Doesn't that depend? I mean if it's a privately-held hospital don't they have the right to decide what the process is to having any type of procedure done there?

 

Of course we see that with our Catholic hospitals.

 

One day it won't be that way or they will be nearly out of business.

Figuring it out is the million dollar question.

 

I don't have all of the answers, I am saying religion is a big issue in this country that has worked its way into several areas it has no business and we are just getting to a point where there is going to be a lot of blow back.

 

Religious people think this is righteous, non-religious people find it appalling, condescending, unethical, and on and on.

 

So you're of the opinion that a person should be able to walk into a hospital ask for a medical procedure to be done, and boom, they do it without any type of guidance as to the possible risks, etc.?

 

And any time that information is provided it's due to religious undertones? That's a huge leap in logic IMO.

So you're of the opinion that a person should be able to walk into a hospital ask for a medical procedure to be done, and boom, they do it without any type of guidance as to the possible risks, etc.?

 

And any time that information is provided it's due to religious undertones? That's a huge leap in logic IMO.

 

Do you believe in an invisible man in the sky?

Of course we see that with our Catholic hospitals.

 

One day it won't be that way or they will be nearly out of business.

 

Don't agree at all. If a hospital decides they don't want to perform abortions or sex change operations (or any other type of procedures that may go against their beliefs), it's not going to break the bank or make them close their doors.

Don't agree at all. If a hospital decides they don't want to perform abortions or sex change operations (or any other type of procedures that may go against their beliefs), it's not going to break the bank or make them close their doors.

 

The lawyers/system will eventually break them. It may be 50 or 100 years from now but it will happen.

Do you believe in an invisible man in the sky?

 

Not sure what your asking, but I won't insult my beliefs by answering if it's what I think your saying.

I have zero problem if there is nothing more than physical, tangible, medical advice in that pre op stuff. But I think that the statement and angle of the group is extremely pointed and in the event that the material is only what I stated above, then this is a big waste of resources and time. If not, I say remove the religious slant and move on. So, this issue could be resolved swiftly, but I don't think that's the intent of the suit as much as it is to smear the thought of religion.

Not sure what your asking, but I won't insult my beliefs by answering if it's what I think your saying.

 

I am saying your question/statement was off topic just like mine was back to you.

I am saying your question/statement was off topic just like mine was back to you.

 

It wasn't off topic in the slightest. You don't believe mandates should be given before medical procedures. My question was in regards to that.

I have zero problem if there is nothing more than physical, tangible, medical advice in that pre op stuff. But I think that the statement and angle of the group is extremely pointed and in the event that the material is only what I stated above, then this is a big waste of resources and time. If not, I say remove the religious slant and move on. So, this issue could be resolved swiftly, but I don't think that's the intent of the suit as much as it is to smear the thought of religion.

 

Assuming you are correct, and you may well be, you have to ask yourself why to some people/groups go to such lengths to smear the thought of religion? I don't mean the obvious hate stuff, I mean really take a look at the other sides point of view on religion. It is the whole point I am making, religion has overstepped its bounds and the pendulum is going to swing the other way.

It wasn't off topic in the slightest. You don't believe mandates should be given before medical procedures. My question was in regards to that.

 

Some of the powers that be make it difficult on women because of their own personal and/or religious beliefs, that is the issue.

Shouldn't it be mandated that a trial happen, as guaranteed in the 14th amendment, in order to deprive the innocent life that lives within?

 

Or will the lawyers/system eventually break that process as well?

Assuming you are correct, and you may well be, you have to ask yourself why to some people/groups go to such lengths to smear the thought of religion? I don't mean the obvious hate stuff, I mean really take a look at the other sides point of view on religion. It is the whole point I am making, religion has overstepped its bounds and the pendulum is going to swing the other way.

Without seeing the material that these women are given, we will never know. If the material gives them options that include adoption and other alternatives to abortion with no direct religious slant, then that is paranoia defined.

Some of the powers that be make it difficult on women because of their own personal and/or religious beliefs, that is the issue.

 

I'd love to see what evidence you have to back that up.

 

Again, if these mandates exist for every procedure, how can we be saying that they exist to make an abortion more difficult for women? I'm not following the logic. It'd be different if doctors weren't required to provide information before knee surgeries, or back surgeries, etc., but were mandated to for abortions. That's not the case though.

Shouldn't it be mandated that a trial happen, as guaranteed in the 14th amendment, in order to deprive the innocent life that lives within?

 

Or will the lawyers/system eventually break that process as well?

 

They don't count.