Saturday, June 23, 2007

Theres beauty in religion

LOL. Naw. Im lying. Its a bunch of shit.

Every Catholic hospital is bound by the ethical directives of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which forbid abortion and sterilization (unless they are lifesaving), in vitro fertilization, surrogate motherhood, some prenatal genetic testing, all artificial forms of birth control and the use of condoms for HIV prevention. Baptist and Seventh Day Adventist hospitals may also restrict abortions. Which means that if your local hospital has been taken over — or if you're ever rushed to the nearest hospital in an emergency — you could be in for a surprise at the services you can't get.
Being a former hard-core pre-med, this isnt news to me. Learned lots of neat stuff as a pre-med. Like, 'religious' hospitals would go out of business if it werent for secular funds. From a 2003 American Atheist column:
Despite the religious label, these so-called religious hospitals are more public than public hospitals. Religious hospitals get 36% of all their revenue from Medicare; public hospitals get only 27%. In addition to that 36% of public funding they get 12% of their funding from Medicaid. Of the remaining 44% of funding, 31% comes from county appropriations, 30% comes from investments, and only 5% comes from charitable contributions (not necessarily religious). The percentage of Church funding for Church-run hospitals comes to a grand total of 0.0015 percent.
Oh! Well there you have it, folks! Sell your soul for 0.0015% of your hospitals total funds, and you too can make women go through horrors like this!
She was only 14 weeks pregnant, but her water had broken. Dr. Goldner delivered the bad news: Because there wasn't enough amniotic fluid left and it was too early for the fetus to survive on its own, the pregnancy was hopeless. Hutchins would likely miscarry in a matter of weeks. But in the meanwhile, she stood at risk for serious infection, which could lead to infertility or death. Dr. Goldner says his devastated patient chose to get an abortion at local Elliot Hospital... "I was told I could not admit her unless there was a risk to her life," Dr. Goldner remembers. "They said, 'Why don't you wait until she has an infection or she gets a fever?' They were asking me to do something other than the standard of care. They wanted me to put her health in jeopardy." He tried admitting Hutchins elsewhere, only to discover that the nearest abortion provider was nearly 80 miles away in Lebanon, New Hampshire — and that she had no car. Ultimately, Dr. Goldner paid a taxi to drive her the hour and a half to the procedure.
The doctor was struck by the hoops women had to jump through to get basic care. "One of my patients was a mother of four who had wanted a tubal ligation at delivery but was turned down," she says. "When I saw her not long afterward, she was pregnant with unwanted twins."
In one case that made the local paper, a patient came in with an ectopic pregnancy: an embryo had implanted in her fallopian tube. Such an embryo has zero chance of survival and is a serious threat to the mother, as its growth can rupture the tube. The more invasive way to treat an ectopic is to surgically remove the tube. An alternative, generally less risky way is to administer methotrexate, a drug also used for cancer. It dissolves the pregnancy but spares the tube, preserving the women's fertility. "The doctor thought the noninvasive treatment was best," Dr. Stulberg recounts. But Catholic directives specify that even in an ectopic pregnancy, doctors cannot perform "a direct abortion" — which, the on-call ob/gyn reasoned, would nix the drug option. (Surgery, on the other hand, could be considered a lifesaving measure that indirectly kills the embryo, and may be permitted.) The doctor didn't wait to take it up with the hospital's ethical committee; she told the patient to check out and head to another ER.
Why I have no idea what these people are talking about!

Why do I get this sneaking suspicion that if a Muslim physician refused to treat a Christian Infidel, those warped bastards supporting these measures in that article wouldnt exactly support them anymore?
I bet Padded-Bra Debbie has an example of that for us! She hates her some towlies!

YAY!

When a Muslim abuses a patient, its barbaric. When Christians do it, its beautiful.

What an inelegant understanding of religion I have, to call it all shit.

9 comments:

John said...

Yeesh. If you are the sort of person who would refuse to provide medical care to someone because of your (or the patient's) religious affiliation, you have no business being in medicine.

Yeah, most religious people are perfectly harmless, but sadly, it often simply takes religious to make an otherwise good person commit an abominable act.

Ian said...

So what's the policy like next door at Prebyterian? And if you've never read it, this is a must-read. It's interesting how narrow "only to save the life of the mother" actually seems to be.

Tyler DiPietro said...

You atheists are so full of hate that you can't see what is obvious to us enlightened liberal believers. Everything bad that comes from religion is obviously the result of politics, ethnicity, tribalism and whatever the fuck we can think that is not religion. You refuse to realize that most religious believers are like Chris Hedges and Reza Azlan, who write books about "transformative experiences" and equate god(s) with abstractions like "love". Your indictment of religion in these and all matters is misguided and rooted in your own fundamentalist scientism/positivism. You can't see the value in believing things without evidence and therefore do not understand why us moderate and sensible believers think religion is fundamentally benign.

quantok said...

Or "Everything bad that comes from Stalinism is obviously the result of politics, ethnicity, tribalism..."

Whatever our innate hominid shortcomings when it comes to the treatment of strangers, you can't deny that philosophical or moral precepts can both drive and structure human behaviour. A pernicious view of human nature can have dire consequences for our disposition towards ourselves and others; a delusional belief that any amount of suffering in this life is justified to usher in a future paradise always leads to atrocity meted out with pious satisfaction. One such belief is that of Original Sin. This is an affront to justice and humanity. And the Church's profligacy in the destruction of the mortal parts of infidels or believers alike needs no further comment.

Tame Christians do not do nearly enough to distance themselves from the vilest sentiments of their holy book and that is why Scripture remains a malignancy merely in remission. A serious "liberal" theist couldn't bear to hold that book in his or her hand. A friend of mine was proud to own an early edition 'Malleus Maleficarum', the Hammer of Witches. It had marginalia, probably inscribed by some pious Teutonic cleric sentencing women to be burned alive. My friend insisted you could "catch the whiff of fanaticism" from its pages, his purpose in assembling a good library on the history of "fanatical belief systems". I used to joke with him that he was wasting his money on antiques; all he had to do was steal a Gideon from a hotel - if he could bear the stench.

But then, when pushed, you are always theists first and liberals second. You are fellow travellers in a three thousand year journey of genocide, fear, authoritarianism, persecution, and irrationality. You give me the Salvation Army, I give you Jerry Falwell; you give me the whispered consolation at the funeral service; I give you the Pope's henchman telling us HIV passes through condoms. You say your messiah preached forgiveness; I give you Mother Theresa's response to the Union Carbide massacre at Bhopal - "Forgive. Forgive!"

I have read Nietzsche for pleasure. When pressed on the links with Nazism I can respond by pointing out that Elizabeth Forster's interpretation of his work was a travesty. But I have that luxury because Nietzsche hasn't been used as the basis for a confession or a civil society. To do so would be criminal and would have to be opposed with all available might. But affiliates of the Testaments don't have that luxury. Yes, it really does say that God hates fags, that the mutilation of infants is holy, that we must whip our minds to believe or roast forever.

This, and so much more is vicious stuff; its entire history is corrosive and, potentially, probably, its future too. I have as much sympathy for my fluffy Christian acquaintances as if they had left unloaded guns in the playroom for their kids to discover but had responsibly placed the bullets in a box under the kitchen sink.

At a bare minimum, no one should be exposed to the Bible who is not old enough to rent an Eli Roth movie. And if liberal theology was serious, it would be undertaking a great re-editing of Scripture purged of its idiotic and incendiary excesses.

This would also have the virtue of saving trees, for that edition would be a very thin volume indeed.

However, I applaud the good works and charitable doings of any person. But are you saying that if the Bible were proved to be a hoax tomorrow you would cease to be a generous person the next day?

Tyler DiPietro said...

Just so people know beforehand, my above post was in jest.

quantok said...

Tyler - I got that when I saw that you used the F-word, even before I checked your profile! I needed to see if you were a Buddhist or something, who need an intellectual kicking of a different sort.

However, I couldn't resist a full-on scientific fundamentalist rant in the form of an open letter, having just put down Hitchens' 'God Is Not Great'. As you might have guessed, I am sympathetic to his general thesis.

My other favourite pastime is patiently (mostly) responding to Creationist mumbo-jumbo on YouTube. Maybe the 500 character stricture was getting to me. However, I have quickly learned that no one debates the science - they merely shift to the next already-debunked argument from incredulity.

So, hail fellow traveller! Keep chipping away at the bunkum...

P.S. I live in the UK where the Christians are very fluffy indeed for the moment, so the most I can expect in terms of retribution is an "I beg to differ..." Kudos to you all for fighting the good fight in Jesusland itself.

John Dennehy said...

You're IT :)
http://evilutionarybiologist.blogspot.com/2007/06/8-random-facts.html

Rev. BigDumbChimp said...

As much as I hate to do this to you, you've been tagged.

Rev. BigDumbChimp said...

Doh.