Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We are glad you left California & can only hope the bigot doctors follow you to Texas so they can avoid the law for a few more years. Your hatred & fear continue to lose credibility except in some radical evangelical Republican asylums [that are getting smaller by the day]. You are on the wrong side of history but we all know that already [when will you accept defeat, yahoo?
"We?" What, you have a mouse in your pocket and you are speaking for the both of you?
I understand people have a religious objection to certain things and that's fine.
I guess if you really hate homosexuals (or any other group) that much and don't want to perform procedures on them, you need to open your own private hospital and then you can discriminate all you want. At the same time, I wouldn't want a dime of tax dollars going to the hospital.
As a lesbian, it's fine if a doctor doesn't want to treat me because they hate homosexuals but I just hope I'm not dying at the time and another doctor is there to treat me.
If they have their own private business, they can discriminate all they want provided they didn't and don't receive any public funds.
Never in the article does it say the doctors hated homosexuals or even disliked them it just said it was against their belief.
I submit to you that you and those with your mind-set are the intolerant ones the real haters.
You seek to use the legal system to force others to either deny their beliefs or loose their jobs.
Last edited by turkeytrot; 08-20-2008 at 08:48 AM..
Reason: incomplete
I don't want anybody intentionally bringing a child in to the world without a mother and a father. I am not a homophobe, as I stated in an earlier posy it's of very little interest to me what adults do with other adults. At the same time, the idea that a mother and father do not have unique, seperate and equally important traits that lend themselves to raising a healthy child is ludicrous. Why stop at two mommies or two daddies? Wouldn't three be better? How about four?
A family with a mother and father raising the child affords the child the greatest chance at a stabel, healthy life. That this may hurt the feelings of gays, lesbians, singles, etc. is of no relevance. Again as I stated in an earlier post, having a child is not about the selfish wants of adults, it's about the child and the child's best interests.
But don't heteroseuxals often have children (many times as a single mother, sometimes father) for selfish wants? I have a four year old relative I would rather have with a loving gay couple than with her messed-up, split-up parents. IMO they had the baby to get sympathy and cash for their drug habits and to avoid work.
I would agree Ward and June Cleaver or Ozzie and Harriet would be the best parents, but let's get real.
But don't heteroseuxals often have children (many times as a single mother, sometimes father) for selfish wants? I have a four year old relative I would rather have with a loving gay couple than with her messed-up, split-up parents. IMO they had the baby to get sympathy and cash for their drug habits and to avoid work.
I would agree Ward and June Cleaver or Ozzie and Harriet would be the best parents, but let's get real.
I thought I had been clear that my sentiments were not directed at gays exclusively, but towards anyone who chose to bring a child in to the world without a stable, married, mom & dad environment in place. Yes it sucks if you're gay and want a kid, but it's not about you. It's about what is best for the child.
This is not a case of my not being real, rather I refuse to bend to political correctness by sacrificing the well being of children to spare feelings or for political expediency. I live my ideals and I'm not afraid to stand up for them.
Last edited by rb4browns; 08-20-2008 at 12:10 PM..
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,373,658 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK
Once again medical "professionals" are trying to bring their religious beliefs where they don't belong- in the workplace. First the Paramacist and now the doctors!
[i]A state Supreme Court today ruled that constitutional freedom of religion does not permit doctors to refuse services to homosexual clients, even when those services would violate doctors' moral and religious convictions.
Any doctor who would refuse to treat someone soley due to their sexual orientation has no moral convictions.
I don't want anybody intentionally bringing a child in to the world without a mother and a father. I am not a homophobe, as I stated in an earlier posy it's of very little interest to me what adults do with other adults. At the same time, the idea that a mother and father do not have unique, seperate and equally important traits that lend themselves to raising a healthy child is ludicrous. Why stop at two mommies or two daddies? Wouldn't three be better? How about four?
A family with a mother and father raising the child affords the child the greatest chance at a stabel, healthy life. That this may hurt the feelings of gays, lesbians, singles, etc. is of no relevance. Again as I stated in an earlier post, having a child is not about the selfish wants of adults, it's about the child and the child's best interests.
Your ideas are common in certain circles, however I am curious what research they are based on? I do know that single parents often face difficulties raising their children, however I strongly believe this has a lot more to do with finances & lack of social (community, family, etc.) support, than it has to do with a single person of either sex raising their children.
Your ideas are common in certain circles, however I am curious what research they are based on? I do know that single parents often face difficulties raising their children, however I strongly believe this has a lot more to do with finances & lack of social (community, family, etc.) support, than it has to do with a single person of either sex raising their children.
I would venture to say that my ideas are far more commonplace than the "certain circles" you refer to.
One can google more than enough academic studies, let's start with a simple questions. Does a Daddy or Mommy bring intrinsic value to a child-parent relationship? Is there something special and/or unique that a Mommy has with her child. What about a Daddy?
And as far as a single parent raising a child, is it really only a question of finances and resources? Really? Meaning that if the single mom had a million dollars and a family next door than the kid wouldn't even notice he didn't have a daddy? Or vice versa, he wouldn't notice that he didn't have his own mother?
ONe of the reasons I am glad I left California. A doctor should not be forced to help bring a child in to the world that intentionally will be denied a father.
Because if there is anything we learned lately from Mr. Phelps with his 8 gold medals...
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,373,658 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigthirsty
Because if there is anything we learned lately from Mr. Phelps with his 8 gold medals...
You have to have a father to be successful.
Not to mention the wrestling Gold Medalist
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
