Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
They do Luis. Its called EMTALA. It means that anyone who comes to the ER must be stabilized and after they are stable, if they have no insurance or for any other reason the hospital chooses, they can be transferred to a charity hospital. However, the first hospital does have the right to not treat, other than to stabilize the patient.
First of all, the word partner is now used by lots of folks because it is more ubiquitous and does not offend anyone, whether gay or straight. Second, a doctor is bound by his or her oath. That can include treating anyone with AIDS or HIV or any other disease. A doctor has to specialize to perform surgeries. A cardiovascular surgeon would not do a hip transplant, for example. A nurse can refuse to take care of a patient on moral grounds, for example, a woman having an abortion BUT he or she can ONLY do that if there are other nurses available to care for that patient. If there is no one else, they must do it owing to their own oaths. There is no exception and refusal will result in losing one's license. As an example, I had to ask someone else to take care of a child in the PACU who had been severely sodomized and had to have reconstructive surgery. As a survivor of rape, I could not emotionally care for her but if there was no other choice, I would have had to. And I would have. A doctor has as much obligation as I do and should not refuse a patient based on their disease. Its against the oaths. Period.
You don't think that socialism is not already in practice here in the US? It is, I assure you. Examples abound but just one for one. A couple in Ohio has land in a rural area. Land they OWN. Yet, because they chose to do with that land what they wanted, they are being fined $1000 for not mowing their lawn. How is this not Big Brother dictating what we can and cannot do? How is having laws based on your faith not dictating how we can live? It was not that long ago that interracial couples could not marry. It was not that long ago the abortion was illegal based on your Bible. And even now, if I chose to put up a Buddhist symbol on my own home, my HOA would tell me to remove it due to the predominance of Christians on my road, keeping in mind I live in the country on a dead end road in the woods. And keeping in mind that this is my home, my land and my barn. This, because people of your ilk want their faith to run the lives of others. What is this, if not socialism?
Question all you like but this propensity to have only the one faith represented has long been a part of your and my culture. Christianity has dictated this country for far too long. I mean no disrespect but denying that will not change that it is true. I don't know where you live but I have traveled this country extensively, having lived in almost every state there is and trust me when I say the preponderance of churches ...Christian churches...sometimes left me speechless. And if you don;t think they have a direct effect on the people of that community, you are only fooling yourself. Laws are still based on Christian ideology. There is no doubt of that. Presidential candidates run their campaigns on religious ideals. This one or that one goes to this or that church and this country will NOT elect someone who does not espouse Christianity. Look at the hoopla over Obama and right wing pundits screaming that he is Muslim when that is a boldfaced lie. I don't like HOA either and technically, we don't have one here on my road. However, that doesn't change the fact that my neighbors will and do tell others how their lawns will be manicured or about how we set out our trash. And btw...there is NO HOA for that couple in Ohio. Its a township only and they are the ones telling this couple how they can live their lives.
Selling all of your possessions and giving the money to the poor is a pretty good indication Jesus was what we call a socialist. Of course the term wasn't around then, but it's the same practice.
So the poor receiving funds for food, being able to get a higher education, receive health care, and being in a system that helps them obtain upward mobility doesn't work? What about police and fire fighters? Are the roads, libraries, and schools all failures?
I don't deny that Christianity is the dominant faith in the US and that quite naturally, as a consequence, laws are made which conform to the Judeo-Christian ethic. The people who founded this country were mostly if not all Christian who came here to find religious freedom. For the most part, religious freedom is extended to all faiths. You may not know, but my particular brand of Christianity is that I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon). If you know anything about our history, you will know that there was an extermination order put out on us by the State of Missouri in 1838 which was not rescinded until 1976. So I do understand some of what you are saying. But most of your "outrage" is simply because Christianity is dominant (at least for now) without explaining exactly which tenets of Christianity you have issue with. What moral tenets of Christianity do you take issue with?
Actually, Woodrow Wilson was one of the last of the progressive presidents.
Many places in the EU are doing just fine. Germany, for instance, is doing great and German citizens do not pay for college tuition.
No, they don't.
The world the constitution was written in no longer exists; it's folly to try to keep to the "original intent" when many things have changed dramatically since. It's also folly to put such emphasis on the original intent of those who wrote "all men are created equal" and who also owned slaves and who felt politics was not a proper place for women.
If you think Obama is a communist, you obviously have no idea what communism is.
If you'd take the time to educate yourself, you will find that communism, which has the root word of community, promotes communal ownership. Of course there are the authoritarian types such as Stalinist communism, but many communist philosophies, including Marxism, are left-winged, and some of them, such as Marxism, have the ultimate goal of being stateless.
Where? When? Even Machiavelli wrote that Christians were fighting against each other.
The Founding Fathers and Framers were largely deists. Some of them were Christian, but many of them believed Jesus was nothing more than a teacher of morality - they denied there was anything divine about Jesus, they did not view him as the son of god, and they did not accept him as a savior.
There have been small groups of pacifist Quakers (and probably other groups) protesting for years about being forced to pay for war. I wonder if Ted Cruz would support their right to channel their tax money away from the Department of Defense.
