• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michigan lesbian couple says pediatrician denied baby care due to sexual orientation

Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

And that's true, my wife was a waitress for a few years and this was almost always the case.


Tim-
My father drove toure bus for a lot of years and they always took turns taking asian groups, and for the same reason. Asian groups were even billed differently so the driver would get something out of it.

Back to topic though, discrimination per-se isn't good or bad, what matters is if anyone's harmed by it and in OP's story no one was.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

My father drove toure bus for a lot of years and they always took turns taking asian groups, and for the same reason. Asian groups were even billed differently so the driver would get something out of it.

Back to topic though, discrimination per-se isn't good or bad, what matters is if anyone's harmed by it and in OP's story no one was.

Harm is a relative term. However, legally, material harm is provable, but almost non-existent in cases like this, and baking cakes, or taking pictures, or preaching to the choir. The only harm is hurt feelings, there is no material harm involved.


Tim-
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

`
Health Care Antidiscrimination Laws Protecting Gays and Lesbians:
`
"Many gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) people experience discrimination and bias when attempting to receive health care, sometimes because they're not always aware of rules protecting them. A number of states have laws that protect LGBT patients against differential treatment -- or outright refusal to treat -- based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In addition, American Medical Association ethics rules prohibit physicians from refusing to treat patients based on their sexual orientation. Here are the ins and outs of these antidiscrimination rules and a list of which states provide protection.

AMA Ethics Rules Prohibit LGBT Discrimination

The American Medical Association has taken a clear stance on physician treatment of gay, lesbian, and transgendered patients. In its ethics opinions -- which serve as a model for how all physicians and their employees should practice medicine -- the AMA states: "Physicians who offer their services to the public may not decline to accept patients because of race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity or any other basis that would constitute invidious discrimination."

The American Medical Association also makes clear that a doctor's right to religious refusal applies to particular treatments or procedures (for example, abortion), but not to particular groups of people (like lesbians). In addition, the AMA states that it will "work to reduce the health disparities suffered because of unequal treatment of minor children and same sex parents in same sex household" and work with local medical societies to provide sample printed nondiscrimination policies to distribute to doctors and hospitals. In fact, the AMA has adopted more than 25 rules and opinions calling for the equal treatment of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered patients, doctors, and medical students. You can access all of these rules on the AMA website at American Medical Association (click "About AMA," "Our People," "Member Groups and Sections," and "GLBT Advisory Committee").

States Prohibiting Health Care Discrimination

In almost half of U.S. states, discriminating against LGBT patients is illegal. Twenty-two states have laws that prohibit discrimination based on a person's sexual orientation in "public accommodations" -- meaning most businesses that serve the public. Public accommodations include the provision of health care services by physicians, hospitals, and other health care providers. Fourteen of these twenty-two states also prohibit public accommodations discrimination based on a person's gender identity"
.
 
Re: Michigan lesbian couple says pediatrician denied baby care due to sexual orientat

She said, in the very quote you replied too, that she "wasn't" curious about her religion? And that because of that her religion was irrelevant. In context what that translates too is that her religion is irrelevant, and that she isn't curious about it. But that's what she said, but some people apparently need guidance navigating the nuances of the English language. ;)


Tim-
yep I got that clearly lol so your post is just more BS fantasy made up in your head and another failure when you come across me, par for the course lol. :shrug:
I still think its weird she wondered about my thoughts though she felt the ladys religion was irrelevant, this fact wont change
your post fails and facts win again

(insert post inspired by agitation and inability to resist the temptation of the impossible task of always trying to save face. The post will be telling me what I really think and what I really thought, trying to explain to me where the mistake was even though theres no evidence of one, and more deflections and made up BS while I sit here and laugh)
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

Of course I will, i enjoy pointing you your dodges and further exposing your posts.
Now we are still waiting, can you present any facts to back up the claims you made and multiple posters proved wrong? Please do so in you next post. Thanks!
Didn't dodge anything. That's just your way of saying that you have nothing of substance to say.
 
Re: Michigan lesbian couple says pediatrician denied baby care due to sexual orientat

IOW, it is discrimination.
Right, it's just ok discrimination.
 
Re: Michigan lesbian couple says pediatrician denied baby care due to sexual orientat

Then I recommend you stop reading this thread.

And I recommend that you stop polluting gun threads.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

We already talked about doctors not being able to refuse to see patients in an emergency.

Didn't mention an emergency. Talking about a doctor in the exact same situation, doing the exact same thing, only the parents are atheists, or interracial, or Jewish, or interfaith. Do you or do you not believe that the doctor should face punishment or possible lawsuit under public accommodation laws for her actions, only with the people she refused to see their baby changed?
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

That was their choice to leave the group. What does that have to do with what Jerry posted?

I was correcting him. He said they did not go to another doctor, find another doctor. They did.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

Who is whining. Just pointing out the bigotry and your inability to grasp certain things.

No, that is an established fact. You think that she is not and of course you are mistaken.

No, I had no interaction with her.

I do not give a crap if you do or do not.

To an apologist and denier probably not, but the again you do not determine such things.

Nobody said that the infant did not get the care. Stop beating the dead horse, it can not feel it.

along with the discrimination. They did not want that. Nobody wants bigotry, that is no decent civilized people want bigotry. You seem to like it.

Intelligent and sensible people already do, you do not count so much for me.

Awesome post. Started with outrage and reached a crescendo of outrage by the end.

Bigotry? Here's the definition of bigot:

a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

I see it every day on here and in real life. I see it right here in this thread, in fact. I see people attacking gay people, religious people, women, men, vegetarians, pro-choicers, right wingers, left wingers, etc. etc. Intolerance is everywhere. And you're as intolerant of her religious beliefs, whatever they are exactly, as she is of the couple's gay marriage.

This isn't the Special Olympics. Not everyone gets a ribbon. Not everyone is going to like everyone else, and not everyone is going to want to associate with everyone else. This doctor got her partner to cover an appointment for her. The baby got the care the parents wanted. You find it a massive big deal because the doctor seems to have some sort of religious issue with gay people. So again, I don't share your outrage. If that makes me uncivilized or unintelligent to you, that's fine with me. I don't even know you.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

I was correcting him. He said they did not go to another doctor, find another doctor. They did.

He was talking about at that initial visit, and he was correct. They didn't have to go find another doctor. The original doctor found one for them, right in the same building.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

I don't know why any adult gives a crap about what another adult thinks of his/her bedroom preferences. The couple at the center of this story are apparently very hurt because this doctor doesn't agree with their preferences. I don't care who dislikes my blonde hair, my blue eyes, my choice of husband, my kids' clothes, what kind of car I drive, what kind of music I like, or what color my house is. Just as long as nobody doesn't provide me with what I pay for that everyone else gets for the same price that I pay.

The baby got medical care that day. This couple is pissed because the doctor doesn't like them. BFD.

They are informing other parents and patients of this doctor's bigotry so they don't have to go through the same thing they do. They have every right to be mad at someone who agreed to be their doctor (the medical group as a whole did not take them on generally, then assign them this doctor, they talked to her prenatal about being their doctor, and she agreed), but then decided to drop them because they are two women rather than a man and a woman, which she claims violates her religious beliefs to check their baby. There is no guarantee that in the future a different doctor would be available in a similar situation involving this doctor. What if she later decides she also can't see babies who only have a single mother or whose parents are divorced because of her religious beliefs?
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

Didn't mention an emergency. Talking about a doctor in the exact same situation, doing the exact same thing, only the parents are atheists, or interracial, or Jewish, or interfaith. Do you or do you not believe that the doctor should face punishment or possible lawsuit under public accommodation laws for her actions, only with the people she refused to see their baby changed?

Punishment? Sure. Go ahead and punish her for that. Nothing like a lawsuit where the damages are hurt feelings. We don't have enough of them.

The maybe she can fie suit against all of the people who are so intolerant of her religious views that they've gone on doctor rating sites - meant to help real people select a doctor who provides good medical care and not provide personal approval of their marriage - and posted malicious things about the doctor. She's exercising her religious views, and last I checked, they're also protected. Hurt feelings and all.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

They are informing other parents and patients of this doctor's bigotry so they don't have to go through the same thing they do. They have every right to be mad at someone who agreed to be their doctor (the medical group as a whole did not take them on generally, then assign them this doctor, they talked to her prenatal about being their doctor, and she agreed), but then decided to drop them because they are two women rather than a man and a woman, which she claims violates her religious beliefs to check their baby. There is no guarantee that in the future a different doctor would be available in a similar situation involving this doctor. What if she later decides she also can't see babies who only have a single mother or whose parents are divorced because of her religious beliefs?
The patient has just as much right to refuse a doctor based on ideology. Fair use is fair.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

He was talking about at that initial visit, and he was correct. They didn't have to go find another doctor. The original doctor found one for them, right in the same building.

No, he wasn't, not from his posts. You might want to go back and check posts #567 and #577. They show much of the progression and his claims, and they aren't correct. For one, the group did not select a doctor for them. The doctor they were supposed to see asked another doctor to fill in for her, even explaining her feelings about it to the other doctor. And he said that I was wrong that they didn't go to another group after that initial appointment.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

They are informing other parents and patients of this doctor's bigotry so they don't have to go through the same thing they do. They have every right to be mad at someone who agreed to be their doctor (the medical group as a whole did not take them on generally, then assign them this doctor, they talked to her prenatal about being their doctor, and she agreed), but then decided to drop them because they are two women rather than a man and a woman, which she claims violates her religious beliefs to check their baby. There is no guarantee that in the future a different doctor would be available in a similar situation involving this doctor. What if she later decides she also can't see babies who only have a single mother or whose parents are divorced because of her religious beliefs?

What if I win the $480 million Powerball? I'll buy a condo in Tahiti.

Every right to be mad. Yes, that's what this is all about. They're mad. Hurt feelings. Legislate hurt feelings all you want, but please don't expect me to join the crusade.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

The patient has just as much right to refuse a doctor based on ideology. Fair use is fair.

The patient has more right because the patient is the one using the service. The doctor does not rely on the patient to keep them healthy.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

Yeah, not really. Usually there some sort of logic used in tying statements together to form what is called a rational argument.

Sorry.
Don't be sorry, now it is obvious why you could not grasp it.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

What if I win the $480 million Powerball? I'll buy a condo in Tahiti.

Every right to be mad. Yes, that's what this is all about. They're mad. Hurt feelings. Legislate hurt feelings all you want, but please don't expect me to join the crusade.

And that is what a good deal of the civil rights movement could be claimed as as well, hurt feelings that they had to use a different fountain, a different entrance, sit in a different area. If someone doesn't see the bigger picture that such treatment makes people feel inferior, and can lead to great divisions in our society.

You can blow off my questions all you like, but it only shows that you are not willing to admit that what she did was wrong and that in a different situation, you might agree that it was wrong.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

Don't forget, she skipped work to avoid telling them to their face she's a bigot!!

But it's OK. Same way it'd be OK if a black family sat down for dinner and the manager said, "so sorry, but you'll have to change tables - this waiter prayed on it and doesn't feel he can give you good service cause he's a racist, but we have other waiters who will serve blacks, so no harm done!"

I'm surprised you can't see this - clear as day to me.....:shock:

/sarcasm.

More seriously, that she couldn't tell them to their face is what's sad to me. It's almost as if her (perhaps decent) conscience was trying to tell her something, and her religion wouldn't let it. Whatever was going on, she knew it was wrong enough to avoid facing her decision.

So she shouldn't have skipped work - she should have gone to work that day and said mean things to them about their lifestyle that for whatever reason she doesn't condone?

That would have made all the difference in the world to this couple, is that right?
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

And that is what a good deal of the civil rights movement could be claimed as as well, hurt feelings that they had to use a different fountain, a different entrance, sit in a different area. If someone doesn't see the bigger picture that such treatment makes people feel inferior, and can lead to great divisions in our society.

You can blow off my questions all you like, but it only shows that you are not willing to admit that what she did was wrong and that in a different situation, you might agree that it was wrong.

I don't care what her religious views are. You do. That's what bothers you here. You want me to say she was supposed to do something she didn't want to do to avoid hurting someone's feelings. Sorry. I left high school a long time ago. I don't care about what other adults think. I didn't care what anyone thought about my choice in spouse, and I can't imagine why it's the end of the world for this couple to get the approval of a pediatrician on theirs.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

Punishment? Sure. Go ahead and punish her for that. Nothing like a lawsuit where the damages are hurt feelings. We don't have enough of them.

The maybe she can fie suit against all of the people who are so intolerant of her religious views that they've gone on doctor rating sites - meant to help real people select a doctor who provides good medical care and not provide personal approval of their marriage - and posted malicious things about the doctor. She's exercising her religious views, and last I checked, they're also protected. Hurt feelings and all.

Not all religious views are protected, nor should they be. Especially not when they are being used purely as an excuse for their bigotry against others.

Again, the question was about under current public accommodation laws, should she be sued if the parents had been mixed race or interfaith or of a faith or hold views she did not agree with? The public accommodation laws say that this is perfectly acceptable, as is punishment from the government for doing such a thing, even if the claim is made that it was their religious views.

And she cannot sue people for talking bad about her customer service on rating sites. She is free to try, but it won't go far. Her religious views are also not protected against other people's views of her religious views or even her actions.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

I don't care what her religious views are. You do. That's what bothers you here. You want me to say she was supposed to do something she didn't want to do to avoid hurting someone's feelings. Sorry. I left high school a long time ago. I don't care about what other adults think. I didn't care what anyone thought about my choice in spouse, and I can't imagine why it's the end of the world for this couple to get the approval of a pediatrician on theirs.

Because it causes issues within society when people refuse to do their job based on any views and a classification of someone or a group of people that has absolutely no real impact on their job, despite their claims otherwise. If you can't do your job to the full extent, then do something else. It doesn't matter if it is your religious views or other beliefs that cause the conflict. You are an adult. You should suck it up and do your job.
 
Re: Bigotry is well and alive even among doctors.

Not all religious views are protected, nor should they be. Especially not when they are being used purely as an excuse for their bigotry against others.

Again, the question was about under current public accommodation laws, should she be sued if the parents had been mixed race or interfaith or of a faith or hold views she did not agree with? The public accommodation laws say that this is perfectly acceptable, as is punishment from the government for doing such a thing, even if the claim is made that it was their religious views.

And she cannot sue people for talking bad about her customer service on rating sites. She is free to try, but it won't go far. Her religious views are also not protected against other people's views of her religious views or even her actions.

Can you show me the law that was passed that said religion isn't part of the protected classes anymore?
 
Back
Top Bottom