I was asked for my religion today..

optogirl

gurramok wrote: »

How is it good that a person who is supposed to do missionary work does not care if I wake up in the morning?

Perhaps, and you may find this hard to understand, him not caring either way is because it would have no effect on him one way or the other. Same as you wishing us to live as long as possible will in no way alter whether we do or not. Get over yourself.

Seaneh

gurramok wrote: »

Haha, you didn't care if I didn't wake up in the morning. Thats an uncaring attituide. Will you be telling the poor people about your uncaring attitude on your mission that?

I don't care whether or not I eat Chicken in the next few days, doesn't mean I wish to never eat chicken again. Your leaps of (il)logic are astounding. I am clearly going on a missions trip BECAUSE I care, why else would I travle around the world for a year living on $1.25 a day, risking malaria, parasites and worse, not being able to shower for up to 4 weeks at a time, eating rice and beans every day for a months at a time, giving up my life for a year? This isn't the sort of thing people do "for the craic".

gurramok wrote: »

Yes Gonzo. Its good to see you doing some missionary work. Will you be helping the poor here on your return?

You are Gonzo, silly boy, not me!
And to answer your question, I already do. My Church has just bought a food trailer which we will use to distribute food, blankets, sleeping bags and clothes to homeless people.

gurramok wrote: »

Abysmal judgement which I have proved conclusively.

You have proven nothing. You have spouted utter nonsense for 50 pages now. Time to give up.

gurramok wrote: »

All what if's and my explanation of those if's were proven to be correct by the new poster named Sparky.

They didn't even get to the 'what if' stage as the trials were halted based on religious grounds.

Even IF the board approved the trial, people still have to volunteer for it. And lets be honest. You're in hospital with a terminal illness. Doctor A and Doctor B are offering you treatments.

Doctor A: I can give you a treatment with a proven success rate and years of medical knowledge and experience in this treatment.

Doctor B: I have an unproven treatment that MAY be quicker/cheaper/easier. However, to use this treatment you have to stop all other treatments as we have to see how this treatment does by itself, because that's what a clinical trial is.



I can tell you, right now, most people would tell Doctor B to get lost.

optogirl

gurramok wrote: »

You need to read posts properly.

Go back to the article again. What the patients did violated Catholic teachings hence the trials were blocked. Where did I say it was to do with their religion?

are you fuc*king serious?

Seaneh

optogirl wrote: »

are you fuc*king serious?

I actually think he is, which is the scary part, because either he misread the thing or he's somehow managed to convince himself he is right...

XxMCRxBabyxX

gurramok wrote: »

You need to read posts properly.

Go back to the article again. What the patients did violated Catholic teachings hence the trials were blocked. Where did I say it was to do with their religion?

By answering optogirls questions that's exactly what you implied. Again read properly!

gurramok

optogirl wrote: »

are you fuc*king serious?

Seaneh wrote: »

I actually think he is, which is the scary part, because either he misread the thing or he's somehow managed to convince himself he is right...

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

By answering optogirls questions that's exactly what you implied. Again read properly!

Jesus, Mary and Joseph people, read the damn article.:mad:

ARTICLE wrote:

because females undergoing treatment were advised to take contraception or abstain from sex. The proposal to use the drug had already been approved by the ethics committee in Tallaght hospital but the sub committee of the Mater board argued that advising women to use contraception was against Catholic doctrine.

and I've been accused of not been able to read:rolleyes:

Seaneh

gurramok wrote: »

Jesus, Mary and Joseph people, read the damn article.:mad:



and I've been accused of not been able to read:rolleyes:

Because you clearly can't.

Also, for someone who doesn't believe in him, you use my saviors name quite a bit.

gurramok

Seaneh wrote: »

I don't care whether or not I eat Chicken in the next few days, doesn't mean I wish to never eat chicken again. Your leaps of (il)logic are astounding. I am clearly going on a missions trip BECAUSE I care, why else would I travle around the world for a year living on $1.25 a day, risking malaria, parasites and worse, not being able to shower for up to 4 weeks at a time, eating rice and beans every day for a months at a time, giving up my life for a year? This isn't the sort of thing people do "for the craic".

Where is the similarity in caring for your own personal gain and caring for humans?

Seaneh wrote: »

You are Gonzo, silly boy, not me!
And to answer your question, I already do. My Church has just bought a food trailer which we will use to distribute food, blankets, sleeping bags and clothes to homeless people.

Thats good to hear Gonzo if its true. I might just bump into you on the streets then. I just hope you don't discriminate on religious grounds when distributing the gear.

Seaneh wrote: »

You have proven nothing. You have spouted utter nonsense for 50 pages now. Time to give up.

You cannot judge the Catholic Church objectively, you are biased.

Seaneh wrote: »

Even IF the board approved the trial, people still have to volunteer for it. And lets be honest. You're in hospital with a terminal illness. Doctor A and Doctor B are offering you treatments.

Doctor A: I can give you a treatment with a proven success rate and years of medical knowledge and experience in this treatment.

Doctor B: I have an unproven treatment that MAY be quicker/cheaper/easier. However, to use this treatment you have to stop all other treatments as we have to see how this treatment does by itself, because that's what a clinical trial is.

I can tell you, right now, most people would tell Doctor B to get lost.

And what if A was not available? You see, there lies the problem. B never had a hope of success due to religious interference.:mad:

XxMCRxBabyxX

gurramok wrote: »

Jesus, Mary and Joseph people, read the damn article.:mad:



and I've been accused of not been able to read:rolleyes:

I still see nothing that has anything to do with the religion of the patients

partyatmygaff

gurramok wrote: »

Jesus, Mary and Joseph people, read the damn article.:mad:

Oho, Catholic in denial? Suspicious stuff altogether.

and I've been accused of not been able to read:rolleyes:

Nah you weren't accused of anything. It was merely a statement of an objective fact.

optogirl

This is like groundhog day but I...can't....stop....replying....

gurramok

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I still see nothing that has anything to do with the religion of the patients

So? That is not the issue here in this case. Jesus girl, read the part of the article again.

because females undergoing treatment were advised to take contraception or abstain from sex. The proposal to use the drug had already been approved by the ethics committee in Tallaght hospital but the sub committee of the Mater board argued that advising women to use contraception was against Catholic doctrine.

What part do you not understand now?

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Oho, Catholic in denial? Suspicious stuff altogether.

Welcome back youngster

Its everyday slang. You'd know that already wouldn't you :rolleyes:

Seaneh

gurramok wrote: »

Where is the similarity in caring for your own personal gain and caring for humans?

So if there is no personal gain, why would I bother doing it unless I cared about helping other people? Explain that there Gonzo?

gurramok wrote: »

Thats good to hear Gonzo if its true. I might just bump into you on the streets then. I just hope you don't discriminate on religious grounds when distributing the gear.

Yes, because there is actually a secret underworld of homeless AGI members who we are aiming to support with out efforts, no filthy Catholics/Church of Ireland/Muslim/Hindu/Agnostic/Atheist's will be getting our sleeping bags.

Well done. Tool.

gurramok wrote: »

You cannot judge the Catholic Church objectively, you are biased.

I'm biased? The mind, it boggles.

gurramok wrote: »

And what if A was not available? You see, there lies the problem. B never had a hope of success due to religious interference.:mad:

But A is available and B will be tested elsewhere so your "argument" is flawed.


Also, it has NOTHING to do with the religion or lack thereof of the patients. The trail was stopped because of the Ethos of the hospital!

I honestly think you need help on several levels. If you want I could forward you details of where you can go and get an A.Q. Evaluation, Psychiatric Evaluations, English Reading Lessons and maybe the number of the hospital so if you really give a flying **** you can ring them and make a complaint.

partyatmygaff

gurramok wrote: »

Welcome back youngster

Stop winking at me ye auld freak. :pac:

Its everyday slang. You'd know that already wouldn't you :rolleyes:

Yeah I do actually. You'd want to take care of your eyes. You keep on rolling them every second and you might get a disconnected retina.

gurramok

Seaneh wrote: »

So if there is no personal gain, why would I bother doing it unless I cared about helping other people? Explain that there Gonzo?

Gonzo, you compared human caring to the the "craic". NOw, why don;t you show equal caring to me?

Seaneh wrote: »

Yes, because there is actually a secret underworld of homeless AGI members who we are aiming to support with out efforts, no filthy Catholics/Church of Ireland/Muslim/Hindu/Agnostic/Atheist's will be getting our sleeping bags.

Well done. Tool.

Getting abusive again?

You obviously do not see the comparison between religious interference in trials and no interference in your charity.

Seaneh wrote: »

I'm biased? The mind, it boggles.

Yes, i showed you how in your posts.

Seaneh wrote: »

But A is available and B will be tested elsewhere so your "argument" is flawed.


Also, it has NOTHING to do with the religion or lack thereof of the patients. The trail was stopped because of the Ethos of the hospital!

Yet another who hasn't a clue.

Article wrote:

because females undergoing treatment were advised to take contraception or abstain from sex. The proposal to use the drug had already been approved by the ethics committee in Tallaght hospital but the sub committee of the Mater board argued that advising women to use contraception was against Catholic doctrine.

Where does it say religious patients in that? Go on, show us.

optogirl

gurramok wrote: »

Gonzo, you compared human caring to the the "craic". NOw, why don;t you show equal caring to me?

What?

You obviously do not see the comparison between religious interference in trials and no interference in your charity.

What?

Seaneh

gurramok wrote: »

Gonzo, you compared human caring to the the "craic". NOw, why don;t you show equal caring to me?



Getting abusive again?

You obviously do not see the comparison between religious interference in trials and no interference in your charity.



Yes, i showed you how in your posts.




Yet another who hasn't a clue.



Where does it say religious patients in that? Go on, show us.

You were asked to give proof that patients in Irish hospitals were discriminated against because of their religion or lack thereof.
You started ****ing on about the trails in response saying that the trials were stopped because of the patients offending catholic values.


You obviously can't comprehend ANYTHING.


As for you other points, they are so retarded that I won't even bother addressing them further than this.

gurramok

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Stop winking at me ye auld freak. :pac:

Now now

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Yeah I do actually. You'd want to take care of your eyes. You keep on rolling them every second and you might get a disconnected retina.

If I was a woman and took contraceptives, would you deny me treatment for my eyes at your doctors clinic on religious grounds? (Kerry example)

optogirl

gurramok wrote: »

Now now



If I was a woman and took contraceptives, would you deny me treatment for my eyes at your doctors clinic on religious grounds? (Kerry example)

words random nonsense anything smiley face?

gurramok

optogirl wrote: »

What?


What?

optogirl wrote: »

words random nonsense anything smiley face?

Look, you are a poster of very few words. Have you anything to contribute?

optogirl

gurramok wrote: »

optogirl wrote: »

Look, you are a poster of very few words. Have you anything to contribute?

I do, I do but unfortunatley I seem to have to keep repeating myself against a barrage of nonsense.

gurramok

Seaneh wrote: »

You were asked to give proof that patients in Irish hospitals were discriminated against because of their religion or lack thereof.
You started ****ing on about the trails in response saying that the trials were stopped because of the patients offending catholic values.

Correct, about bleein time you see it.

I'm quoting official sources my friend. Where are your sources?

Actually, none of the religious posters have offered a single source throughout this thread. All we got was misguided passion.

gurramok

optogirl wrote: »

I do, I do but unfortunatley I seem to have to keep repeating myself against a barrage of nonsense.

No nonsense from me here. Answer the question then.

If I was a woman and took contraceptives, would you deny me treatment for my eyes at your doctors clinic on religious grounds? (Kerry example)

Would you?

XxMCRxBabyxX

gurramok wrote: »

So? That is not the issue here in this case. Jesus girl, read the part of the article again.



What part do you not understand now?



Welcome back youngster

Its everyday slang. You'd know that already wouldn't you :rolleyes:

That's now what you were asked though was it? READ THE ****ING QUESTION

optogirl

gurramok wrote: »

No nonsense from me here. Answer the question then.



Would you?

Very hard to understand the question as it's so badly phrased. First I have to pretend that you are a woman, I am a doctor, I am religious and am anti-contraception. None of which is true. How could I possibly know what I would do in an alternate universe?

partyatmygaff

gurramok wrote: »

Now now



I was a woman and took contraceptives,

/slowly backs away

Seaneh

gurramok wrote: »

Correct, about bleein time you see it.

I'm quoting official sources my friend. Where are your sources?

Actually, none of the religious posters have offered a single source throughout this thread. All we got was misguided passion.

The trial being stopped had NOTHING to do with the patients religion or lack thereof.


YOU ARE MAKING STUFF UP.

drkpower

gurramok wrote: »

If I was a woman and took contraceptives, would you deny me treatment for my eyes at your doctors clinic on religious grounds? (Kerry example)

Wow; another 20 pages in the last 18 hours.....:D

Still talking about issues such as conscientious objection, I see. Did you ever find the doctor's code of ethics that underpins these issues? It really is the starting ground for anyone who wants to be taken seriously on these issues.

No......?

Seaneh

gurramok wrote: »

No nonsense from me here. Answer the question then.



Would you?

Nobody was denied anything because they were on contraceptives.
Where does it say they were?!?!?!

YOU ARE MAKING STUFF UP.

gurramok

optogirl wrote: »

Very hard to understand the question as it's so badly phrased. First I have to pretend that you are a woman, I am a doctor, I am religious and am anti-contraception. None of which is true. How could I possibly know what I would do in an alternate universe?

Well, if you were, what would you do?

Seaneh wrote: »

The trial being stopped had NOTHING to do with the patients religion or lack thereof.

Eh, duh!!

Where did I say that? Quote it. Of course, evidence is your very weak point.

Seaneh wrote: »

Nobody was denied anything because they were on contraceptives.
Where does it say they were?!?!?!

YOU ARE MAKING STUFF UP.

The Kerry article. Are you actually following the thread at all? Keep up fella.