SCOTUS Scores Again!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-06-2016, 07:45 PM (This post was last modified: 28-06-2016 08:31 PM by Anjele.)
RE: SCOTUS Scores Again!
(28-06-2016 07:38 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 05:51 PM)Heatheness Wrote:  What burns me is that they not only refuse but I read stories of horrible treatment to some women who have presented their prescriptions. When your pharmacy is the only one in town it becomes a hardship to shop elsewhere. Just like the Catlick hospitals refusing to treat women who're having a miscarriage or who want their tubes tied after their child is born.

Fucking get out of the medical profession if you're not going to help everyone with whatever their needs are.

If I ever have blood issues, I hope my hematologist isn't JW, y'know?

Catholic hospitals do not refuse treatment to women who are miscarrying. A miscarriage is a medically urgent, if not an emergency, situation.

But they don't do elective tubal ligations.

The difference here needs to be clear. Note that 'elective' doesn't fall under the category of medical need.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Anjele's post
28-06-2016, 07:51 PM
RE: SCOTUS Scores Again!
Yeah, I wasn't talking about Catholic hospitals, but rather, JW docs
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2016, 07:54 PM
RE: SCOTUS Scores Again!
(28-06-2016 07:51 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Yeah, I wasn't talking about Catholic hospitals, but rather, JW docs

JWs tend not to believe in, or promote, more education than is necessary to care for your family. Probably not a lot of JW docs out there. You are probably safe.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2016, 07:57 PM
RE: SCOTUS Scores Again!
(28-06-2016 07:54 PM)Anjele Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 07:51 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Yeah, I wasn't talking about Catholic hospitals, but rather, JW docs

JWs tend not to believe in, or promote, more education than is necessary to care for your family. Probably not a lot of JW docs out there. You are probably safe.

It was a joke, ma'am. The thought doesn't keep me up at night. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
28-06-2016, 08:39 PM
RE: SCOTUS Scores Again!
(28-06-2016 06:54 PM)Anjele Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 05:51 PM)Heatheness Wrote:  What burns me is that they not only refuse but I read stories of horrible treatment to some women who have presented their prescriptions. When your pharmacy is the only one in town it becomes a hardship to shop elsewhere. Just like the Catlick hospitals refusing to treat women who're having a miscarriage or who want their tubes tied after their child is born.

Fucking get out of the medical profession if you're not going to help everyone with whatever their needs are.

I will argue with the Catholic hospital thing. It's a CATHOLIC hospital. It's really to be expected.

When I had Alex I had him in a Catholic Hospital because it is a really good maternity hospital and I had the girls at University of Iowa hospitals and while the care is good the volume is high and is noisier and more chaotic.

I was going to leave the hospital the morning after I had him to go to my doctor's office for the tubal. Due to a rougher than expected delivery, I opted not to and had it done six months later instead.

I knew going in that was going to be the case. No one advertised or offered anything differently. There were other options available. It is not a public hospital. Catholic hospitals are private hospitals and they go by their beliefs.

No one has to go to one. You have options.

Also, nuns have long been connected with hospitals and nursing. They give good care. Let me add that a tubal is usually an elective surgery...it is not required for a medical institution to perform an elective surgery.

When a good friend recently lost her baby, the baby was delivered at a catholic hospital. She gave them very high marks and said they were very respectful. When she had a meltdown in the middle of the night (she could feel the baby move she thought) a nun stayed with her until her husband arrived.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2016, 09:02 PM
RE: SCOTUS Scores Again!
(28-06-2016 07:06 PM)Anjele Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 07:02 PM)Heatheness Wrote:  I understand that but when they are the only hospital for hundreds of miles it even more critical they stop using their emergency care facilities for god works. They should NEVER be allowed to turn away someone in need of emergency care.

The catlick hospitals here give the finest care, I know, I've been in the 2 biggest ones. One of them will do hysterectomies because I had mine there. But the others do not. They won't touch any reproductive organs. It's insane.

Who has had to have an emergency tubal ligation? Anyone you know?

The Fallopian Tube may have to be removed due to ectopic pregnancy but a hospital isn't going to turn you down. An ectopic pregnancy can be lethal.

Where have you found a Catholic hospital that refuses treatment for disorders of the reproductive system?

An elective tubal is not the same thing.



This:

http://www.medicaldaily.com/catholic-hos...productive

http://www.care2.com/causes/treatment-denied.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/cath...9a28aceea6

and there are lots more.

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Heatheness's post
29-06-2016, 05:02 AM
RE: SCOTUS Scores Again!
Just for the record, they are being sued all over the country for similar reasons. The ACLU is on many of the cases.

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2016, 05:10 PM
RE: SCOTUS Scores Again!
"If this is a sign of how religious liberty claims will be treated in the years ahead, those who value religious freedom have cause for great concern," Alito wrote.

It kills me how they only see it as a assault on "their" religious views, meanwhile not caring at all about the liberties of others, specifically, not to be held under the tyranny of religion. I mean, heck, if BC methods were being forced down their throats I could see them getting angry, but its MY throat it is going in.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Rachel E's post
05-07-2016, 06:10 PM
RE: SCOTUS Scores Again!
(05-07-2016 05:10 PM)Rachel E Wrote:  "If this is a sign of how religious liberty claims will be treated in the years ahead, those who value religious freedom have cause for great concern," Alito wrote.

It kills me how they only see it as a assault on "their" religious views, meanwhile not caring at all about the liberties of others, specifically, not to be held under the tyranny of religion. I mean, heck, if BC methods were being forced down their throats I could see them getting angry, but its MY throat it is going in.

Exactly! Yes

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Heatheness's post
05-07-2016, 06:18 PM
RE: SCOTUS Scores Again!
Awww yah! Tell those religious a-holes to stay outta my lady parts!

[Image: giphy.gif]

[Image: sagansig_zps6vhbql6m.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like SitaSky's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: