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.

(Some Guy)   Lieberman on why hospitals can deny rape victims contraceptives: "In Connecticut, it shouldn't take more than a short ride to get to another hospital." Blogger responds with actual facts. Griswold v Connecticut surrenders   (ctbob.blogspot.com) divider line
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

1119 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Aug 2006 at 1:09 AM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



43 Comments     (+0 »)
 
2006-08-24 8:49:49 PM  
He is a farktard.
 
2006-08-24 8:51:57 PM  
Wow!
He ROCKS!
 
2006-08-24 8:58:52 PM  
As long as the Catholic Hospitals get NO taxpayer money (including Medicaid/Medicare reimbursement), they can do what they want. Otherwise, they should put their money where their mouth is.

I know, overly simplistic, but you can't have it both ways. If they truly feel that their abortion views conflict with what the law allows, they should be prepared to go private pay only.
 
2006-08-24 9:00:00 PM  
educated: Wow!
He ROCKS!


Yup, I think he should start his own political party called, "the elect joel lieberman party" or something similar. Then, everybody who has a contraception problem, and a car, can race to the hospital of their choice and avail themselves of the services therein, and if that doesn't work, forum shop. He's a deep thought thinker. Going further, everybody who goes to an emergency department with chest pains who are told by the attending that it is just gas, should go seek out another emergency room to diagnose their myocardial infarction. Hey, it's just a short drive! The man's a genius.
 
2006-08-24 9:00:36 PM  
This is from way back in May. You don't have to look that far back to find Joe saying something stupid.
 
2006-08-24 9:00:59 PM  
Because after an assault, who wouldn't want to joyride from hospital to hospital, hunting for one that will deign to help?

Incidentally, I hope those "principled" hospitals have never handed out Vioxx or other anti-inflammatories.

Asstards.
 
2006-08-24 9:14:22 PM  
duppy: "Because after an assault, who wouldn't want to joyride from hospital to hospital, hunting for one that will deign to help?"

Also, I'm sure there are women who are injured and not in any condition to get out of bed.
 
2006-08-24 9:41:25 PM  
There is no logical medical or scientific reason for denying women emergency contraceptives. None. I do not care what your person feelings are on the matter, if you are in health care your responsibility is to the patient and to her needs, not to your own selfish, nonsensical ideology. It is simply stunning that in this day and age people can be so absolutely obtuse.
 
2006-08-24 10:06:49 PM  
ArbitraryConstant: duppy: "Because after an assault, who wouldn't want to joyride from hospital to hospital, hunting for one that will deign to help?"

Also, I'm sure there are women who are injured and not in any condition to get out of bed.


and on top of that, if there's one thing a woman LOVES to do after being raped, its drag the process out as much as possible, tell as many strangers as possible about her situation, hang around for hours in a hospital only to have some RN come tell her that, oops, sorry, they can't help her but hey, there's another hospital about 45 minutes up the highway...maybe they can help (but you should probably call first just in case).

All because someone doesn't believe that a woman should be given the right to contraception (not an abortificant, mind you...contraception), evidently because you are a dirty whore who is sinning against God by not wanting to give birth to your rapist's child.
 
2006-08-24 10:43:03 PM  
Ah, in a perfect world there would be a way to remove the rapist's fetus from the woman, cram it up the rectum of one of these ideological jackasses, and let it gestate there...
 
2006-08-24 10:47:18 PM  
Wow, this is kinda a lite version of shaming the rape victim that is often practiced in Middle Eastern countries.

What an ass.
 
2006-08-24 11:26:04 PM  
All right, I used to think this guy was a nuisance/joke; now he can DIAF.
 
2006-08-25 1:20:27 AM  
VoteOn: Apply directly to Ned Lamont.
VoteOn: Apply directly to Ned Lamont.
VoteOn: Apply directly to Ned Lamont.
 
2006-08-25 1:39:23 AM  
I'm not here to complain that this is old -- it is -- but to point out that this is one of two issues (the other being Schiavo) that CT voters who supported Lamont offered.

It was NEVER enough. "You're just voting AGAINST Joe! What are you voting FOR?!?!!!?!ELEVNTYLOTSOFINDIGNATION"

As submitter notes in an oblique way, birth control is sacred here in CT. This "Lieberman against rape victims" stance is taken very seriously by Democrats. Republicans are still yelling about "IDEOLOGICAL PURITY!! WITCH HUNT!! POOR JOE!"
AAaaaannnd, when a CT Dem asks one of these folks if there are any Republicans that they know of that are anti-war, they have NO IDEA why you'd ask (and then resume the ideological purity rant)

/sorry, got off on a tangent, I know
 
2006-08-25 1:43:28 AM  
"IDEOLOGICAL PURITY!! WITCH HUNT!! POOR JOE!"

Yet, somehow, magically this does not apply to the Laffey-Chafee race the next state over, where the conservative is battling the moderate Republican incumbent...
 
2006-08-25 1:44:06 AM  
damageddude : As long as the Catholic Hospitals get NO taxpayer money (including Medicaid/Medicare reimbursement), they can do what they want..

Which might make sense if Medicaid/Medicare were designed as a benefit for hospitals. Unfortunately for your logic, they are a benefit targeted to the PATIENTS. So by all means, punish the sick & ill because you don't like the Catholics and/or Orthodox Jews being allowed to follow the dictates of their faith. We can't have freedom of Religion after all, it detracts from forcing everyone else to follow your own views of morality to a T.
 
2006-08-25 1:44:35 AM  
-they're afraid of the Democratic Party growing balls, essentially
 
2006-08-25 1:45:48 AM  
Well at least now they'll be able to get it at a local pharmacy if the hospital turns them down. That is of course assuming the pharmacist doesn't have a religious problem with contraception also, and assuming the victim is 18 or older, and assuming the pharmacy carries it.

The real purpose of the "18 and over" clause added to the Plan B approval by Bush's FDA is definitely to allow pharmacists to deny it to people. Thankfully, I think pharmacists can now be legally fired for this.
 
2006-08-25 2:25:39 AM  
bmasso
We can't have freedom of Religion after all

Freedom of religion is fine, government funding religion isn't.
 
2006-08-25 3:00:24 AM  
I'm okay with the hospital doing this...

...as long as they give up any tax breaks that they recieve for being an apolitica/religious nonprofit organization.
 
2006-08-25 3:19:54 AM  
I wanted to say something intelligent (as if I could...)

But the only thing I can come up with is Lieberman makes me want to puke.

If there is a silver lining to the 2000 presidential election, it is that that disgusting piece of garbage is not our vice president (of course, he would be better than the penguin). He does not care about his constituents, he just wants to keep being a titty suck politician.

Joe, go get a real job for a while.
 
2006-08-25 8:16:26 AM  
damageddude: As long as the Catholic Hospitals get NO taxpayer money (including Medicaid/Medicare reimbursement), they can do what they want. Otherwise, they should put their money where their mouth is.

I know, overly simplistic, but you can't have it both ways. If they truly feel that their abortion views conflict with what the law allows, they should be prepared to go private pay only.



Tha winnah!
 
2006-08-25 8:37:28 AM  
Joe is exactly right and since when did tax payer money become tied in with giving abortions?
 
2006-08-25 9:17:13 AM  
Hang On Voltaire, shut your pie hole you sad, pathetic, misogynistic piece of shiat and come back when you have the foggiest idea what the difference between Plan B birth control and an abortion is. Until then, you have nothing intelligent to say about this and will succeed only in making yourself look like the lunatic GOP shill you really are.
 
2006-08-25 9:25:58 AM  
Americans would take to Sharia law pretty well, I guess.
 
2006-08-25 9:45:11 AM  
Hang On Voltaire

Joe is exactly right and since when did tax payer money become tied in with giving abortions?

We're discussing the denial of medical treatment to rape victims due to hospital religeous affiliation. You seem to have wandered into the wrong thread.

It is deeply disturbing that some in our society would advocate that a rape victim be forced to concieve and carry the child of her rapist to term based on a papal encyclical that is not ex cathedra. If the catholic church wants an ironclad position on this then let the pope speak ex cathedra on the subject. Then I will respect their position and politely ask that they get out of the hospital business.
 
2006-08-25 10:37:28 AM  
duppy

Ah, in a perfect world there would be a way to remove the rapist's fetus from the woman, cram it up the rectum of one of these ideological jackasses, and let it gestate there...

I thought that's how politicians were born?
 
2006-08-25 11:00:29 AM  
damageddude
As long as the Catholic Hospitals get NO taxpayer money (including Medicaid/Medicare reimbursement), they can do what they want.

Yeah, Heaven forbid they help people.
 
2006-08-25 11:23:43 AM  
Joe Lieberman--not pro-life, but somewhat sympathetic to those who are--not an acceptable democrat
Ben Nelson--pro-life, acceptable as a democrat
Bob Casey--pro-life, acceptable as a democrat

Seriously, I understand it's hip to be down on Lieberman these days, but this blog post and this forum discussion is pretty weak on actual arguments and heavy on "Lieberman's an idiot! Yes he is teh suck"

Please someone answer me these questions:
Is it so terrible to allow a moderate into the democratic party?
What is it that Lieberman has done that makes him worse than all the other moderates in the democracic party? (Nelson, Salazar, Pryor)
Do you really think the democrats' best strategy at this point is to cast aside the center?
 
2006-08-25 11:25:02 AM  
mrexcess : Freedom of religion is fine, government funding religion isn't.

Good arguement to preclude gov't funding of circumcision.
Not so good when you try to use it to FORCE folks to do
things their faith doesn't allow.

I have a sister who's a nurse, started out as an ER one,
moved to Surgery, ended up in Psychiatry, now in Psych Admin.
Made the move from Surgery at least partly because she
didn't want to assist at elective abortions, and discovered that
that preference meant she could expect to always be assigned
the shiat shifts and assignments. Do you really want to argue
that she should be FORCED to perform abortions? And if she's
allowed to practice "Choice", WTH shouldn't groups of medical
workers as well?

Meh, often it seems (IMHO) pro-Choice only applies
if the choice IS abortion.
 
2006-08-25 11:26:44 AM  
Joe is exactly right and since when did tax payer money become tied in with giving abortions?

Do you know what contraceptives are?
 
2006-08-25 11:32:12 AM  
2006-08-25 01:45:48 AM Mnemia

The real purpose of the "18 and over" clause added to the Plan B approval by Bush's FDA is definitely to allow pharmacists to deny it to people. Thankfully, I think pharmacists can now be legally fired for this.


The only state requiring that a woman be granted her legally prescribed contraception is Illinois. Some pharmacy chains require that a pharmacist fill prescriptions, including Walgreens and CVS, but other pharmacies, including Wal-Mart and Target, have refused to make this a condition of employment. Wal-Mart fired one pharmacist for refusing to even refer women to other pharmacies and for putting women who called about contraception on indefinite hold until they hung up. Wal-Mart has finally decided that every pharmacy is going to at least carry Plan-B, after they got sued in Massachusetts by three women who were denied their prescriptions at Wal-Mart and were about to have to pay damages under Massachusetts law, as well as risk having their pharamacies lose their licenses.
 
2006-08-25 11:36:12 AM  
Aexia: Joe is exactly right and since when did tax payer money become tied in with giving abortions?

Do you know what contraceptives are?


Come on he is a Republican, when did facts and evidence come into his vocabulary, he thinks that Plan B causes abortions, thats all he needs to know. Hannity or Coulter told him so....
 
2006-08-25 12:04:51 PM  
Please ignore members of the Fark Right Wing Brigade™ like Hang On Voltaire. He knows the difference between Plan B and abortions, and his purpose isn't to inform or debate the merits. He (and they) are here only to troll now.
 
2006-08-25 12:12:40 PM  
What is it that Lieberman has done that makes him worse than all the other moderates in the democracic party? (Nelson, Salazar, Pryor)

Nelson, Salazar and Pryor all represent states much more conservative than Connecticut while Lieberman is out of step and out of touch with his state.

In addition, Nelson, Salazar and Pryor don't go on Fox News saying anyone who disagrees with them is an America-hating terrorist-sympathizing extremist traitor and that we shouldn't question the President.

In short, Connecticut can do better than Lieberman and this November, it will. It's not anymore a "purge" of centrists than McKinney getting the boot was a purge of liberals. It's about getting rid of out of touch incumbents.

Do you really think the democrats' best strategy at this point is to cast aside the center?

It's a good thing they aren't.

The Republicans however...
 
2006-08-25 12:30:20 PM  
Nelson, Salazar and Pryor all represent states much more conservative than Connecticut while Lieberman is out of step and out of touch with his state.

People keep saying this, but I'm not exactly sure why. Lieberman's won three times and he's leading polls right now; how exactly does that make him out of step?

In addition, Nelson, Salazar and Pryor don't go on Fox News saying anyone who disagrees with them is an America-hating terrorist-sympathizing extremist traitor and that we shouldn't question the President.

Hyperbole anyone?

In short, Connecticut can do better than Lieberman and this November, it will. It's not anymore a "purge" of centrists than McKinney getting the boot was a purge of liberals. It's about getting rid of out of touch incumbents.

Lieberman is the most prominent moderate in the democratic party. He was the VP candidate in 2000. McKinney is a rep who no one heard of until she fought a cop. Hardly analagous.
 
2006-08-25 1:28:14 PM  
2006-08-25 11:25:02 AM bmasso

I have a sister who's a nurse, started out as an ER one,
moved to Surgery, ended up in Psychiatry, now in Psych Admin. Made the move from Surgery at least partly because she didn't want to assist at elective abortions


Have you ever performed an abortion? Have you ever received an abortion? "elective abortions" aren't performed at hospitals, they are performed at clinics. You know, those places surrounded by angry loud protestors who scream at pregnant women. You know, those places that the "pro-life" people bomb and blocade.

I'm calling your story BS. How about the name of the state, the name of the hospital, and some more details about these "elective abortions".

One of the reasons "elective abortions" aren't performed in a hospital is it's not necessary. Early abortions can be performed with RU-486, no surgical intervention at all. Later ones can be performed with local anaesthesia, at an outpatient clinic, and the woman goes home a few hours later. The only abortions performed in a hospital are those involving later term abortions, and those are only legal in the case of severe fetal defect, or in the case of risk of health to the mother if she were forced to deliver a fetus that is already dead, or perhaps is posing some other health risk. By any chance are any of these "elective abortions" accompanied by "elective hysterectomies" due to a perforated uterus? How about "elective blood transfusion" due to extreme loss of blood? Did any of these women have "elective miscarriages" that required a d&c performed by a surgeon?

It's not clear that you or your sister understand the definition of "elective abortion".

Meh, often it seems (IMHO) pro-Choice only applies
if the choice IS abortion.


It's pro-choice or no choice. It's a fun catchphrase, and it's true. There are lots of surgeries that don't involve women. Your sister could help with oncology, or cardiology, etc. Or she could become a nurse practitioner and pick her choice of doing primary care in an outpatient clinic. Lots of options for nurses these days. But I'm quite confident your sister never helped with an "elective abortion". If she thinks she did, how dare she question the motives of a woman who would die if she delivered a malformed fetus.
 
2006-08-25 2:58:50 PM  
RU486 is not an abortificant(sp?) its a CONTRACEPTIVE...if used correctly within the narrow window , it can prevent CONTRACEPTION...it can NOT abort a fetus allready attached to the Uterian Wall.

/may every "Holier than Thou" Pharmacist who denies any women a prescription
based on their narrow and personal "religious" beliefs have a broom handle jammed repeatedly and with force up their ass...then be denied tampons to staunch the bleeding.
//you want to see an "Angry Liberal"...here I am.
 
2006-08-25 3:09:25 PM  
Each hospital the blogger listed had another hospital within 1-3 miles of it.

And his "it's so hard to get a cab at 2:00 AM" comment is meaningless. Have the hospital call a cab for you. Yes, they can do that and yes, a cabbie will come.

That said, Lieberman is an asshat for spouting such ignorance.

There is no excuse for a hospital to not provide certain things. Hospitals are held to certain minimal standards of care & you'd think something like contraceptives would be part of that minimal standard, regardless of their private or religious status.
 
2006-08-25 3:40:49 PM  
BMasso : I have a sister who's a nurse, started out as an ER one,
moved to Surgery, ended up in Psychiatry, now in Psych Admin. Made the move from Surgery at least partly because she didn't want to assist at elective abortions


dbackeberg : Have you ever performed an abortion? Have you ever received an abortion?

Normal entry to the "you aren't ALLOWED to have opinions on this subject" meme.

db : "elective abortions" aren't performed at hospitals, they are performed at clinics....

She made the switch a few decades ago - at the time I don't think the local PP clinic had been set up as of yet - but if - as YOU SAY - there are NO elective abortions performed in hospitals - why the recent proposals to deny certification to any Catholic hospital that doesn't do them?

db : I'm calling your story BS.

I find your lack of faith - disturbing....

db : How about the name of the state, the name of the hospital, and some more details about these "elective abortions".

Syracuse, NY.
She worked at all three local hospitals at one time or another,
St. Joseph's (Catholic), Crouse-Irving, and Upstate Med Center.
If your level of willingness to disbelieve requires me to give you names and/or descriptions of patients/procedures than you'll just have to go on willfully disbelieving anything that might conflict with your world-view. I don't know that data - I just know the reasons she told me for the switch - among which was that if she weren't willing to assist on abortions she was on the shait list at work.

db : [Lots of rambling about CURRENT conditions that has nothing to do with conditions back in the early 70's, ended with again asking for case histories]

For my response, see above.
Please note though - RU486 was not available 30 years earlier.
Your assumptions regarding it make me wonder if you've ever asked your grandma what microwave recipies SHE used to use when she first got married.

db : It's not clear that you or your sister understand the definition of "elective abortion".

Yes, buttress your arguements by assuming that simple terms are beyond my comprehension - and also beyond the comprehension of a medical professional as well. That makes so much sense.

BMasso : Meh, often it seems (IMHO) pro-Choice only applies
if the choice IS abortion.


db : It's pro-choice or no choice. It's a fun catchphrase, and it's true. There are lots of surgeries that don't involve women. Your sister could help with oncology, or cardiology, etc. Or she could become a nurse practitioner and pick her choice of doing primary care in an outpatient clinic. Lots of options for nurses these days. But I'm quite confident your sister never helped with an "elective abortion". If she thinks she did, how dare she question the motives of a woman who would die if she delivered a malformed fetus.
[Entire rant preserved to preserve it's absurdity.]

#1 - Tou're again disallowing my SISTER'S ability to choose.
#2 - WTF - Did you not even read my post? She DID change her specialty - that's what the whole comment was ABOUT - that she was presured to assist at abortions and decided to get out of Surgery rather than be punished for not being pro-abortion.
#3 - I'm quite confident you don't know WTH you're talking about when you say you're 100% confident a person you've never meet working under conditions you seem unable to wrap your mind around never did what WAS done in hospitals prior to clinics sprouting up.
#4 - Final sentense is really the MOST absurd - Birth Defects normally endanger the baby, not the mom - if you think that the average abortion is a response to a birth defect you're - in a different reality - as you are if you think the average abortion is to resolve danger to the mom - and finally - I question the motives of anyone who argues under the assumption that a ridiculous worst-case scenario is the norm.
 
2006-08-25 6:03:40 PM  
It's interesting how all of a sudden with medical professionals is is all about them and their issues. Do you damn job and give medical attention to the person it actually affects: the patient.
 
2006-08-26 2:18:21 AM  
doctofunk: Joe Lieberman--not pro-life, but somewhat sympathetic to those who are--not an acceptable democrat
Ben Nelson--pro-life, acceptable as a democrat
Bob Casey--pro-life, acceptable as a democrat



actually the whole gross insensitivity to women who have been raped seems to be the clincher, not pro{life|choice}
 
2006-08-27 4:38:31 PM  
Wow, my blog has been Farked! This is a dream come true!

"Connecticut Bob"
http://connecticutbob.com
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments


This thread is archived, and 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.