I was asked for my religion today..

HarryPotter41

gurramok wrote: »

So here we have it, you are so blinded in your religious beliefs that you believe a patient has no rights when it comes to been denied treatment based on the personal beliefs of religious doctors.




Actually you bring up a very good point there. It is indeed sectarianism in its ugliest form :mad:




Oh boy Harry. It was on religious grounds. Read the article again.

I am on about my doctor and the antibiotics, is it getting too much for you? Do ya want me too call a shaman to look at you?

partyatmygaff

Caesar Augustus wrote: »

I'd settle for silver. I have a theory I want to test.

Ah yes. The theory that if any metal barring solid gold or platinum (None of that plated rubbish) touches the flesh of Caesar Augustus said metal shall turn to gold.


A walking, talking philosopher's stone.

gurramok

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

I am on about my doctor and the antibiotics, is it getting too much for you? Do ya want me too call a shaman to look at you?

Oh you talking on a personal level. What about me going to your doctor then?

Will there be treatments not available to me as a non-Catholic based on religious grounds because I carry out evil things like living in sin?

HarryPotter41

gurramok wrote: »

Oh you talking on a personal level. What about me going to your doctor then?

Will there be treatments not available to me as a non-Catholic based on religious grounds because I carry out evil things like living in sin?

I doubt it, though I would say if ya talk the kinda rubbish to him you have been talking in here he may just give ya something to put you down.

Marcus.Aurelius

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Ah yes. The theory that if any metal barring solid gold or platinum (None of that plated rubbish) touches the flesh of Caesar Augustus said metal shall turn to gold.


A walking, talking philosopher's stone.

"I found Rome a city of bricks and left it a city of marble."

gurramok

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

I doubt it, though I would say if ya talk the kinda rubbish to him you have been talking in here he may just give ya something to put you down.

Well, the Galway doctor refused treatment because the couple had sex before marriage :eek:

You are stretching that doubt to infinity and beyond Mr Potter.

partyatmygaff

gurramok wrote: »

So here we have it, you are so blinded in your religious beliefs that you believe a patient has no rights when it comes to been denied treatment based on the personal beliefs of religious doctors.

You have NO understanding whatsoever of medicine. Doctors follow their own code of ethics. No doctor will treat someone against their own beliefs, that's hypocrisy. They are not machines trained to diagnose and heal without any thought, emotion or morality. Try and understand that and you'll understand what everyone's been trying to tell you for the past few days.

Actually you bring up a very good point there. It is indeed sectarianism in its ugliest form

I hate to do this but
*facepalm*

Actually, why don't you go to a Catholic doctor right now? Tell him you've got some stomach pains. Knowing how those evil discriminating Catholic doctors think they'll probably boot you out yelling "GET OUTTA HERE YA FILTHY PAGAN" but you might get lucky and get someone who'll actually admit you. If you're exceptionally lucky and one does, i'd imagine that evil Catholic doctor would give you a prescription along the lines of

Benzene 50ml - To be taken orally on an empty stomach
Methanol 100ml - To be taken orally on an empty stomach

And maybe if he's feeling particularly murderous
Hydrofluoric Acid (10M) - To be taken orally on an empty stomach

Or he might just y'know, act professionally like any normal human being.

HarryPotter41

gurramok wrote: »

Well, the Galway doctor refused treatment because the couple had sex before marriage :eek:

You are stretching that doubt to infinity and beyond Mr Potter.

Harry Potter wasn't in Toy Story

partyatmygaff

Caesar Augustus wrote: »

"I found Rome a city of bricks and left it a city of marble."

You're Caesar reborn :pac:

HarryPotter41

partyatmygaff wrote: »

You have NO understanding whatsoever of medicine. Doctors follow their own code of ethics. No doctor will treat someone against their own beliefs, that's hypocrisy. They are not machines trained to diagnose and heal without any thought, emotion or morality. Try and understand that and you'll understand what everyone's been trying to tell you for the past few days.




I hate to do this but
*facepalm*

Actually, why don't you go to a Catholic doctor right now? Tell him you've got some stomach pains. Knowing how those evil discriminating Catholic doctors think they'll probably boot you out yelling "GET OUTTA HERE YA FILTHY PAGAN" but you might get lucky and get someone who'll actually admit you. If you're exceptionally lucky and one does, i'd imagine that evil Catholic doctor would give you a prescription along the lines of

Benzene 50ml - To be taken orally on an empty stomach
Methanol 100ml - To be taken orally on an empty stomach

And maybe if he's feeling particularly murderous
Hydrofluoric Acid (10M) - To be taken orally on an empty stomach

Or he might just y'know, act professionally like any normal human being.

I laughed. How a simple question about his religion has turned every Catholic doctor into a mudering bigot is a mystery to me, it has to be time to give up on this guy.

partyatmygaff

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

Harry Potter wasn't in Toy Story

Harry, try using the silencio charm on the OP. It'd do us all some good. :pac:

HarryPotter41

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Harry, try using the silencio charm on the OP. It'd do us all some good. :pac:

I laughed again, starting to think you're okay. Don't know if my powers are strong enough for him, and Dumbledore is dead. We're screwed.

gurramok

partyatmygaff wrote: »

You have NO understanding whatsoever of medicine. Doctors follow their own code of ethics. No doctor will treat someone against their own beliefs, that's hypocrisy. They are not machines trained to diagnose and heal without any thought, emotion or morality. Try and understand that and you'll understand what everyone's been trying to tell you for the past few days.

I don't think your getting it.

"you believe a patient has no rights when it comes to been denied treatment based on the personal beliefs of religious doctors."
The CO part of the ethics is played here. Somehow I think your not really studying to be a medical student as your knowledge is quite poor.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I hate to do this but
*facepalm*

Actually, why don't you go to a Catholic doctor right now? Tell him you've got some stomach pains. Knowing how those evil discriminating Catholic doctors think they'll probably boot you out yelling "GET OUTTA HERE YA FILTHY PAGAN" but you might get lucky and get someone who'll actually admit you. If you're exceptionally lucky and one does, i'd imagine that evil Catholic doctor would give you a prescription along the lines of

Benzene 50ml - To be taken orally on an empty stomach
Methanol 100ml - To be taken orally on an empty stomach

And maybe if he's feeling particularly murderous
Hydrofluoric Acid (10M) - To be taken orally on an empty stomach

Or he might just y'know, act professionally like any normal human being.

Why is the doctor sectarian then? I've given concrete proof of where patients fell victim to religious doctors as in Galway and Kerry. Where is your proof?!

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

Harry Potter wasn't in Toy Story

So? Its a phrase to describe quite accurately your defeated points.

Seaneh

gurramok wrote: »

No, why did the doctor refuse then? Perhaps the patient didn't go to mass that often:rolleyes:

Why should a Catholic public doctor refuse treatment to a non-Catholic based on religious grounds? (it has happened as per online articles)

He never said his doctor denied him anti-biotics on religious grounds. You, in your idiocy, are reaching for something that isn't there, as usual.

There are quite a few doctors who will not prescribe anti-biotics unless they are absolutely needed and it has NOTHING to do with religion. My Atheist GP will only prescribe them to be after a blood/Urine/Swab test, are you suggesting that he is doing this because I am Christian? Because I know exactly why he won't prescribe them unless needed, do you?

HarryPotter41

Seaneh wrote: »

He never said his doctor denied him anti-biotics on religious grounds. You, in your idiocy, are reaching for something that isn't there, as usual.

There are quite a few doctors who will not prescribe anti-biotics unless they are absolutely needed and it has NOTHING to do with religion. My Atheist GP will only prescribe them to be after a blood/Urine/Swab test, are you suggesting that he is doing this because I am Christian? Because I know exactly why he won't prescribe them unless needed, do you?

A voice of sanity. Doubt he does, and I am now in full agreement with my doctor on his non prescribing of them. Same reason as yours I would guess. Luckily you have no problem going to an atheist doctor.

Seaneh

gurramok wrote: »

Oh you talking on a personal level. What about me going to your doctor then?

Will there be treatments not available to me as a non-Catholic based on religious grounds because I carry out evil things like living in sin?

Are you actually saying that you believe that Doctors in Ireland would refuse people a treatment because they (the patient) weren't catholic that they (the doctor) would otherwise prescribe to a catholic patient? If so, I'd love to see proof of it.

HarryPotter41

gurramok wrote: »

I don't think your getting it.

"you believe a patient has no rights when it comes to been denied treatment based on the personal beliefs of religious doctors."
The CO part of the ethics is played here. Somehow I think your not really studying to be a medical student as your knowledge is quite poor.




Why is the doctor sectarian then? I've given concrete proof of where patients fell victim to religious doctors as in Galway and Kerry. Where is your proof?!



So? Its a phrase to describe quite accurately your defeated points.

Hahahahaha, Good Lord, you are actually quite funny in a worrying way.

Seaneh

gurramok wrote: »

Well, the Galway doctor refused treatment because the couple had sex before marriage :eek:

You are stretching that doubt to infinity and beyond Mr Potter.

No he didn't. Where did it say that? He refused to preform a procedure because he felt that only married people should raise children, also, that case was dismissed, not only did he never formally reject the couples request but because he was never actually their doctor he wasn't able to refer them to a doctor that would do as they wished. You see when a doctor uses contentious objection on any grounds they are obliged to refer you to another doctor in the same field.

Marcus.Aurelius

Seaneh wrote: »

No he didn't. Where did it say that? He refused to preform a procedure because he felt that only married people should raise children, also, that case was dismissed, not only did he never formally reject the couples request but because he was never actually their doctor he wasn't able to refer them to a doctor that would do as they wished. You see when a doctor uses contentious objection on any grounds they are obliged to refer you to another doctor in the same field.

Don't you think in this day and age it is disagreeable for a doctor to refuse to prescribe any drug for treatment in response to a morality that has nothing to do with medical science?

partyatmygaff

gurramok wrote: »

I don't think your getting it.

I'm the one not getting it... Well, If it helps you sleep at night

"you believe a patient has no rights when it comes to been(sic) denied treatment based on the personal beliefs of religious doctors."
The CO part of the ethics is played here. Somehow I think your not really studying to be a medical student as your knowledge is quite poor.

The CO part of "the ethics" (As you put it in your 'quite excellent' English). Hmm, oddly enough i've never heard of the CO part of ethics (If it even exists). You see that's why I am aiming to study Medicine. If I knew medicine inside and out why would I aim to study it? Needless to say however, we can rest assured that my knowledge of Medical ethics is a bit more substantial than yours.

Why is the doctor sectarian then? I've given concrete proof of where patients fell victim to religious doctors as in Galway and Kerry. Where is your proof?!

I really am lost for words. Do you use any logic when you type posts or do you simply type the first aggravatingly idiotic thing that pops in to your head?

The doctor is not sectarian, none of his patients are "victims". He is following his own code of ethics as he has every right to as a doctor. I have no need for proof. Anyone who has even the slightest interest in Medicine knows that.

So? Its a phrase to describe quite accurately your defeated points.

His points were defeated? Not by you surely?

MagicSean

Caesar Augustus wrote: »

Don't you think in this day and age it is disagreeable for a doctor to refuse to prescribe any drug for treatment in response to a morality that has nothing to do with medical science?

Medical science is not infallible.

Seaneh

Caesar Augustus wrote: »

Don't you think in this day and age it is disagreeable for a doctor to refuse to prescribe any drug for treatment in response to a morality that has nothing to do with medical science?

So long as he is willing to refer the patient to another doctor in the field required, yes, he should have to right to refuse on any grounds he wishes be they moral, religious, ethical or his personal medical opinion. Are you saying that conscientious objection is a bad thing and should not be allowed? I'd find that pretty odd to be honest.

Marcus.Aurelius

k_mac wrote: »

Medical science is not infallible.

Sorry, but where does medical science make a moral judgement?

gurramok

Seanah wrote:

Are you actually saying that you believe that Doctors in Ireland would refuse people a treatment because they (the patient) weren't catholic that they (the doctor) would otherwise prescribe to a catholic patient? If so, I'd love to see proof of it.

Not sure if I respond to a poster who constantly shouts abuse at anyone who is non-religious and doesn't care if I wake up in the mornings.:mad:

Seanah wrote:

Seriously, give up, you do nothing but make yourself seem like a paranoid idiot.
Time to give up the goat and accept that you are either (a) a troll or (b) an idiot.
The only person I said was an idiot was the OP

shut the **** up.

If you can't see the point of what I said I worry about you.
Seriously, do an AQ test.

Also, you are being a total hypocrite here.

I don't care either way.

If you behave, i'll answer you. You should thank me that I have not reported you yet, i'm very tolerant.

HarryPotter43 wrote:

Hahahahaha, Good Lord, you are actually quite funny in a worrying way.

What so funny? There was a poster with a so called great knowledge of ethics who kept quoting Santa, that I found amusing.

And whats worrying you? That I stick up for the non-Catholics? :eek:

partyatmygaff

Caesar Augustus wrote: »

Don't you think in this day and age it is disagreeable for a doctor to refuse to prescribe any drug for treatment in response to a morality that has nothing to do with medical science?

Medical science is one thing and Medicine is another.

That is why in some schools Medicine graduates are awarded with two separate degrees. A Bachelor of Medicinal Sciences and a Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery.

Medicinal sciences involve anatomy, disease diagnosis, biochemistry and all the other physical aspects of medicine. That alone would make for a very poor Doctor.

Medicine on the other hand deals with Clinical application of the Medicinal sciences. You need to learn how to deal with patients, how to deal with moral and ethical dilemmas among many other things.

Marcus.Aurelius

Seaneh wrote: »

So long as he is willing to refer the patient to another doctor in the field required, yes, he should have to right to refuse on any grounds he wishes be they moral, religious, ethical or his personal medical opinion. Are you saying that conscientious objection is a bad thing and should not be allowed? I'd find that pretty odd to be honest.

Medical ethics and religious morality are (and should be legally) mutually exclusive fields.

Should a Fundamentalist Muslim Garda (for the purposes of argument) refer a rape victim to another Garda because he can't morally deal with her without feeling the need to stone her to death for adultery according to his own religiously-inspired morality?

Secular ethics have nothing, repeat nothing to do with religious morality.

MagicSean

Caesar Augustus wrote: »

Sorry, but where does medical science make a moral judgement?

When it allows something to be done which should not be done ethically.

Marcus.Aurelius

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Medical science is one thing and Medicine is another.

If you wish me to use the term medicine to include all aspects I am happy to use that in future. Please see my last post.

Marcus.Aurelius

k_mac wrote: »

When it allows something to be done which should not be done ethically.

Medical ethics do not allow physicians to indulge in metaphysical delusions, for all our sakes.

partyatmygaff

gurramok wrote: »

Not sure if I respond to a poster who constantly shouts abuse at anyone who is non-religious and doesn't care if I wake up in the mornings.:mad:

He doesn't shout abuse at non-religious. He shouts abuse at you for your posts. That's not what I do but I can kinda sympathise with him. Your posts would aggravate anyone.

If you behave, i'll answer you. You should thank me that I have not reported you yet, i'm very tolerant.

Humour forum is that way --->

And whats worrying you? That I stick up for the non-Catholics? :eek:

You aren't "sticking up" for anyone. You aren't some misunderstood champion of non-Catholics either. All you are is someone who doesn't know what he's talking about who acts as if he does.