[Vision2020] Obama to Rescind Conscience Rule

Wed Mar 4 17:58:40 PST 2009

Gary,

So you are saying, it doesn't matter if a person with a license sworn to help somebody doesn't? How about if you had a stroke, or are suffocating, and the paramedic doesn't like you? Should you call another hospital provider? Or do we make exceptions to capitalistic rules in matters of health care and government provided rights?

Best Regards,

Donovan

--- On Wed, 3/4/09, g. crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:
From: g. crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Obama to Rescind Conscience Rule
To: "Bill London" <london at moscow.com>, "Saundra Lund" <sslund_2007 at verizon.net>, vision2020 at moscow.com
Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2009, 5:40 PM

 _filtered #yiv692810045 {
font-family:Wingdings;}
 _filtered #yiv692810045 {
font-family:Cambria Math;}
 _filtered #yiv692810045 {
font-family:Calibri;}
 _filtered #yiv692810045 {
font-family:Consolas;}
 _filtered #yiv692810045 {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
#yiv692810045 P.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE:12pt;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:"Times New Roman", "serif";}
#yiv692810045 LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE:12pt;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:"Times New Roman", "serif";}
#yiv692810045 DIV.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE:12pt;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:"Times New Roman", "serif";}
#yiv692810045 A:link {
COLOR:blue;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv692810045 SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR:blue;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv692810045 A:visited {
COLOR:purple;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv692810045 SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR:purple;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv692810045 P {
FONT-SIZE:12pt;MARGIN-LEFT:0in;MARGIN-RIGHT:0in;FONT-FAMILY:"Times New Roman", "serif";}
#yiv692810045 PRE {
FONT-SIZE:10pt;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:"Courier New";}
#yiv692810045 SPAN.HTMLPreformattedChar {
FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;}
#yiv692810045 SPAN.EmailStyle20 {
COLOR:#1f497d;FONT-FAMILY:"Calibri", "sans-serif";}
#yiv692810045 .MsoChpDefault {
FONT-SIZE:10pt;}
#yiv692810045 DIV.Section1 {
}

 "I can certainly see situations (as Saundra 
Lund notes) where medical providers, citing their religious beliefs, refuse to 
provide prenatal care to various clients, refuse to give ED medication, 
refuse to do reconstructive surgery."

I'm thinking that you imagine the situations more 
vividly then you might see them. Let's leave the religious aspect of this 
discussion aside for a moment. While I find it more then a little hard to 
believe that any other then the tiniest fraction of medical providers would 
withhold the services you list, I still would have to ask, so what? Get a 
different provider. As I have argued in the past, all purveyors of goods and/or 
services, whether they be landlords, physicians, pharmacists, bankers, 
grocers, mechanics, or anyone else should be free to decide who they 
want to work for and sell to based on whatever whim strikes their fancy. 

You're apparently in favor of the right to be 
irresponsible. You're in favor of the right to not deal with the consequences of 
irresponsible behavior. Above all else you're in favor of the right to choose. 
What about my and others rights? Why does the right to choose supersede everyone 
else's right to view innocent life as something special and worthy of 
protection? What is it about your rights that are so special that I have to be 
forced to join with you in exercising them against my will?

g

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: 
  Bill London 

  To: g. crabtree ; Saundra 
  Lund ; vision2020 at moscow.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 11:17 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Obama to 
  Rescind Conscience Rule

  G-
  That is the core of the problem 
here.
  You say that an abortion is "the death of a 
  child" and as such trumps the normal requirements of professionalism (doctors 
  should be able to refuse to do such things based upon their religious 
  convictions)
  However, not everyone agrees with you..not your 
  definition of abortion nor what constitutes a religious 
conviction
  Religious convictions come in a wide range of 
  flavors.  I can certainly see situations (as Saundra Lund notes) where 
  medical providers, citing their religious beliefs, refuse to provide prenatal 
  care to various clients, refuse to give ED medication, refuse to do 
  reconstructive surgery.
  BL

    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: 
    g. 
    crabtree 
    To: Saundra Lund ; vision2020 at moscow.com 
    Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 7:11 
    AM
    Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Obama to 
    Rescind Conscience Rule

    "Third, I 
    personally was looking forward to seeing Mr. Crabtree’s howls of indignation 
    the first time a clinic refused to provide prenatal care to a welfare mother 
    with more children than she can support.  Or, the first time a married 
    woman was denied insurance coverage for baby number three, four, five, or 
    more.  Or, the first time one of his buddies was denied his ED 
    medication.  Or, a loved one was denied reconstructive surgery 
    following a mastectomy.  And so forth."

    She sets 'em up and she knocks 'em down! The straw men, that 
    is. 

    She then goes on to make a specious argument that 
    involves fiscal responsibility. It's good to start ones day with a hearty 
    belly laugh. Keep it up Ms.Lund. Now that D.L. Hughley is a "journalist/news 
    commentator" there's a slot for angry comedienne that's come open. The 
    similarity in hairdo's should aid in the 
    transition.

    The fact of the matter is that not one of your 
    examples forces the health care provider to be complicit in the death 
    of a child. Yip and squeal all you like, killing people is not the 
    equivalent of being denied a boner pill and someone who thinks our new 
    demander in chief trots on water really has no chops for making an economic 
    responsibility presentation.

    g

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: 
      Saundra Lund 
      To: vision2020 at moscow.com 
      Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 11:46 
      PM
      Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Obama to 
      Rescind Conscience Rule

      Tongue planted 
      firmly in cheek, I have to say that I don’t think the Conscience Rule was 
      all bad  J  Of 
      course, it helps that it was drafted by morons who didn’t bother to think 
      about anything other than trying to ram their beliefs down the throats – 
      and into the pocketbooks – of everyone. 

      First, I think 
      folks should read what it actually says and what it actually 
      requires.  It’s freely available in the CRF – have a good 
      read. 

      Second, isn’t 
      it absolutely amazing that so many of the people – who lost the election – 
      are screaming about evil government and wanting to keep evil government as 
      small as possible except when they want it to advance their personal 
      agendas?  Why, the unmasking of the hypocrisy alone is worth the 
      price of admission, isn’t it? 

      Third, I 
      personally was looking forward to seeing Mr. Crabtree’s howls of 
      indignation the first time a clinic refused to provide prenatal care to a 
      welfare mother with more children than she can support.  Or, the 
      first time a married woman was denied insurance coverage for baby number 
      three, four, five, or more.  Or, the first time one of his buddies 
      was denied his ED medication.  Or, a loved one was denied 
      reconstructive surgery following a mastectomy.  And so 
      forth. 

      Because, of 
      course, the “Conscience Rule” allowed health providers (the definition of 
      which was incredibly broad) to refuse to provide, participate in (even 
      tangentially), provide referrals, or process claims and payments not only 
      on the basis of “sincere religious belief,” but also “moral 
      conviction.”  Thus, health care delivery in this country was turned 
      into an arena where others were given free rein to force their religious 
      beliefs and moral convictions on the rest of us. 

      And, let’s 
      think . . . just for a minute . . . about implementation.  In order 
      to maintain adequate standards of care, this moronic “Conscience Rule” 
      opened the door for employers – including the government – to stick their 
      noses into the religious beliefs and moral convictions of their employees 
      and potential employees.  How else could they make sure to staff 
      adequately for whatever situation might arise?  You wouldn’t want, 
      for instance, the only lab employee on duty to be a Jehovah’s Witness who 
      is willing to do all the work except those pertaining to transfusions if 
      you were the victim of a drunk driver and needed an emergency blood 
      transfusion, would you? 

      So, that 
      brings us to the next inevitable result:  skyrocketing health care 
      costs.  Because in order to maintain adequate standards of care, more 
      employees would be required at all times to pick up the slack of those 
      refusing to do all aspects of the jobs they were hired to do.  So, 
      not only was our care – and not just those pertaining to family planning, 
      reproductive freedom, and end of life care – to be dictated by the 
      religious beliefs and moral convictions of those calling the shots, but we 
      were supposed to pay for the increased financial burden of those religious 
      beliefs and convictions.  Yeah, that was gonna be real helpful for 
      those of us already struggling with out-of-control health care 
      costs. 

      Yuppers, that 
      “Conscience Rule” was a real brilliant move conceived by incredibly 
      brilliant people, huh?  It would have been a real hoot to see their 
      spittle-flecked outraged faces when they realized the Pandora’s Box they 
      opened. 

      Saundra 
      Moscow, 
      ID 

      The only thing 
      necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do 
      nothing. 
      ~ Edmund 
      Burke 

      =======================================================
 List 
      services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the 
      communities of the Palouse since 1994.   

      http://www.fsr.net                       

      mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

    =======================================================
 List 
    services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the 
    communities of the Palouse since 1994.   

    http://www.fsr.net                       

    mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
==============================================================================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090304/a7392334/attachment-0001.html 