFICALLY due to their religious beliefs.
    The Constitution only protects the rights of a "person", which is defined as someone who has been born. Your desire to have unborn children protected has no basis in the constitution.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •