Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 175

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

  1. #41
    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 ChuckBerry View Post
    h

    Bit judgmental, don't you think? Have you heard the obstetricians side of the story? Many hospitals don't have a neonatal ward, our local Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic hospital does not, and obstetric cases are referred to the nearby Women's and Children's hospital, or to Lafayette General Medical Center. It's possible this was a small local hospital with basic services not capable of handling all comers without assistance. The fact that the on call obstetrician didn't call in and that there was no backup plan is troubling regardless of the reason, and at a minimum makes the Catholic hospital liable for the death of the mother.

    Spinning this out as an overall indictment of Catholicism is juvenile. People make mistakes and people make bad decisions.
    If a hospital doesn't have a neo natal ward, then referring patients to a hospital that does is the responsible thing to do.

    But that's not the situation in this case, now is it?

    And I never said that this represents an "overall indictment of Catholicism". Those are your words, not mine
    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..

  2. #42
    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 ChuckBerry View Post
    They have 170 hospitals. All of the land and buildings and equipment inside them add up to that much. That doesn't mean they have 15 billion ready cash to spend.
    If they can't properly manage all those facilities, then they should sell them and invest the proceeds in properly managing the remaining ones.
    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..

  3. #43
    Elitist as Hell.
    Einzige's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-29-16 @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,655

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

    It's so embarrassing when Catholics play the martyr card. Sure, all Christians wil pretend to be persecuted, because that's the nature of Christianity as a religion of victimization, but Catholicism in the United States is especially bad at pretending it's 1928 and they're Al Smith in South Carolina.

  4. #44
    Relentless Thinking Fury
    ChezC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,125

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

    Unfortunately this is one for instance in a long narrative where "Catholic" Institutions are not following Catholic Teaching. It doesn't mean the teaching isn't sound. It means that the people who identify themselves as Catholics are not adhering to the teachings. Catholic Health unfortunately has a long track record of not adhering to Church doctrine. They aren't the only ones, and unfortunate for the Catholic Church -- its limp-wristed responses to these Institutions and groups who openly contradict doctrine will only further tarnish its image and cause more people to turn from the faith.

    Responding as a "pro-lifer" a fetus is a life however if the "law" dictates that it isn't than legally the organization cannot be considered culpable under the law. This doesn't mean they aren't culpable. Law is nothing but sophistry in the first place. To me it seems that hypocrisy is meeting hypocrisy on even terms. However to change the law to suit a individual's fancy at this juncture would destroy completely the illusion that the law is concrete. It will show that law is merely a kite which sways back and forth on the wind of personal opinion.

  5. #45
    User laurcunningham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Last Seen
    10-16-15 @ 09:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    105

    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.
    To me it seems as though the fetuses did not have rights because they died on their own, "like God intended," whereas had the harlot of a woman chosen to terminate the pregnancy early on because she wasn't prepared to be a mother then they would have had rights because "God said so." I'm really sorry for that woman and her children. The situation sounds unfortunate and terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by madman View Post
    So basically,you want a US law based on your religious beliefs even though not everyone believes in your religion? right
    I just had a similar discussion/argument with a peer in one of my classes, but it had to do with same-sex marriage instead. We got into separation of church and state debate and the woman exclaimed that because the bible said that it was law, it was, and it didn't matter if I didn't believe in god, I was wrong for suggesting that religious people should keep their religion to themselves, in their families, and within their churches. I wasn't suggesting and never argumentatively announced that I felt that people shouldn't be allowed to be religious, I just stated that it wasn't fair to push one's beliefs on me if I don't agree with them. I think that in the case of homosexuality, women's rights, and abortion, yes, religious people do feel that United States law should be based around their beliefs even if it conflicts with other peoples. I'm not particularly singling out digsbe here because I don't know if that is what they want, but your response to them reminded me of my recent frustrating conversation.

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Not everyone lives their lives in a purely atheistic/secular manner either, why have US law based on secular/atheistic beliefs even though not everyone believes in accordance with that? (especially when doing such may violate human rights)
    In the case of abortion, having the "atheistic/secular belief" as law would allow anyone to make their own decision to have an abortion or not have an abortion which doesn't negatively affect a religious person. They are then allowed to choose to carry their pregnancy to term as their god wanted them to do. Letting religion get involved and create laws saying that no one is allowed to have abortions at all because it makes certain religious people grumpy forces one groups interests on another. As much as people like to spit out that atheist people are terrible, horrible, evil people, all of their interests revolve around letting people be themselves. Do I think you should have twenty-seven children? No, that's extremely irresponsible, but if your god has told you that your path in life is to pop out as many children as possible, that's none of my damn business and I wouldn't dream of telling you that my opposing views on it should stop you from doing it.

    It is the same thing with same-sex marriage. Atheistic laws would allow anyone to make any choice they choose to when it comes to marrying another adult, regardless of sex, and starting their own families. Religious laws take some groups of people's interests and force others to live by that law. So in essence that is why US law should be based around "secular/atheistic beliefs." None of those laws impede on individual rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Fabulous View Post
    Sure there are.

    Do you have any kids? I do. While my wife was pregnant I had all sorts of reasons for wanting my unborn child protected that had nothing at all to do with religion. You would have to be some kind of moron to argue otherwise.
    But you and your wife wanted the child. I'm not arguing, I'm just saying that your feelings were so strong because you wanted to have that child.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    The laws is not meant to, nor has the power to, assuage your feelings of loss. That's why miscarriages are not illegal
    Well that and because you can't really control miscarriages and holding a woman responsible for something she couldn't control is ridiculous... even though my state is trying to pass a law that would consider a woman a murderer for having a miscarriage.
    ..:: Lauren ::..

  6. #46
    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 madman View Post
    Maybe a "pro-lifer" would like to make an excuse for this.
    Not a pro lifer, but clearly their institutional views do little to change the law and how it currently applied. It's like if someone held the personal view that killing anything was murder: this view would not open them to murder charges for killing a fly

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    01-22-17 @ 09:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    4,136

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

    Quote Originally Posted by madman View Post
    "Dont apply the actions..." Are you serious? Are they not supposed to be following what the Vatican says?

    Use the law when it benefits you
    use the book when it benefits you
    (choose the one that suits you best)
    You're being delusional. The bible isn't a doctrine of authority in court.

  8. #48
    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 laurcunningham View Post
    In the case of abortion, having the "atheistic/secular belief" as law would allow anyone to make their own decision to have an abortion or not have an abortion which doesn't negatively affect a religious person.
    I really question this, because a) I have seen no proof of a scientific consensus when life begins, or even evidence that such is a question science should and can answer. And no, I don't think religion should inform it either, but I'm assuming the answer will be more philosophical and qualitative

    b) as an atheist who completely supports a secular govt "when life actually begins" strikes me as a pretty complex question that is central to the abortion debate. Not sure how so many people can overlook the possible moral dilemmas involved with abortion, but doing so does your cause no favor

    PS also confused on how atheism would likely dictate my views on civil liberties. Is there something inherent in not believing in god that informs a personal view against slavery?

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    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


    Why not use the progressive argument which is law in defense?

    I'm pro life and probably would have used the same argument. Sometimes people talk out two sides of their mouth. At the same time not everyone who works in a catholic hospital is catholic. Being a catholic isn't exactly a prerequisite for working in medicine.

    Also, I don't even see how this is a malpractice case - a doctor missed a page. I miss phone calls all the time.

  10. #50
    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 Mr.Nick View Post
    a doctor missed a page. I miss phone calls all the time.
    you're also not a doctor who is "on call"

Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... 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
  •