Skip to content
 
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.

(LGBTQ Nation)   Judge rules that 'religious hospitals' can deny aid to LGBTQ, Just like Jesus said to   (lgbtqnation.com) divider line
    More: Stupid, Transgender, Barack Obama, Health care, Discrimination, Vice President of the United States, George W. Bush, Religious Freedom Restoration Act, religious doctors  
•       •       •

3284 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 13 Aug 2021 at 7:30 AM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-08-12 10:30:21 PM  
On other words, their religious oaths are supposedly more important than their medical oaths.
 
2021-08-12 10:43:11 PM  
Can we ban those "Hospitals" from receiving any tax payer funding, grants and tax exemptions?
 
2021-08-12 10:45:35 PM  
God damn it so much
 
2021-08-12 10:48:30 PM  
4.3.2.1...

Some chuckel fark will say "why would they do that, I'll gladly serve a taco to a gay person."
 
2021-08-12 11:33:44 PM  

Kris_Romm: On other words, their religious oaths are supposedly more important than their medical oaths.


Instead of calling it the Hippocratic Oath, it should be called the Hypocrite Oath
 
2021-08-12 11:41:29 PM  
This is the Federal District Judge that all the rightwingers shop for to file their lost-cause cases, the  one that said Obamacare was unconstitutional and got overturned 7-2 by the Supreme Court. He's got a safe job for life and considers it his hobby to issue his political opinions as court rulings.

"Legal scholars considered O'Connor's ruling "as a tortured effort to rewrite not just the law but congressional history."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed_O%​2​7Connor

"O'Connor also said that the Biden administration "may" have "some sort of religious animus in the failure to include reasonable religious exemptions" in its interpretation of Section 1557, although he didn't point to any evidence that the Catholic president has it out for Catholic health care providers. "

He's a zealot who's going to get overruled again.
 
2021-08-13 12:18:07 AM  

Kris_Romm: On other words, their religious oaths are supposedly more important than their medical oaths.


You may not know this, but the Hippocratic Oath is completely non-binding.  We have laws that take its place and can hit a doctor where it hurts - in the wallet, not in their honor.

That said, thorpe is right - this judge is a f*cking RWNJ.  That doesn't however, excuse Franciscan from this shiat.  F*cking assholes.  Protecting priests when they rape children is OK, treating a medically acknowledged condition is a violation of your religious freedom?  F*ck you.
 
2021-08-13 12:20:41 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: Kris_Romm: On other words, their religious oaths are supposedly more important than their medical oaths.

You may not know this, but the Hippocratic Oath is completely non-binding.  We have laws that take its place and can hit a doctor where it hurts - in the wallet, not in their honor.

That said, thorpe is right - this judge is a f*cking RWNJ.  That doesn't however, excuse Franciscan from this shiat.  F*cking assholes.  Protecting priests when they rape children is OK, treating a medically acknowledged condition is a violation of your religious freedom?  F*ck you.


Franciscan is also based in Indiana and this case has no business being in the 5th.
 
2021-08-13 12:29:08 AM  

GardenWeasel: Benevolent Misanthrope: Kris_Romm: On other words, their religious oaths are supposedly more important than their medical oaths.

You may not know this, but the Hippocratic Oath is completely non-binding.  We have laws that take its place and can hit a doctor where it hurts - in the wallet, not in their honor.

That said, thorpe is right - this judge is a f*cking RWNJ.  That doesn't however, excuse Franciscan from this shiat.  F*cking assholes.  Protecting priests when they rape children is OK, treating a medically acknowledged condition is a violation of your religious freedom?  F*ck you.

Franciscan is also based in Indiana and this case has no business being in the 5th.


Based, but they do have a hospital in the 5th, IIRC.  It's actually comic, though, that they are basing their case in Texas on federal law violating their rights under Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

/Frankly, I was shocked to learn that religious freedom had been suspended in Indiana before.
 
2021-08-13 12:57:35 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: Kris_Romm: On other words, their religious oaths are supposedly more important than their medical oaths.

You may not know this, but the Hippocratic Oath is completely non-binding.  We have laws that take its place and can hit a doctor where it hurts - in the wallet, not in their honor.


If you asked a Doctor if he followed the oath and he waffled, would you use him?

You're really just saying he can't be prosecuted.  But malpractice suits wouldn't rely on explicitly breaking the oath either. So it could go both ways.
 
2021-08-13 1:44:59 AM  

optikeye: Can we ban those "Hospitals" from receiving any tax payer funding, grants and tax exemptions?


No, because that's anti-Christian. It's like condemning the government of Israel makes you an anti-Semite.
 
2021-08-13 1:50:18 AM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: optikeye: Can we ban those "Hospitals" from receiving any tax payer funding, grants and tax exemptions?

It's like condemning the government of Israel makes you an anti-Semite.4


I really wish more people understood that. Just like the troops. You can support the troops, without having to support the war, or those behind it

All during the Second Gulf War, I was told I was 'a communist', I was 'a terrorist supporter', and I must hate America and  the troops, because I didn't support Bush Jr's war in Iraq
 
2021-08-13 2:12:52 AM  

Kris_Romm: Benevolent Misanthrope: Kris_Romm: On other words, their religious oaths are supposedly more important than their medical oaths.

You may not know this, but the Hippocratic Oath is completely non-binding.  We have laws that take its place and can hit a doctor where it hurts - in the wallet, not in their honor.

If you asked a Doctor if he followed the oath and he waffled, would you use him?

You're really just saying he can't be prosecuted.  But malpractice suits wouldn't rely on explicitly breaking the oath either. So it could go both ways.


Please don't put words in my mouth.

I am not saying he can't be prosecuted, I'm saying that, even if he did recite some version of the Hippocratic Oath, that is irrelevant.  If you had said "making others confirm to their religious beliefs is more important to them than providing competent medical service", I would agree with you.

And I wouldn't give a shiat if they waffled on an ancient Greek religious vow, I'm more interested in whether they've been dinged on malpractice and ethics charges, or do stupid shiat like refuse to provide care to trans people.
 
2021-08-13 2:14:23 AM  
I didn't realize doctors would be "forced" to perform procedures out of their specialty, whether or not they also happen to be out of their moral comfort zone.

It's almost as if we have an "activist judge" on our hands.
 
2021-08-13 2:34:03 AM  

puffy999: I didn't realize doctors would be "forced" to perform procedures out of their specialty, whether or not they also happen to be out of their moral comfort zone.

It's almost as if we have an "activist judge" on our hands.


No, it's only an 'activist judge', if they ruled according to the Constitution, like they are sworn to do.

Now if a Judge said we must treat gays, blacks, Muslims and Mexicans as decent people, THAT would be an activist judge (at least according to the Republicans)
 
2021-08-13 2:55:26 AM  

TuckFrump: puffy999: I didn't realize doctors would be "forced" to perform procedures out of their specialty, whether or not they also happen to be out of their moral comfort zone.

It's almost as if we have an "activist judge" on our hands.

No, it's only an 'activist judge', if they ruled according to the Constitution, like they are sworn to do.

Now if a Judge said we must treat gays, blacks, Muslims, women, poors, and Mexicans as decent people, THAT would be an activist judge (at least according to the Republicans)


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-08-13 2:55:50 AM  
I forgot natives
 
2021-08-13 2:57:16 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-08-13 3:06:38 AM  

puffy999: I forgot natives


I forgot women and poors. They're almost as bad as being gay, according to the RePuke...I mean Republicans
 
2021-08-13 3:11:02 AM  

TuckFrump: puffy999: I forgot natives

I forgot women and poors. They're almost as bad as being gay, according to the RePuke...I mean Republicans


But to that point, the Founders also thought that. Well non-landowners instead of poors but you get the point. All men and all white and not even that was inclusive enough. That IS what Republicans are after... Hell that might be their one honest trait, wanting to be like the Founding Fathers (in that single respect).
 
2021-08-13 3:12:21 AM  

puffy999: . All men and all white and not even that was exclusive enough.


ftfm
 
2021-08-13 4:32:38 AM  

puffy999: TuckFrump: puffy999: I forgot natives

I forgot women and poors. They're almost as bad as being gay, according to the RePuke...I mean Republicans

But to that point, the Founders also thought that. Well non-landowners instead of poors but you get the point. All men and all white and not even that was inclusive enough. That IS what Republicans are after... Hell that might be their one honest trait, wanting to be like the Founding Fathers (in that single respect).


My dad was a world-class racist. He always said people on welfare should not be allowed to vote because "They're just going to vote for whoever offers the most shiat, which the taxpayers will have to pick up the tab for"
 
2021-08-13 4:36:36 AM  
I look forward to hearing the usual conservative pundits complaining about activist judges legislating from the bench. They'll be here soon.

Any minute now.

Still waiting.
 
2021-08-13 4:38:56 AM  

Gordon Bennett: I look forward to hearing the usual conservative pundits complaining about activist judges legislating from the bench. They'll be here soon.

Any minute now.

Still waiting.


They'll have to wait until this goes live on the main board, as they don't have any money. Any money they have, are going to Donald Trump's 'fight to be president again'. That and Fox News
 
2021-08-13 5:21:20 AM  
Redefine "religious hospital" to mean a place where you just pray for the patients to get better. If you have drugs and surgical equipment, your faith is weak.
 
2021-08-13 7:32:23 AM  
Take some more hydroxy, judge.

/and the rest of the GOP can FAOD as well
 
2021-08-13 7:35:46 AM  

Kris_Romm: If you asked a Doctor if he followed the oath and he waffled, would you use him?


Does he strictly adhere to the no abortions part of the oath?
 
2021-08-13 7:36:31 AM  
The 5th Circuit.

Not even once.
 
2021-08-13 7:36:54 AM  

PunGent: Take some more hydroxy, judge.

/and the rest of the GOP can FAOD as well



Fark and off die?
 
2021-08-13 7:37:38 AM  
Church of the Everloving White Jebus is about to be founded based on the principals that Jebus was for white people and white people only.   Actually, I think there's a couple of churches like that.  Wait until the buy a hospital and school and declare their town to be a religious compound.

Crap.  I'm talking about Idaho, aren't I?
 
2021-08-13 7:37:48 AM  
Troll headline. It's not about "aid" in general, it's about sex change operations and abortions.

George W. Bush appointee District Judge Reed O'Connor in Texas ruled that Obamacare "forces Christian plaintiffs to face civil penalties or to perform gender-transition procedures and abortions contrary to their religious beliefs," which he called " a quintessential irreparable injury" even though no hospital was actually forced to perform the procedures.
[...]
The Franciscan Alliance, a Catholic network of hospitals, sued saying that their rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) were violated since they would be forced to perform abortions and provide gender-affirming care.
 
2021-08-13 7:38:41 AM  

mikaloyd: PunGent: Take some more hydroxy, judge.

/and the rest of the GOP can FAOD as well


Fark and off die?


Fashion, Originality, and Design.
 
2021-08-13 7:40:14 AM  
I bet if sympathetic nurses and doctors refused to work at these hospitals they would go belly up in no time. Market is pretty tight right now for those professions.
 
2021-08-13 7:42:42 AM  
Three billion dollar corporation.  St Francis would be so proud.
 
2021-08-13 7:43:32 AM  
TuckFrump -Instead of calling it the Hippocratic Oath, it should be called the Hypocrite Oath

That is what I have been calling it for decades. As soon as it became a normal practice to discriminate against anyone after taking an oath to help. And, some do it, regardless of whether or not others have heard about it. (I used to know of one southern doctor who literally said he would not touch a ... I am sure you can fill in the rest.)

My dad was a world-class racist. He always said people on welfare should not be allowed to vote because "They're just going to vote for whoever offers the most shiat, which the taxpayers will have to pick up the tab for"

I m betting he used a different word than 'people'... am I right?
 
2021-08-13 7:46:07 AM  

TuckFrump: puffy999: TuckFrump: puffy999: I forgot natives

I forgot women and poors. They're almost as bad as being gay, according to the RePuke...I mean Republicans

But to that point, the Founders also thought that. Well non-landowners instead of poors but you get the point. All men and all white and not even that was inclusive enough. That IS what Republicans are after... Hell that might be their one honest trait, wanting to be like the Founding Fathers (in that single respect).

My dad was a world-class racist. He always said people on welfare should not be allowed to vote because "They're just going to vote for whoever offers the most shiat, which the taxpayers will have to pick up the tab for"


You'd be foolish to not vote for who 'gives you the most shiat'.  Roads, schools, healthcare.  That's who the wealthy vote for--the people that give them the most shiat: Tax cuts, contracts, bailouts.
 
2021-08-13 7:49:23 AM  
I'm  unbelievably sick of hearing about other people's religion. I'm even more sick that they think that their religion gives them Extra Special Rights -"Rights" that usually allow them to treat those that they dislike like shiat.

And I'm sickest of all of brain-dead judges that give the religious bigots these Rights.

Look, your religion is your personal belief. You're entitled to it. I'm not allowed to persecute for it (and wouldn't if I was allowed). However, no one else is required to live by your religious rules, nor are your religious rules allowed to hurt others. Seriously, keep your internal game of make-believe to yourself.
 
2021-08-13 7:50:23 AM  
If a person was LGBTQ, why would they even want to go to a religion/faith-based hospital?
 
2021-08-13 7:51:06 AM  
Can someone show me in the Bible/Quran where it says to discriminate against "the gheys"? Because other than the frequently used, very small section in Leviticus, I've never heard of a chapter that's about, "these people can be freely discriminated against and you'll still get eternal paradise."

Seriously, I cannot be the first person who thinks that people need to prove their religious belief through their holy texts. Everything else is just people being assholes.
 
2021-08-13 7:56:07 AM  

BitwiseShift: Three billion dollar corporation.  St Francis would be so proud.


I'm pretty sure the Bible says it's totally okay to serve two masters, and that the pursuit of your faith AND money is fine.
 
2021-08-13 7:56:46 AM  

optikeye: Can we ban those "Hospitals" from receiving any tax payer funding, grants and tax exemptions?


Is there some way to recall this biased piece of horse caca from the bench?
 
2021-08-13 7:58:03 AM  
Wait so the Catholic Hospitals are no longer treating their priests?
 
2021-08-13 7:58:29 AM  

ajgeek: Can someone show me in the Bible/Quran where it says to discriminate against "the gheys"? Because other than the frequently used, very small section in Leviticus, I've never heard of a chapter that's about, "these people can be freely discriminated against and you'll still get eternal paradise."

Seriously, I cannot be the first person who thinks that people need to prove their religious belief through their holy texts. Everything else is just people being assholes.


The Bible is a great set of books. But mostly it is used to oppress people. You use its texts to explain misery and corruption to the poor, take their money, and tell them death is actually the beginning of a great time. It's essentially one big "Wait for it..."
 
2021-08-13 7:58:33 AM  
Must recite the Nicene Creed and the Augsburg Confession before treatment. Sorry, hospital policy.
 
2021-08-13 8:02:07 AM  

Resident Muslim: If a person was LGBTQ, why would they even want to go to a religion/faith-based hospital?


Because they like healthcare.

In some places in the USA all the hospitals are religious.
 
2021-08-13 8:02:38 AM  
Can they also deny treatment to Covid Vax Deniers who show up?
 
2021-08-13 8:05:25 AM  

mikaloyd: PunGent: Take some more hydroxy, judge.

/and the rest of the GOP can FAOD as well


Fark and off die?


They can ESAD for all I care.
 
2021-08-13 8:07:20 AM  

Resident Muslim: If a person was LGBTQ, why would they even want to go to a religion/faith-based hospital?


Sometimes it's the nearest area hospital, maybe the biggest. The one where your doctor has admitting privileges....

(I lived in an area with several major hospitals. The nearest Catholic hosp. was undeniably the best trauma center. Another Cath, hosp. the best for neonatal and infant care.
 
2021-08-13 8:07:24 AM  

thorpe: This is the Federal District Judge that all the rightwingers shop for to file their lost-cause cases, the  one that said Obamacare was unconstitutional and got overturned 7-2 by the Supreme Court. He's got a safe job for life and considers it his hobby to issue his political opinions as court rulings.

"Legal scholars considered O'Connor's ruling "as a tortured effort to rewrite not just the law but congressional history."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed_O%2​7Connor

"O'Connor also said that the Biden administration "may" have "some sort of religious animus in the failure to include reasonable religious exemptions" in its interpretation of Section 1557, although he didn't point to any evidence that the Catholic president has it out for Catholic health care providers. "

He's a zealot who's going to get overruled again.


He really needs to be removed for misconduct.
 
2021-08-13 8:09:53 AM  

Resident Muslim: If a person was LGBTQ, why would they even want to go to a religion/faith-based hospital?


This has already been explained to you over and over and over again.

FOAD
 
Displayed 50 of 196 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.