If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Magic Valley)   Idaho Republican introduces a bill for medical personnel who have taken the hypocritic oath   (magicvalley.com) divider line 165
    More: Asinine, medics, New Mexico Supreme Court, single-parent, denials  
•       •       •

5531 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Feb 2014 at 4:24 PM (20 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



165 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-17 02:55:10 PM
i1321.photobucket.com
Sees what subby did.
 
2014-02-17 02:56:21 PM
I would suggest that some politicians start thinking about how their children and grandchildren are going to view them in a few decades (or today for that matter).
 
2014-02-17 02:57:10 PM
"We've seen the government attempt to come in and dictate who a church should hire for their personnel," said state Rep. Lynn Luker, R-Boise, to the House State Affairs Committee.

Umm....no.

Luker, a lawyer, responded that the phrase is found in was legal documents.

"But how do you prove your sincerely held beliefs?" asked state Rep. Eric Anderson, R-Priest Lake. "Are you going to bring people to court?"

"Yes, if it comes to that," Luker said.


Sounds like he just wants to drum up more business for attorneys.

And what kinda fruity name is "Lynn" for a man, anyway?
 
2014-02-17 02:58:00 PM
What the farking hell religion involves denying people necessary medical care ? And how can they simultaneously hate abortion AND single mothers?

it must be a day that ends in "y" because someone in the GOP came up with a new evil idea.  I'm surprised they don't all have wicked little goatees so they can stroke them when they come up with this crazy shiat.
 
2014-02-17 02:59:45 PM
Hey, the phrase "do no harm" is ambiguous. Do no harm to whom? To my patient, or to my immortal soul? It's a tricky question.

/sarcasm, for those with faulty detectors.
 
2014-02-17 03:01:05 PM

mrshowrules: I would suggest that some politicians start thinking about how their children and grandchildren are going to view them in a few decades (or today for that matter).


The kids and grandkids will probably be indoctrinated into the cult from birth, so they will think what was done by their forefathers is just peachy.
 
2014-02-17 03:01:15 PM
Holy crap - there is more to this: The same would be allowed for teachers to deny educating one of their students if they were gay.

i don't even have words....
 
2014-02-17 03:03:47 PM
So this won't backfire at all when teachers refuse to teach kids on account of them being from Christian families.
 
2014-02-17 03:03:47 PM

serpent_sky: Holy crap - there is more to this: The same would be allowed for teachers to deny educating one of their students if they were gay.

i don't even have words....


I've got 3, repeated over and over to these pricks.

GO FARK YOURSELF!
GO FARK YOURSELF!
GO FARK YOURSELF!

GO FARK YOURSELF!
GO FARK YOURSELF!
 
2014-02-17 03:09:57 PM

unyon: So this won't backfire at all when teachers refuse to teach kids on account of them being from Christian families.

FTFA:
Under the new bill, Idahoans would not lose their professional or occupational licenses if they refused to provide their services to an individual or a group because they were exercising their religion


Unfortunately it seems like you have to claim to be practicing a religion (not the absence of one).
 
2014-02-17 03:15:34 PM
What the fark? I don't even...

/eyeroll
 
2014-02-17 03:15:46 PM

mrshowrules: Unfortunately it seems like you have to claim to be practicing a religion (not the absence of one).


Pastafarian?
 
2014-02-17 03:17:11 PM

mrshowrules: unyon: So this won't backfire at all when teachers refuse to teach kids on account of them being from Christian families.

FTFA:
Under the new bill, Idahoans would not lose their professional or occupational licenses if they refused to provide their services to an individual or a group because they were exercising their religion

Unfortunately it seems like you have to claim to be practicing a religion (not the absence of one).


No, you just need to have a sincerely held belief.  If it were me, it would be the sincerely held belief that intolerant assholes need to be taught a lesson from the goes-around-comes-around handbook.  They of course are welcome to attempt to sue me to determine the sincerity of those beliefs.
 
2014-02-17 03:19:46 PM

mrshowrules: unyon: So this won't backfire at all when teachers refuse to teach kids on account of them being from Christian families.

FTFA:
Under the new bill, Idahoans would not lose their professional or occupational licenses if they refused to provide their services to an individual or a group because they were exercising their religion

Unfortunately it seems like you have to claim to be practicing a religion (not the absence of one).


Well, since the current trend is to call atheism a religion, then a sincerely held religious beliefs could be that Christians are an evil scourge and one shouldn't have to serve/treat/teach them.  Right?
 
2014-02-17 03:22:52 PM
Fun Fact: the original Hippocratic oath forbade performing abortions, having sex with patients, the patients spouses or their slaves.
 
2014-02-17 03:26:52 PM

timujin: mrshowrules: unyon: So this won't backfire at all when teachers refuse to teach kids on account of them being from Christian families.

FTFA:
Under the new bill, Idahoans would not lose their professional or occupational licenses if they refused to provide their services to an individual or a group because they were exercising their religion

Unfortunately it seems like you have to claim to be practicing a religion (not the absence of one).

Well, since the current trend is to call atheism a religion, then a sincerely held religious beliefs could be that Christians are an evil scourge and one shouldn't have to serve/treat/teach them.  Right?


Even if you called atheism a religion, there is no centralized doctrine.  I think it would be much more interesting to call yourself a satanist.  You could stir everyone's soup with your penis and be protected.
 
2014-02-17 03:29:02 PM

RedPhoenix122: mrshowrules: Unfortunately it seems like you have to claim to be practicing a religion (not the absence of one).

Pastafarian?


Does Pastafarianism require you to judge, ignore or mistreat people because of their actions.  Could you refuse to serve someone spaghetti if they did not first bow to the dish and respect first?  That could be entertaining.
 
2014-02-17 03:33:06 PM

mrshowrules: RedPhoenix122: mrshowrules: Unfortunately it seems like you have to claim to be practicing a religion (not the absence of one).

Pastafarian?

Does Pastafarianism require you to judge, ignore or mistreat people because of their actions.  Could you refuse to serve someone spaghetti if they did not first bow to the dish and respect first?  That could be entertaining.


I'm not 100% clear on the doctrine but you'd think Pastafarians wouldn't take kindly to members of the Church of Atkins.
 
2014-02-17 03:34:30 PM

mrshowrules: Even if you called atheism a religion, there is no centralized doctrine. I think it would be much more interesting to call yourself a satanist. You could stir everyone's soup with your penis and be protected.


I see no way they could prove that someone did or didn't hold a faith that's basic rule is "do whatever you want" so it's really not a bad idea.

They never see the big picture and how these insane ideas can easily be used against them.
 
2014-02-17 03:36:26 PM
FTFA: "We as a nation have almost divorced any association with a higher being," Luker said.

If you like your God so much, go have sex with Him. Just don't make the rest of us watch.
 
2014-02-17 03:38:28 PM
FTFA: Luker, a lawyer, responded that the phrase is found in was legal documents.  "But how do you prove your sincerely held beliefs?" asked state Rep. Eric Anderson, R-Priest Lake. "Are you going to bring people to court?"

And nowgovernment would get involved in what qualifies as a legitimate and "sincere religious belief." The party of small government at work again, apparently.
 
2014-02-17 03:40:59 PM
A whole lot of discussion about the religion angle here when the article states that it doesn't protect people from being fired over denying people services based on religious beliefs.

Of course, this is fark so "rtfa" is a four letter word

/evil enough without allowing the religion angle by itself obviously
 
2014-02-17 03:41:37 PM

Diogenes: mrshowrules: RedPhoenix122: mrshowrules: Unfortunately it seems like you have to claim to be practicing a religion (not the absence of one).

Pastafarian?

Does Pastafarianism require you to judge, ignore or mistreat people because of their actions.  Could you refuse to serve someone spaghetti if they did not first bow to the dish and respect first?  That could be entertaining.

I'm not 100% clear on the doctrine but you'd think Pastafarians wouldn't take kindly to members of the Church of Atkins.


His kind should stop persecuting my religious freedom.
 
2014-02-17 03:42:17 PM

mrshowrules: Even if you called atheism a religion, there is no centralized doctrine.


Perhaps more importantly, there are no agreed upon rituals.
 
2014-02-17 03:43:27 PM

martissimo: A whole lot of discussion about the religion angle here when the article states that it doesn't protect people from being fired over denying people services based on religious beliefs.


No, just allows them to go practice somewhere else.  You know, like the catholic church does with child molesters.
 
2014-02-17 03:46:28 PM

Somacandra: And nowgovernment would get involved in what qualifies as a legitimate and "sincere religious belief." The party of small government at work again, apparently.


How does one prove a spiritual belief?  It would be almost impossible to do it and be anywhere near compliance with any existing standards of a court of law.
 
2014-02-17 03:55:32 PM

martissimo: A whole lot of discussion about the religion angle here when the article states that it doesn't protect people from being fired over denying people services based on religious beliefs.



Yes, but someone could die before the doctor who denies services to gay people gets fired, hence the danger.  (I'm not even being ridiculous - a gay couple comes into the emergency room - they were robbed at knifepoint and one of them was stabbed. The one man says "Please help my husband, he's lost a lot of blood."  The available doctor says "sorry, I don't treat gays because Jesus" and the man dies.  The hospital can fire the doctor, but that won't bring back the dead man.)  Further, the doctor will still have a license and can do the same thing somewhere else.

The teacher who refuses to teach a gay child can be fired after minimum damage inflicted but with doctors, it could be life or death.
 
2014-02-17 03:56:00 PM

Somacandra: mrshowrules: Even if you called atheism a religion, there is no centralized doctrine.

Perhaps more importantly, there are no agreed upon rituals.


Getting high and watching Real Time with Bill Maher is not in Tomes of Observance?
 
2014-02-17 03:56:44 PM

serpent_sky: martissimo: A whole lot of discussion about the religion angle here when the article states that it doesn't protect people from being fired over denying people services based on religious beliefs.


Yes, but someone could die before the doctor who denies services to gay people gets fired, hence the danger.  (I'm not even being ridiculous - a gay couple comes into the emergency room - they were robbed at knifepoint and one of them was stabbed. The one man says "Please help my husband, he's lost a lot of blood."  The available doctor says "sorry, I don't treat gays because Jesus" and the man dies.  The hospital can fire the doctor, but that won't bring back the dead man.)  Further, the doctor will still have a license and can do the same thing somewhere else.

The teacher who refuses to teach a gay child can be fired after minimum damage inflicted but with doctors, it could be life or death.


So, can a Jehovah's Witness refuse to give a blood transfusion and still keep his license?  I'm curious about that.
 
2014-02-17 04:07:55 PM

RedPhoenix122: So, can a Jehovah's Witness refuse to give a blood transfusion and still keep his license? I'm curious about that.


I would imagine there aren't a lot of Jehovah's Witness doctors, but the problem with all of this is their faith decrees that they do/don't certain things - not that they have to actively prevent other people from doing things. i know the fanatics generally don't understand their own faiths, but there is no faith I'm aware of that makes its adherents responsible for the free will of everyone else on earth or demands they not provide services they agreed to provide in their line of work.
 
2014-02-17 04:08:26 PM
Tonight when my shift starts I'm totally telling my boss I can't mop the booths because the strands are made of unnatural fibers.
 
2014-02-17 04:09:40 PM

RedPhoenix122: serpent_sky: martissimo: A whole lot of discussion about the religion angle here when the article states that it doesn't protect people from being fired over denying people services based on religious beliefs.


Yes, but someone could die before the doctor who denies services to gay people gets fired, hence the danger.  (I'm not even being ridiculous - a gay couple comes into the emergency room - they were robbed at knifepoint and one of them was stabbed. The one man says "Please help my husband, he's lost a lot of blood."  The available doctor says "sorry, I don't treat gays because Jesus" and the man dies.  The hospital can fire the doctor, but that won't bring back the dead man.)  Further, the doctor will still have a license and can do the same thing somewhere else.

The teacher who refuses to teach a gay child can be fired after minimum damage inflicted but with doctors, it could be life or death.

So, can a Jehovah's Witness refuse to give a blood transfusion and still keep his license?  I'm curious about that.


How about a Christian Science follower?  They could technically deny applying pressure to a massive blood spurting wound in favour of praying.

Didn't Bush Jr. actually pass a similar law for pharmacists?
 
2014-02-17 04:12:15 PM

Somacandra: mrshowrules: Even if you called atheism a religion, there is no centralized doctrine.

Perhaps more importantly, there are no agreed upon rituals.


I like to tie them to stakes in field and dance around them naked in the moonlight singing Ladysmith Black Mambazo until they lose all their powers.  That's not part of the canon?
 
2014-02-17 04:18:35 PM
Jobs? Jobs? Jobs?
 
2014-02-17 04:29:57 PM
FTFA:"We as a nation have almost divorced any association with a higher being," Luker said.

If you like your God so much, please go to meet him right now.
 
2014-02-17 04:31:02 PM
Didn't Kansas just try to pull this shiat?
 
2014-02-17 04:34:22 PM
The bill would also allow psychologists to provide faith-based services as long as they cited they were exercising their religion

Yeah, because the Bible is a better authority than DSM V (or whatever they are up to now).

"You aren't bi-polar, you're just possessed by a demon. Go stand next to that fig tree and I will cast the demon out of you"
 
2014-02-17 04:34:39 PM
I'm Catholic. Can I deny services to Protestants?
 
2014-02-17 04:35:14 PM

Diogenes: Somacandra: mrshowrules: Even if you called atheism a religion, there is no centralized doctrine.

Perhaps more importantly, there are no agreed upon rituals.

I like to tie them to stakes in field and dance around them naked in the moonlight singing Ladysmith Black Mambazo until they lose all their powers.  That's not part of the canon?


If it's not, it damn well should be.
 
2014-02-17 04:38:39 PM
It's things like this that make me believe that these types aren't simply bigots, but are indeed morons who never learn. Every time some idiot, whether politician or religious leader, includes single mothers in their list of "ok to discriminate against" there will inevitably be a widow of a dead soldier and her child held up as an example of why their hate-fueled bigotry is ridiculous. Generally speaking, even people who hate gays and dance with joy when they're denied equal rights will scream about hating 'merika if you attempt to vilify or shame a dead veteran's widow. Still, though, brain deal morans like this guy, who are so determined that welfare queens are destroying the fabric of our great Christian society, only see single mothers as whores who spread their legs for a government handout and they are somehow blind to the fact that many single mothers were once married mothers and aren't all evil sinners.
 
2014-02-17 04:39:03 PM

Mr. Coffee Nerves: Tonight when my shift starts I'm totally telling my boss I can't mop the booths because the strands are made of unnatural fibers.


If anyone you do business with remarried someone they divorced after they'd married again (you get married-you get divorced-she remarries-she gets divorced-you remarry her), they've violated that same part of Leviticus. Anyone who's had sex with their stepmom/dad, stepsister/brother, committed adultery (of any kind), had sex with an "unclean" woman (within 2 weeks of starting her period, she's "unclean"), and many, many other sexual peccadilloes (or "pick-a-dildos") are just as "stone them to death"-y as gay sex.

Also, lesbians are A-OK with Leviticus (only "a man who lies another man" is prohibited. This may also allow all-male orgies).

Not to mention the death penalty for so many, many other things outside of Leviticus - working on the Sabbath, rebellious kids, cursing your parents/god, killing someone else (if your life wasn't immediately in danger - look up "sanctuary cities"). Oh, and tattoos (any mark with tribal or religious significance)/scarification (which might include some body piercings) are also prohibited, though not under penalty of death.

// or anyone who's had sex with an animal
// gotta kill the animal too, in that case; and no barbecuing it
// but Exodus does have a version of Stand Your Ground - a tunneling burglar (look it up)
 
2014-02-17 04:39:07 PM

serpent_sky: What the farking hell religion involves denying people necessary medical care ? And how can they simultaneously hate abortion AND single mothers?


The correct answer is Mormon. This dicksplat is a Mormon.
 
2014-02-17 04:40:08 PM
"We've seen the government attempt to come in and dictate who a church should hire for their personnel," said state Rep. Lynn Luker, R-Boise, to the House State Affairs Committee. "We've seen the government mandate health care which requires businesses and individuals to support paying for ... contraceptions against their religious feelings."

Going to need a citation for those claims there, Lynn.
 
2014-02-17 04:40:39 PM
My religion wants him to die in order for an age of peace and tranquility to reign. So, in the spirit of the bill, should something bad happen to him, I'm legally protected?
 
2014-02-17 04:40:47 PM
I'm pretty sure Christian Jesus doesn't want tax cuts for the rich, so following a doctrine is a loose definition of religion anyway.
 
2014-02-17 04:42:55 PM

unyon: mrshowrules: unyon: So this won't backfire at all when teachers refuse to teach kids on account of them being from Christian families.

FTFA:
Under the new bill, Idahoans would not lose their professional or occupational licenses if they refused to provide their services to an individual or a group because they were exercising their religion

Unfortunately it seems like you have to claim to be practicing a religion (not the absence of one).

No, you just need to have a sincerely held belief.  If it were me, it would be the sincerely held belief that intolerant assholes need to be taught a lesson from the goes-around-comes-around handbook.  They of course are welcome to attempt to sue me to determine the sincerity of those beliefs.


I have the same emotional reaction. However, unlike the dipshiats from TFA, take my profesionalism seriously and they would be provided the best care possible and never learn anything about my spiritual or political beliefs. Because vocation, professionalism, and reasons...
 
2014-02-17 04:43:42 PM
Do I even need to read the article to know that it was a republican who came up with this idea?

vile and foul idea = obviously a republican
 
2014-02-17 04:44:25 PM
Okay shills explain in detail how this justifiable, moral or legal. This outta be good.....
 
2014-02-17 04:45:29 PM
How about a national registry of bigoted companies and service to be boycotted?
 
2014-02-17 04:47:30 PM
In Idaho, when they go full potato they really go full potato.
 
Displayed 50 of 165 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report