[Vision2020] Obama to Rescind Conscience Rule

[Sunil Ramalingam]

It appears your opposition to straw men exists only when used against your arguments.  You're employing that argument here, using such extreme examples as to make them laughable.

Seems to me the 'conscience rule' as enacted by your former idol was mainly going to be used to allow pharmacists not to sell contraceptive pills or devices, not to protect your mythical medical professionals from performing procedures like abortions.

Sunil

From: jampot at roadrunner.com
To: godshatter at yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 20:04:46 -0800
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Obama to Rescind Conscience Rule










The question  that everyone continues to not 
answer is since when does earning an M.D.  or entering the health care 
field automatically mean you must perform or facilitate abortions on 
demand?
 
I get the impression from comments you have made on 
this forum that you are a computer/internet "guy" Should you, assuming 
you would be otherwise disinclined, be forced to create web sites 
for Scientologists, pedophiles, or purveyors of porn? 
 
g
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Rumelhart" <godshatter at yahoo.com>
To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
Cc: "Bill London" <london at moscow.com>; "Saundra Lund" 
<sslund_2007 at verizon.net>; 
<vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 7:16 
PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Obama to Rescind 
Conscience Rule

> g. crabtree wrote:
>>  "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
> 
> Don't physicians already have the right to quit their jobs 
and go work 
> elsewhere if they feel they are being forced to do 
something that goes 
> against their conscience?  Why do we need 
legislation to allow employees 
> not to perform their work duties?  
I don't particularly like the idea of 
> dialing 911 again and again until 
I get someone who is not a Jehovah's 
> Witness and is willing to give me 
a blood transfusion when I really need 
> it for example.
> 
> 
This is similar to the Muslim guy in the news a while back that refused 
> 
to sell alcoholic beverages at a convenience store.  He's unsuited for 

> the job he's in.  He should be fired and replaced with someone who 
is 
> willing to sell alcohol to adults.
> 
> If you're in a 
job that might force you to do things you find 
> objectionable - find 
another job.
> 
> Paul
> 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090305/e13d63f6/attachment-0001.html