Woman raped by stranger and then arrested by cops.

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: jjones

I agree with you Mill on everything, including your previous post, except this last paragraph. What about in the case where this medical person works for the state? In personal practice, I agree with you and feel they can do whatever they wish, but when one works for the state, I believe you have to set your religious preferences aside and offer up treatment in accordance with the state's guidelines. Of course, this is assuming the state has a guideleine which recommends dispensing such medication upon request of the patient/victim.

I would tend to agree that the med pro should have the freedom to not do something that goes against their beliefs, except in the case of a captive patient that cannot get care elsewhere. This is the one area where the state CAN legally hire/fire based on religious preference... if that belief impairs their ability to do the job fully.

I'm a med pro and i believe we SHOULDNT have the choice. Look, we're taught to be objective about everything else. To leave our beliefs at home. Sure thats a tall order but passing a medication is a very simple act.

I look at it like this, nowhere else in the hospital is religion allowed unless it's the hospital chaplain/imam/rabbi. If I tried to preach Christianity to a Muslim patient I'd be fired. Or if I said my religious beliefs don't allow me to take care of a jewish patient....I'd definitely be written up for a major infraction, possibly fired. In my eyes as a medical professional, this act should be a fireable offense. And don't give me crap about being easy to pass the work off, if you cant be objective enough to pass a medication then you really shouldn't be taking care of that person.

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I believe in freedom. That means not forcing an individual to do something they do not want to do. Now, if you work for someone else, and they insist you must do that to keep your job, then I would agree with you. The employer has every right to hire/fire someone who cannot do the job fully. However, for someone in private practice, or for a company that holds that position, I would disagree with you.

I only get so fired up about this because it puts a bad spin on nurses and medical professionals. And again I only feel so strongly because we're required to be objective about everything else. I do things all the time that I don't like but I just STFU about it and do it, as does everyone else. You wanna complain/protest/refuse something, do it at home, in the break room, BUT NOT IN FRONT OF THE PATIENT.

I mean working where I work, we take all the sick prisoners from the county, state and local jails....do you think I like taking care of rapists, murderers, molesters? HELL NO. Do I refuse to take care of them? Nope. None of my employees like taking care of prisoners, especially violent or cruel or perverted ones but we just trudge on and do it...it's part of the job...if you dont like it, then GTFU of the nursing/med pro profession

That's cool. I guess I should have qualified my first post with the issue of employees. They have to be able to fullfill the duties given to them by the employer, or find another job.

But doctors in private practice pick and choose their patients every day. I don't see this issue as any different.

Yea thats their thing. They wanna be biased in patient selection go ahead cuz as long as you shut your mouth no one will know. And on that part I agree.

I don't agree with the selective patients and procedures thing. If a procedure is legal, you should have to do it or not have a medical license. What if the doctor was a white supremacist and refused to treat blacks, jews, hispanics, asians, etc.? What if the doctor is Muslim and refuses to treat women who aren't properly covered when they see him? What if the doctor was gay and refuses to treat anyone against gay marriage?

Where do you draw the line? Just let them treat whomever they want? How about an ER doctor who refuses treatment to dying patients because of their beliefs? Is that okay?

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: Roguestar

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: Ilikepiedoyou
at my school, rape is most often the fault of the victim

I really hope you are being sarcastic. :roll:

If not, how? All the perpetrator has to do is restrain himself, unless one is to believe some backward notion that men cannot resist such temptation and therefore the women are at fault.:|

I dont believe that its the victim's *fault*. However there are many many cases where the woman aggravates it in the moronic way they dress. It's disgusting and you'd think these people would have more sense to them than always yelling "Hey!! Look how my breasts are showing! And look how tight these jeans are!! But you better not touch me or I will put you in jail!" :roll:

You, sir, are part of the problem and for that I think you are despicable. There are few crimes worse than rape and to trivialise it or make it out that "they were asking for it, dressing like that" is completely absolving the perpetrator of responsibility. I can only be thankful that you are not the one who makes the laws and sits in court because if you were it'd be a whole lot less fun to live here.

Hot dam :shocked: You guys are really fired up about this. I cant believe how worked up you guys are getting over a single news article. 😵 Where is the "I'll wait for benchmarks" 😛 mentality that I had supposed this forum followed? (The majority anyways)

Rougue, I'm very sorry to have aggravated you to such a disturbing level 😵 Seriously, I most likely view rape at a higher level than you do. It sickens me, and when it comes to rapists I have no problem wanting each one of them to die a slow, and very painful death. It doesn't bother me at all. I was merely saying that it would help *reduce* the number of rapes if women actually dressed sensibly instead of like sluts. 😕

Rapists already have screws loose. But this generation of women dont see that I guess. They would rather take a screwdriver and see what happens when you take those loose screws out.

I agree its no one else's fault but the rapist. It's just the simple fact that women refuse to help their own situation.

Seriously guys, cool off a bit and get some fresh air. This is turning into a P&N thread. 😎

And you're still extremely f'ing wrong. Rape is a crime of violence and dominance, it's not a crime of lust. Grandmothers get raped, it's a way for a rapist to express their "power". It's great that you want to torture rapists and all, but to think that the way a woman dress has ANYTHING to do with it is seriously ignorant.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: Roguestar

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: Ilikepiedoyou
at my school, rape is most often the fault of the victim

I really hope you are being sarcastic. :roll:

If not, how? All the perpetrator has to do is restrain himself, unless one is to believe some backward notion that men cannot resist such temptation and therefore the women are at fault.:|

I dont believe that its the victim's *fault*. However there are many many cases where the woman aggravates it in the moronic way they dress. It's disgusting and you'd think these people would have more sense to them than always yelling "Hey!! Look how my breasts are showing! And look how tight these jeans are!! But you better not touch me or I will put you in jail!" :roll:

You, sir, are part of the problem and for that I think you are despicable. There are few crimes worse than rape and to trivialise it or make it out that "they were asking for it, dressing like that" is completely absolving the perpetrator of responsibility. I can only be thankful that you are not the one who makes the laws and sits in court because if you were it'd be a whole lot less fun to live here.

Hot dam :shocked: You guys are really fired up about this. I cant believe how worked up you guys are getting over a single news article. 😵 Where is the "I'll wait for benchmarks" 😛 mentality that I had supposed this forum followed? (The majority anyways)

Rougue, I'm very sorry to have aggravated you to such a disturbing level 😵 Seriously, I most likely view rape at a higher level than you do. It sickens me, and when it comes to rapists I have no problem wanting each one of them to die a slow, and very painful death. It doesn't bother me at all. I was merely saying that it would help *reduce* the number of rapes if women actually dressed sensibly instead of like sluts. 😕

Rapists already have screws loose. But this generation of women dont see that I guess. They would rather take a screwdriver and see what happens when you take those loose screws out.

I agree its no one else's fault but the rapist. It's just the simple fact that women refuse to help their own situation.

Seriously guys, cool off a bit and get some fresh air. This is turning into a P&N thread. 😎

You just said that rape is "in part" the victim's fault for wearing revealing clothing. That's like saying murder is a murder victim's fault because "they were asking for it". That is wrong, by anyone's definition. Screws loose or not, it is still their fault except in a few VERY rare cases of mental instability.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Roguestar

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: Ilikepiedoyou
at my school, rape is most often the fault of the victim

I really hope you are being sarcastic. :roll:

If not, how? All the perpetrator has to do is restrain himself, unless one is to believe some backward notion that men cannot resist such temptation and therefore the women are at fault.:|

I dont believe that its the victim's *fault*. However there are many many cases where the woman aggravates it in the moronic way they dress. It's disgusting and you'd think these people would have more sense to them than always yelling "Hey!! Look how my breasts are showing! And look how tight these jeans are!! But you better not touch me or I will put you in jail!" :roll:

You, sir, are part of the problem and for that I think you are despicable. There are few crimes worse than rape and to trivialise it or make it out that "they were asking for it, dressing like that" is completely absolving the perpetrator of responsibility. I can only be thankful that you are not the one who makes the laws and sits in court because if you were it'd be a whole lot less fun to live here.

Agreed.

TheCoolnessrune: Your saying that because some women dress like sluts, and some just look hot, therefore they are asking to be raped? W T F to put it mildly. Are you one of those Wahabi Muslim fanatics who are trying to blow up our troops in Iraq (not to mention innocent Iraqis)? Because that's exactly what they believe.

That's why they passed absurd laws that force women to cover themselves. They are small men who can obviously not control their urges (as are you), and many of them have committed atrocities that make them sub-human IMO.

Also, did you know that many rapist pick their target due to personal reasons, and don't just grab a random girl off the street? In that case clothing wouldn't matter sh!t.

Actually, Im not a muslim, I'm a Christian 😎 Its not that I believe in laws to cover up, merely to hold some standard of decency.

Look at the average Off-Topic thread here. "Shes really blossomed" or "dayum shes hot" or "Look at the rack one that one!!!!!oneone!rofl!" It already shows how carnal and fairly foolish the average man is on this forum. So you combine that with someone who already has some screws loose... What do you expect will happen?

As to your last complements, rapists goal's are either to feel more powerful, or to satisfy lust against a certain person. To the first one, there is personal reasons, to the second, well, something started that lust. They could be famous, particularly pretty, oooooor (here's the shocker :Q) They could be dressing like sluts! *gasp*

You guys really need to cool out 😵 Just a conversation. I promise im not blowing up any buildings 😛 No.. Really.... Im content enjoying sitting on my porch (But wow! is it cold! 😛) Wanna talk about global warming next? 😎

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: jjones

I agree with you Mill on everything, including your previous post, except this last paragraph. What about in the case where this medical person works for the state? In personal practice, I agree with you and feel they can do whatever they wish, but when one works for the state, I believe you have to set your religious preferences aside and offer up treatment in accordance with the state's guidelines. Of course, this is assuming the state has a guideleine which recommends dispensing such medication upon request of the patient/victim.

I would tend to agree that the med pro should have the freedom to not do something that goes against their beliefs, except in the case of a captive patient that cannot get care elsewhere. This is the one area where the state CAN legally hire/fire based on religious preference... if that belief impairs their ability to do the job fully.

I'm a med pro and i believe we SHOULDNT have the choice. Look, we're taught to be objective about everything else. To leave our beliefs at home. Sure thats a tall order but passing a medication is a very simple act.

I look at it like this, nowhere else in the hospital is religion allowed unless it's the hospital chaplain/imam/rabbi. If I tried to preach Christianity to a Muslim patient I'd be fired. Or if I said my religious beliefs don't allow me to take care of a jewish patient....I'd definitely be written up for a major infraction, possibly fired. In my eyes as a medical professional, this act should be a fireable offense. And don't give me crap about being easy to pass the work off, if you cant be objective enough to pass a medication then you really shouldn't be taking care of that person.

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I believe in freedom. That means not forcing an individual to do something they do not want to do. Now, if you work for someone else, and they insist you must do that to keep your job, then I would agree with you. The employer has every right to hire/fire someone who cannot do the job fully. However, for someone in private practice, or for a company that holds that position, I would disagree with you.

I only get so fired up about this because it puts a bad spin on nurses and medical professionals. And again I only feel so strongly because we're required to be objective about everything else. I do things all the time that I don't like but I just STFU about it and do it, as does everyone else. You wanna complain/protest/refuse something, do it at home, in the break room, BUT NOT IN FRONT OF THE PATIENT.

I mean working where I work, we take all the sick prisoners from the county, state and local jails....do you think I like taking care of rapists, murderers, molesters? HELL NO. Do I refuse to take care of them? Nope. None of my employees like taking care of prisoners, especially violent or cruel or perverted ones but we just trudge on and do it...it's part of the job...if you dont like it, then GTFU of the nursing/med pro profession

That's cool. I guess I should have qualified my first post with the issue of employees. They have to be able to fullfill the duties given to them by the employer, or find another job.

But doctors in private practice pick and choose their patients every day. I don't see this issue as any different.

Yea thats their thing. They wanna be biased in patient selection go ahead cuz as long as you shut your mouth no one will know. And on that part I agree.

I don't agree with the selective patients and procedures thing. If a procedure is legal, you should have to do it or not have a medical license. What if the doctor was a white supremacist and refused to treat blacks, jews, hispanics, asians, etc.? What if the doctor is Muslim and refuses to treat women who aren't properly covered when they see him? What if the doctor was gay and refuses to treat anyone against gay marriage?

Where do you draw the line? Just let them treat whomever they want? How about an ER doctor who refuses treatment to dying patients because of their beliefs? Is that okay?

Again, this is not about employees who must fullfill their job description or lose it.

Doctors in private practice pick and choose their patients all the time. There is nothing wrong with that. It's called freedom. The patient can easily go somewhere else.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: jjones

I agree with you Mill on everything, including your previous post, except this last paragraph. What about in the case where this medical person works for the state? In personal practice, I agree with you and feel they can do whatever they wish, but when one works for the state, I believe you have to set your religious preferences aside and offer up treatment in accordance with the state's guidelines. Of course, this is assuming the state has a guideleine which recommends dispensing such medication upon request of the patient/victim.

I would tend to agree that the med pro should have the freedom to not do something that goes against their beliefs, except in the case of a captive patient that cannot get care elsewhere. This is the one area where the state CAN legally hire/fire based on religious preference... if that belief impairs their ability to do the job fully.

I'm a med pro and i believe we SHOULDNT have the choice. Look, we're taught to be objective about everything else. To leave our beliefs at home. Sure thats a tall order but passing a medication is a very simple act.

I look at it like this, nowhere else in the hospital is religion allowed unless it's the hospital chaplain/imam/rabbi. If I tried to preach Christianity to a Muslim patient I'd be fired. Or if I said my religious beliefs don't allow me to take care of a jewish patient....I'd definitely be written up for a major infraction, possibly fired. In my eyes as a medical professional, this act should be a fireable offense. And don't give me crap about being easy to pass the work off, if you cant be objective enough to pass a medication then you really shouldn't be taking care of that person.

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I believe in freedom. That means not forcing an individual to do something they do not want to do. Now, if you work for someone else, and they insist you must do that to keep your job, then I would agree with you. The employer has every right to hire/fire someone who cannot do the job fully. However, for someone in private practice, or for a company that holds that position, I would disagree with you.

I only get so fired up about this because it puts a bad spin on nurses and medical professionals. And again I only feel so strongly because we're required to be objective about everything else. I do things all the time that I don't like but I just STFU about it and do it, as does everyone else. You wanna complain/protest/refuse something, do it at home, in the break room, BUT NOT IN FRONT OF THE PATIENT.

I mean working where I work, we take all the sick prisoners from the county, state and local jails....do you think I like taking care of rapists, murderers, molesters? HELL NO. Do I refuse to take care of them? Nope. None of my employees like taking care of prisoners, especially violent or cruel or perverted ones but we just trudge on and do it...it's part of the job...if you dont like it, then GTFU of the nursing/med pro profession

That's cool. I guess I should have qualified my first post with the issue of employees. They have to be able to fullfill the duties given to them by the employer, or find another job.

But doctors in private practice pick and choose their patients every day. I don't see this issue as any different.

Yea thats their thing. They wanna be biased in patient selection go ahead cuz as long as you shut your mouth no one will know. And on that part I agree.

I don't agree with the selective patients and procedures thing. If a procedure is legal, you should have to do it or not have a medical license. What if the doctor was a white supremacist and refused to treat blacks, jews, hispanics, asians, etc.? What if the doctor is Muslim and refuses to treat women who aren't properly covered when they see him? What if the doctor was gay and refuses to treat anyone against gay marriage?

Where do you draw the line? Just let them treat whomever they want? How about an ER doctor who refuses treatment to dying patients because of their beliefs? Is that okay?

Again, this is not about employees who must fullfill their job description or lose it.

Doctors in private practice pick and choose their patients all the time. There is nothing wrong with that. It's called freedom. The patient can easily go somewhere else.

And if every doctor chooses not to help that patient?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: joshsquall

And if every doctor chooses not to help that patient?

It wont happen, and you know it.

Only an ER is forced to provide aid to all, BTW.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Roguestar

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: Ilikepiedoyou
at my school, rape is most often the fault of the victim

I really hope you are being sarcastic. :roll:

If not, how? All the perpetrator has to do is restrain himself, unless one is to believe some backward notion that men cannot resist such temptation and therefore the women are at fault.:|

I dont believe that its the victim's *fault*. However there are many many cases where the woman aggravates it in the moronic way they dress. It's disgusting and you'd think these people would have more sense to them than always yelling "Hey!! Look how my breasts are showing! And look how tight these jeans are!! But you better not touch me or I will put you in jail!" :roll:

You, sir, are part of the problem and for that I think you are despicable. There are few crimes worse than rape and to trivialise it or make it out that "they were asking for it, dressing like that" is completely absolving the perpetrator of responsibility. I can only be thankful that you are not the one who makes the laws and sits in court because if you were it'd be a whole lot less fun to live here.

Agreed.

TheCoolnessrune: Your saying that because some women dress like sluts, and some just look hot, therefore they are asking to be raped? W T F to put it mildly. Are you one of those Wahabi Muslim fanatics who are trying to blow up our troops in Iraq (not to mention innocent Iraqis)? Because that's exactly what they believe.

That's why they passed absurd laws that force women to cover themselves. They are small men who can obviously not control their urges (as are you), and many of them have committed atrocities that make them sub-human IMO.

Also, did you know that many rapist pick their target due to personal reasons, and don't just grab a random girl off the street? In that case clothing wouldn't matter sh!t.

Actually, Im not a muslim, I'm a Christian 😎 Its not that I believe in laws to cover up, merely to hold some standard of decency.

Look at the average Off-Topic thread here. "Shes really blossomed" or "dayum shes hot" or "Look at the rack one that one!!!!!oneone!rofl!" It already shows how carnal and fairly foolish the average man is on this forum. So you combine that with someone who already has some screws loose... What do you expect will happen?

As to your last complements, rapists goal's are either to feel more powerful, or to satisfy lust against a certain person. To the first one, there is personal reasons, to the second, well, something started that lust. They could be famous, particularly pretty, oooooor (here's the shocker :Q) They could be dressing like sluts! *gasp*

You guys really need to cool out 😵 Just a conversation. I promise im not blowing up any buildings 😛 No.. Really.... Im content enjoying sitting on my porch (But wow! is it cold! 😛) Wanna talk about global warming next? 😎

so you are compareing looking at a girl to rape? if you can't tell the diffrence between looking and rape you might have a screw loose.

Again you are missing the point. IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT A WOMEN IS WEARING. The man is in control if he is going to rape or not.

If he is lusting after a particuler female it really does not matter what she is wearing. since he si plannign to rape her or not.

now there might be some guy in the bar that is very horny and will do anything to satisfy it. so yeah he might rape a female. But he is going to get one that is easy to get. One that is leaving alone and walking or such. The "she was dressed as a slut" excuse is bullshit.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: aurareturn

Originally posted by: Ranger X

BTW, it's people like that nurse that makes me proud that I'm an atheist. I recall reading about a bunch of pharmacists refusing to sell birth control pills because it was against their religion and that made me sick to my stomach.

Agreed.

Why? There are atheist zealots too.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: joshsquall

And if every doctor chooses not to help that patient?

It wont happen, and you know it.

Only an ER is forced to provide aid to all, BTW.

Under the "treat who you want" policy, it could definitely happen. Especially with modern HMOs and PPOs. Most people have very few choices when it comes to doctors in a reasonable radius. Since beliefs tend to be related to geographical region, it's feasible that an entire region of viable doctors under your insurance plan refuse to treat you based on some belief. Just because it hasn't happened to you and you haven't seen it on the news doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: aurareturn

Originally posted by: Ranger X

BTW, it's people like that nurse that makes me proud that I'm an atheist. I recall reading about a bunch of pharmacists refusing to sell birth control pills because it was against their religion and that made me sick to my stomach.

Agreed.

Why? There are atheist zealots too.

Atheist zealots don't refuse treatment based on their own religious beliefs.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: aurareturn

Originally posted by: Ranger X

BTW, it's people like that nurse that makes me proud that I'm an atheist. I recall reading about a bunch of pharmacists refusing to sell birth control pills because it was against their religion and that made me sick to my stomach.

Agreed.

Why? There are atheist zealots too.

That force their beliefs on others? Show me some evidence...

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: joshsquall

And if every doctor chooses not to help that patient?

It wont happen, and you know it.

Only an ER is forced to provide aid to all, BTW.

Under the "treat who you want" policy, it could definitely happen. Especially with modern HMOs and PPOs. Most people have very few choices when it comes to doctors in a reasonable radius. Since beliefs tend to be related to geographical region, it's feasible that an entire region of viable doctors under your insurance plan refuse to treat you based on some belief. Just because it hasn't happened to you and you haven't seen it on the news doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

No large medical practice could have a policy like this and stay in business.

Stop appealing to ridiculous extremes to make your point. So far, there is no law stating a medical professional must provide abortions, birth control, or morning after pills.

So, where is the slew of doctors denying this? Where are the places these services are impossible to find because doctors refuse to do them for religious reasons?

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: aurareturn

Originally posted by: Ranger X

BTW, it's people like that nurse that makes me proud that I'm an atheist. I recall reading about a bunch of pharmacists refusing to sell birth control pills because it was against their religion and that made me sick to my stomach.

Agreed.

Why? There are atheist zealots too.

That force their beliefs on others? Show me some evidence...

DVK916
StatsManD
(I never said they force their beliefs on people, I said there are atheist zealots. They make atheists look bad like this nurse makes christians look bad)

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: CrazyShiz

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat
So, if Bin Laden were raped we should let him go?

Oh hell no. He should rot in jail AND be denied the Morning After pill. God knows the murder of over 3,000 people is equivalent to stealing...


Please think before you speak.

If she's a criminal she's a criminal, she doesn't get a pass just because she was raped.

She shouldn't have been denied the morning after pill, that's idiotic. I assume the nurse supervisor is Catholic, but I wasn't aware that it was against their religion for non-Catholics to take the morning after pill.

First of all, I'd say you are wrong on two counts. First of all, if someone is injured (especially a rape), you can arrest them and transport them to a hospital for treatment. After a doctor releases them you can transport them to jail (you have an officer remain outside the patient's room). Or, in cases like this involving a rape, you can delay the serving of the warrant and post a guard to later serve the warrant. There's zero reason to create an emotional trauma on-top of an emotional trauma that had just occurred. It isn't good policing and it isn't the procedure I've been taught.

Secondly, some Catholics or religious folks will NOT dispense or write prescriptions for ANYONE to use a contraceptive. I have a good friend of mine who is a doctor, and he simply won't do it. He's not a jerk about it, though. If someone asks him about it he will simply say it is against his religious beliefs and then call another doctor to take care of the situation, or refer them to someone else for immediate care -- or at the very worst, he will send them to the E.R.

His beliefs are very strong, and it carries over into his personal life as well. He doesn't believe in the usage of contraceptives at all. He's not judgemental about it. He knows that I use them, and he's never once said a negative thing about it. He just explains the way he feels, and that's it. He'd never talk about his personal feelings with a patient unless they ask. Just a simple: I'm sorry, I cannot write you a prescription for that because it is against my religious beliefs. I'll ask Dr. Whoever to come talk to you and help you out. Or, he'll give them a list of doctors or the other things I mentioned earlier.

There's absolutely zero problem to me with someone refusing to dispense or prescribe contraceptives if it is against their religious beliefs. Unless, of course, it is an emergency or there is no provider available. In this situation, with the nurse, it was obviously an emergency, and obviously there was another way out. Someone else could have dispensed it, or she could have sent the girl under guard to the E.R. There's no excuse for REFUSING to allow someone to make their own personal choice. You don't have to dispense it, but you better not prevent their freedom from making a personal choice if they want it. That includes calling the damn Sheriff and getting his ass to come down to the jail if you don't want to do it.

I know other Catholics won't dispense birth control, but the only way they can say it's against their religion to dispense birth control is because they're enabling someone else to sin. Kind of irrelevant when that other person isn't even a Catholic so they're going to hell anyway as far as the Catholic is concerned. Perhaps if they were more consistent it wouldn't be a big deal, but they seem to be selective about which sins they really care about other people committing.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Leros
They really need to make a federal law that says its illegal to refuse legal medication to people.

why would this be a federal issue? it's a classic health/safety/welfare issue, which is the domain of the states.

the simple solution: make it a violation of the license to refuse to dispense medication unless there is some medical reason not to, such as creating a dangerous drug cocktail.

Originally posted by: Amused

Only an ER is forced to provide aid to all, BTW.

that's not true.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
Actually, Im not a muslim, I'm a Christian 😎 Its not that I believe in laws to cover up, merely to hold some standard of decency.

Look at the average Off-Topic thread here. "Shes really blossomed" or "dayum shes hot" or "Look at the rack one that one!!!!!oneone!rofl!" It already shows how carnal and fairly foolish the average man is on this forum. So you combine that with someone who already has some screws loose... What do you expect will happen?

As to your last complements, rapists goal's are either to feel more powerful, or to satisfy lust against a certain person. To the first one, there is personal reasons, to the second, well, something started that lust. They could be famous, particularly pretty, oooooor (here's the shocker :Q) They could be dressing like sluts! *gasp*

You guys really need to cool out 😵 Just a conversation. I promise im not blowing up any buildings 😛 No.. Really.... Im content enjoying sitting on my porch (But wow! is it cold! 😛) Wanna talk about global warming next? 😎

so you are compareing looking at a girl to rape? if you can't tell the diffrence between looking and rape you might have a screw loose.

Again you are missing the point. IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT A WOMEN IS WEARING. The man is in control if he is going to rape or not.

If he is lusting after a particuler female it really does not matter what she is wearing. since he si plannign to rape her or not.

now there might be some guy in the bar that is very horny and will do anything to satisfy it. so yeah he might rape a female. But he is going to get one that is easy to get. One that is leaving alone and walking or such. The "she was dressed as a slut" excuse is bullshit.

Im sorry if you misunderstood. Perhaps I am being a bit vague. Im not saying that looking at a girl can be compared to raping her. I suppose typing responses do not show the proper emotional side necessary to properly discuss these topics, but im trying 😛

Anyways, no, im not referring to that at all. I never said that all rapes are caused by women dressed like sluts. Everyone is so quick to assume all of a sudden. It's quite odd given the usual slowness taken by people to change on this forum. But thats neither here nor there. My original statement is that the way women dress *aggravates* some rapists. I didn't say all, and I never said it was their fault. But if the situation can be helped at least a little bit, why not do it?

Perhaps its merely my point of view but the more revealing a woman dresses, the more of a turn off it is for me. And no, before you hit that Quick Reply button, im not a Wahabi Muslim *cough* irishScott *cough* *cough* 😉 I dont think they have to wear a veil over their faces... They just choose to anyways with the pound of makeup the pour on their faces every morning 😉 I just wish women had more self esteem about themselves and not their bodies. They most certainly dont have to show their breasts and their ass to get my attention, just drives me away. Show me your own pretty, natural face, and youll have my attention 😎

EDIT: Wording mistake... plus I sized down the post... More elegant! 😀

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Amused

Only an ER is forced to provide aid to all, BTW.

that's not true.

Really? I didn't know that. So if a patient walks into a private practice the Dr must treat them?

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
Hot dam :shocked: You guys are really fired up about this. I cant believe how worked up you guys are getting over a single news article. 😵 Where is the "I'll wait for benchmarks" 😛 mentality that I had supposed this forum followed? (The majority anyways)

Rougue, I'm very sorry to have aggravated you to such a disturbing level 😵 Seriously, I most likely view rape at a higher level than you do. It sickens me, and when it comes to rapists I have no problem wanting each one of them to die a slow, and very painful death. It doesn't bother me at all. I was merely saying that it would help *reduce* the number of rapes if women actually dressed sensibly instead of like sluts. 😕

Rapists already have screws loose. But this generation of women dont see that I guess. They would rather take a screwdriver and see what happens when you take those loose screws out.

I agree its no one else's fault but the rapist. It's just the simple fact that women refuse to help their own situation.

Seriously guys, cool off a bit and get some fresh air. This is turning into a P&N thread. 😎

You just said that rape is "in part" the victim's fault for wearing revealing clothing. That's like saying murder is a murder victim's fault because "they were asking for it". That is wrong, by anyone's definition. Screws loose or not, it is still their fault except in a few VERY rare cases of mental instability.

Mind showing me where I said what you have in quotes? I dont remember writing that but perhaps the FuseTalk system changes words as you post them 😉

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Amused

Only an ER is forced to provide aid to all, BTW.

that's not true.

Really? I didn't know that. So if a patient walks into a private practice the Dr must treat them?

i didn't say that.

an ER isn't forced to participate in EMTALA.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Amused

Only an ER is forced to provide aid to all, BTW.

that's not true.

Really? I didn't know that. So if a patient walks into a private practice the Dr must treat them?

i didn't say that.

You didn't say anything but express your disagreement, silly. 😛

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
Hot dam :shocked: You guys are really fired up about this. I cant believe how worked up you guys are getting over a single news article. 😵 Where is the "I'll wait for benchmarks" 😛 mentality that I had supposed this forum followed? (The majority anyways)

Rougue, I'm very sorry to have aggravated you to such a disturbing level 😵 Seriously, I most likely view rape at a higher level than you do. It sickens me, and when it comes to rapists I have no problem wanting each one of them to die a slow, and very painful death. It doesn't bother me at all. I was merely saying that it would help *reduce* the number of rapes if women actually dressed sensibly instead of like sluts. 😕

Rapists already have screws loose. But this generation of women dont see that I guess. They would rather take a screwdriver and see what happens when you take those loose screws out.

I agree its no one else's fault but the rapist. It's just the simple fact that women refuse to help their own situation.

Seriously guys, cool off a bit and get some fresh air. This is turning into a P&N thread. 😎

Yep, they're on the edge of their seats wondering what it's like to be raped.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Amused

Only an ER is forced to provide aid to all, BTW.

that's not true.

Really? I didn't know that. So if a patient walks into a private practice the Dr must treat them?

i didn't say that.

You didn't say anything but express your disagreement, silly. 😛

I believe the doctor must provide care in an emergency, regardless of whether it's a private practice or an ER.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Amused

Only an ER is forced to provide aid to all, BTW.

that's not true.

Really? I didn't know that. So if a patient walks into a private practice the Dr must treat them?

i didn't say that.

You didn't say anything but express your disagreement, silly. 😛

I believe the doctor must provide care in an emergency, regardless of whether it's a private practice or an ER.

Ah. Well, abortions and birth control don't seem to apply.

 

[Leros]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Leros
They really need to make a federal law that says its illegal to refuse legal medication to people.

why would this be a federal issue? it's a classic health/safety/welfare issue, which is the domain of the states.

The reason I think it should be federal is that I think there are a few states where such a law would not be passed.