[Tenchiro]

Gay doctors petition against Michigan bill
Wed Sep 22, 9:15 PM ET
Mike Lavers, PlanetOut Network

SUMMARY: The nation's largest LGBT medical group is petitioning nationwide against a proposed Michigan law that would allow doctors to not treat patients on moral or religious grounds.

The nation's largest LGBT medical advocacy organization announced Tuesday it plans to petition nationwide against a proposed Michigan law that would allow doctors and other licensed medical care providers to not treat patients on "ethical, moral or religious grounds."

Am I getting the hang of sensationalism? link

 

[valve bouncer]

Pffft, you're no N8, you have credibilty. Become a total wanker that no-one respects then you might be in with a chance.

 

[Toshi]

that's interesting. at least here at the university of washington med school it is made abundantly clear that it is the obligation of the physician to render aid to everyone, regardless of what their orientation is (or, also pertinent, whether they are members of an enemy state)

 

[ohio]

that's interesting. at least here at the university of washington med school it is made abundantly clear that it is the obligation of the physician to render aid to everyone, regardless of what their orientation is (or, also pertinent, whether they are members of an enemy state)

I'm no doctor, but isn't that the hippocratic oath?

 

[Toshi]

I'm no doctor, but isn't that the hippocratic oath?

it's been modified over the years...

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_classical.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_modern.html

and our version: http://depts.washington.edu/drrpt/stories/education/oath.html

 

[Silver]

Maybe instead of this:

"I will not permit considerations of religion, nationality, race, party politics, or social standing to intervene between my duty and my patient;"

We can go with this:

"I will not permit considerations of religion, nationality, race, party politics, or social standing to intervene between my duty and my patient; unless said patient is a dirty faggot"

N8, look good to you?

 

[Andyman_1970]

Wow what a contradition.......almost to the same magnitude as moral relativism.....

Anyway, speaking on behalf of those of the Christian faith, how in the world is withholding medical care to say a homosexual congruent with the Christian faith? Now there may be Buddist, or Muslims, or Mormons or whatever who have actual "rules" that prohibit caring for the homosexuals, so I won't speak for them, but Christians however..................

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Wow what a contradition.......almost to the same magnitude as moral relativism.....

Anyway, speaking on behalf of those of the Christian faith, how in the world is withholding medical care to say a homosexual congruent with the Christian faith? Now there may be Buddist, or Muslims, or Mormons or whatever who have actual "rules" that prohibit caring for the homosexuals, so I won't speak for them, but Christians however..................

At what point did mormons stop being christians? (Grew up in that community, so I find your statement very odd - sorry to take it totally out of the context of the debate).

 

[Andyman_1970]

At what point did mormons stop being christians? (Grew up in that community, so I find your statement very odd - sorry to take it totally out of the context of the debate).

I sure don't want to derail this thread by any means, so JrB, if you would like to have an indepth discussion feel free to PM me, but I will however make a few statement here concerning your post, and please know JrB this is not meant to be disrespectful to you at all.

From a "technical" point of view concerning Christianity, one is considered orthodox (not in the big "O" orthodox but in the "normal" definition) by affirming the contents Nicene Creed (which was created at the council of Nicene in about the 13th century). Mormons along with Jehovah's Witnesses (that's not His "name" by the way) Unitarians and the like are from a "technical" not considered orthodox by the Christian community.

Probably the largest difference between Mormonism and "orthodox Christianity" and Judaism is that Mormonism is polytheistic where Christianity and Judaism are Monotheistic.

Like I said JrB feel free to PM me if you would like to continue this discussion (and no I won't try to "convert" you...........LOL)

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Sendin a PM and taking the...ehr...more theological twist to this offline . Back to the good ole debate bout them darned gays needing medical treatment...for shame! hehehe (yes that was sarcastic, doctors, while human, should not become general practitioners unless they plan to help everyone in need. Even those who focus only on foot fungi shouldn't pick between the green fungi and the other green fungi).

 

[fluff]

Probably the largest difference between Mormonism and "orthodox Christianity" and Judaism is that Mormonism is polytheistic where Christianity and Judaism are Monotheistic.

What about Catholics then? Christadelphians? I seem to remember some thread where it was suggested that unless you subscribe to the holy trinity then you're not Christian. Which trinity of course is not strictly mono-theistic, unlike Judaism & Islam.

 

[Andyman_1970]

What about Catholics then? Christadelphians? I seem to remember some thread where it was suggested that unless you subscribe to the holy trinity then you're not Christian. Which trinity of course is not strictly mono-theistic, unlike Judaism & Islam.

Hey Fluff, I'd be more than happy to discuss this with you via PM as I don't want to derail this thread (as much as I would love to).

Catholics, I believe Catholics affirm the Nicene Creed (FYI I'm not much into creeds and the like, but for arguements sake and for "technical reasons"), how does that make them polythesitic? As for Christiadelphians (of which I remember you grew up as), I'm not sure if they have any polytheistic beliefs. I do however know they deny the diety of Jesus, which is I would argue places it in the "unorthodox" category.

I would argue that the concept of the Trinity is monotheisic, it's one infinite God manifesting Himself 3 different ways, not 3 different separate Gods.

 

[fluff]

I wanna derail this thread. It was boring before, we haven't had a good religious debate here for a while...

By your reasoning Hinduism is approaching a monothestic religion, after all Vishnu and Krishna are different manifestations of the same god.

 

[$tinkle]

<ontopic>
is it not true that before someone can be approved for certain wait-litsted procedures (transplants & other expensive items), they have to be vetted, and part of that vetting weighs life-style considerations? If that's true, is that the thrust of this "moral" argument?
</ontopic>

 

[Andyman_1970]

I wanna derail this thread. It was boring before, we haven't had a good religious debate here for a while....

I agree...........it has been a while.

By your reasoning Hinduism is approaching a monothestic religion, after all Vishnu and Krishna are different manifestations of the same god.

We're comparing apples and oranges here............

 

[fluff]

We're comparing apples and oranges here............

Well, that's as good a starting point as I've seen in a while.

 

[Tenchiro]

At what point did mormons stop being christians? (Grew up in that community, so I find your statement very odd - sorry to take it totally out of the context of the debate).

I always thought that Mormons were to Christians, as Christians are to Jews. Based on some of the same writings but differing in actual practice.

 

[Andyman_1970]

I always thought that Mormons were to Christians, as Christians are to Jews. Based on some of the same writings but differing in actual practice.

LOL

Actually, the early Christians were all Jews, they went to the synagouge, they offered sacrafices at the Temple, did all the Jewish stuff but had the belief that this guy from Nazareth was the promised Messiah, they were in effect another sect of Judaism (of which in the 1st century there were several). It was about 325 AD when Constantine "declared" Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire that anything to do with Judaism were erased. From my point of veiw, I hold that the early 1st century church was what God really intended, and that Christianity is a sect of Judaism, as such anything written for the church after 325 AD is highly "suspect" unless it can be confirmed in the Tanakh (Old Testament, which was the Scriptures Jesus and Paul taught out of and what ALL of their teachings are based on).

Anyway, I digress. It's intersting though that only 2 sects of Judaism survive today the Pharisees (which is now rabbinic Judaism) and Christianity.

 

[fluff]

From my point of veiw, I hold that the early 1st century church was what God really intended, and that Christianity is a sect of Judaism, as such anything written for the church after 325 AD is highly "suspect" unless it can be confirmed in the Tanakh (Old Testament, which was the Scriptures Jesus and Paul taught out of and what ALL of their teachings are based on).

Eeek!

 

[Andyman_1970]

Eeek!

How did I miss that thread.

Anyway..........here's the "short" answer to that. Rabbi's have their interpretation of the Torah, their way of living out the 613 commands as given to Moses by God. This was called at rabbi's "yoke", sound familiar anyone from Sunday School when you were a kid........"take my yoke upon you, for I am gentle and humble"..........

As Christians, we are called to be disciples, which from the 1st century point of view meant that a persons whole life centered around learning about their rabbi, so that they can do what their rabbi does, so that they can become like their rabbi, that is what it means to be a disciple. So for followers of Jesus, we have the Gospels which give us an outline so to speak of Jesus "yoke", His interpretation of the Torah. Again, there is much more to the Torah and living it out than is revealed in the OT, the Talmud for example (the Oral Torah) and the Mishnah (ancient rabbinic commentary on the Torah) gives LOTS of clarification from a rabbinic point of view on those commands (like stoning your neighbor on the Sabbath) that seem a little silly to us today.

 

[fluff]

How did I miss that thread.

Anyway..........here's the "short" answer to that. Rabbi's have their interpretation of the Torah, their way of living out the 613 commands as given to Moses by God. This was called at rabbi's "yoke", sound familiar anyone from Sunday School when you were a kid........"take my yoke upon you, for I am gentle and humble"..........

As Christians, we are called to be disciples, which from the 1st century point of view meant that a persons whole life centered around learning about their rabbi, so that they can do what their rabbi does, so that they can become like their rabbi, that is what it means to be a disciple. So for followers of Jesus, we have the Gospels which give us an outline so to speak of Jesus "yoke", His interpretation of the Torah. Again, there is much more to the Torah and living it out than is revealed in the OT, the Talmud for example (the Oral Torah) and the Mishnah (ancient rabbinic commentary on the Torah) gives LOTS of clarification from a rabbinic point of view on those commands (like stoning your neighbor on the Sabbath) that seem a little silly to us today.

So in many ways similar to the Hadith teachings of Islam; which should stop people spouting rubbish about that religion in terms of some statements of the Koran, one might hope.

 

[Andyman_1970]

Eeek!

Reading this thread made me think. It's funny how people take bits and peices out of the Text and scream..........."OOOOOOOHHHHHH it's BAAAAAADDDDDD!!!!!!!" totally out of context and totally looking at just a fragment of the background and supporting documents regarding that Text.

Isn't this kind of "butchering" of the Scriptures the thing that most "anti-Christians" fault most Christians for? And yet they do it themselves (in a general sense not specific to the thread in question or the persons on that thread).

 

[Silver]

<ontopic>
is it not true that before someone can be approved for certain wait-litsted procedures (transplants & other expensive items), they have to be vetted, and part of that vetting weighs life-style considerations? If that's true, is that the thrust of this "moral" argument?
</ontopic>

No, I think the thrust of this is the "ick" factor.

Someone must have forgot Jesus working with the lepers...

 

[ohio]

<ontopic>
is it not true that before someone can be approved for certain wait-litsted procedures (transplants & other expensive items), they have to be vetted, and part of that vetting weighs life-style considerations? If that's true, is that the thrust of this "moral" argument?
</ontopic>

"life-style" considerations (such as drug-use, or lack of exercise), coupled with genetic and health history, are scientific ones based on the statistical life-expectancy resulting. That is, if you're a 60-year-old diabetic smoker whose father died of heart disease at 55, you're not as likely to get a heart transplant as a 30-year-old non-smoker with no family history of heart disease. I don't believe even clinical psychological issues factor into this, let alone purely emotional issues.

Being gay or muslim or what have you has zero effect on these statistics. Interestingly, race does correlate with some of them, but I believe that is taken into account by family history.

 

[Andyman_1970]

Someone must have forgot Jesus working with the lepers...

Good job Silver, you took the words right out of my mouth.

What better way to share you faith for these Christian Dr's than to treat someone with whom they disagree with their lifestyle, loving them unconditionally just as Jesus loved us..............wow that's some radical thinking...................

 

[$tinkle]

as much as you anti-bushies may hate to read it, this is just another opportunity for faith based initiatives.

...like carelink, which i support only financially, until they get down here to the springs. Mike Tucker's a truly amazing guy.

actually, i'm not sure if they're part of the "network", but sure seem like a good candidate for FBI (not the hoover variety)

 

[Andyman_1970]

...like carelink, which i support only financially, until they get down here to the springs. Mike Tucker's a truly amazing guy.

Sweet!!!!!!!!! I wish there was something like that here in Little Rock, I would volunteer to help out there in a heartbeat.................

 

[MikeD]

What about Catholics then? Christadelphians? I seem to remember some thread where it was suggested that unless you subscribe to the holy trinity then you're not Christian. Which trinity of course is not strictly mono-theistic, unlike Judaism & Islam.

Well, Catholicism has more than the trinity...it has polytheism in the cult of the saints. Sure, you can rhetorically skirt that by pointing out that the saints aren't gods, per se, but they serve the de facto function of the traditional polytheist 'god of [blank].' Ie, they're a force to which to appeal to for help in a certain aspect of life or environment. That function is the importance, not the dogma that puts them below 'god' in a heirarchy. They do the same thing, regardless of the literature.

MD