Transgender health protections rolled back in the States

[VVerkia]

Religious health care institutions and workers shouldn’t be forced to go against their beliefs on transition surgeries or therapies. However, as NPR reports this change seems to cover virtually every aspect of healthcare. Not only would religious hospitals or secular hospitals never deny lifesaving healthcare to LGBT people, the law shouldn’t allow it either.

Why should your religion give you a pass on denying people equal protection under the law?

It is ironically "somehow equal". Based on religion, these workers don't do transition surgeries and therapies both to trans and cis ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Thedas Defiant]

People who want to let their bigoted beliefs color their treatment of patients shouldn't be in the healthcare profession TBH.

I agree, but it depends on what you mean by bigotry and treatments. A Catholic hospital shouldn’t be forced to provide transition surgeries, for example. In this case it wouldn’t be bigotry for a clearly-known Catholic hospital to provide Catholic healthcare. People that are personally opposed to abortion also shouldn’t be forced to assist in abortions. Thankfully this one is near-universally recognized in global healthcare.

What is 'Catholic healthcare'? You can be Catholic and pro-LGBT+ so I'm not sure how this could be a wide label.

[Hakons]

Religious health care institutions and workers shouldn’t be forced to go against their beliefs on transition surgeries or therapies. However, as NPR reports this change seems to cover virtually every aspect of healthcare. Not only would religious hospitals or secular hospitals never deny lifesaving healthcare to LGBT people, the law shouldn’t allow it either.

Why should your religion give you a pass on denying people equal protection under the law?

Equal protection under the law doesn’t include forcing religious people to denounce their religion in practice. Once again, think of abortion law, where medical professionals are allowed the world over to abstain from being involved. A religious hospital will provide every available medicine and procedure to everyone that needs it. Religious hospitals simply don’t see transition surgeries or therapies as a part of healthcare.

I think you’re kind of exemplifying why the Trump admin felt it needed to make this measure. You seem to want to force religious hospitals and healthcare workers to take part in surgeries or therapies they find contrary to reason and faith.

[Hakons]

I agree, but it depends on what you mean by bigotry and treatments. A Catholic hospital shouldn’t be forced to provide transition surgeries, for example. In this case it wouldn’t be bigotry for a clearly-known Catholic hospital to provide Catholic healthcare. People that are personally opposed to abortion also shouldn’t be forced to assist in abortions. Thankfully this one is near-universally recognized in global healthcare.

What is 'Catholic healthcare'? You can be Catholic and pro-LGBT+ so I'm not sure how this could be a wide label.

Catholic healthcare is the healthcare provided by Catholics and recognized as such by their respective diocese. For example, Catholic owned hospitals, nursing homes run by nuns, charity clinics, ect...

[Grenartia]

And why should they have to do that? When you become a doctor, you take an oath to treat the sick and heal the injured. That means all the sick and all the injured, not just the ones you don't think are icky.

Because we're not your servants.

That's cute.

I'm studying to be a doctor myself.

Call me when they teach you the meaning of the Hippocratic Oath.

I can refuse to treat whoever I want.

Then what's the fucking point of being a doctor?

Why should I be forced to treat you?

Because treating people is a doctor's fucking job.

Oaths don't mean anything to me.

Then don't be a doctor. Simple. As.

Its a national tragedy that anyone is discriminated against.

I hate to break it to you, but it will always happen.

It shouldn't, and doesn't have to.

This isn't lalaland.

If "Lalaland" is free of discrimination, maybe we should strive to be more like it.

You conjour up as many imaginary protections as you want. It won't change anything.

See you in court!

Let me know what your associated hospital is when you graduate so I can avoid it thx

Unless you find yourself in Florida needing neurosurgery I doubt that'll be a problem.

Don't throw a temper tantrum when someone finds these posts and uses them to prove you're unfit to hold a medical license.

[Galloism]

Nevertheless, 1 million+ men are raped by women every year in a manner that can cause pregnancy. There is almost certainly a nonnegligible number of men paying child support as a result of being raped.

1/100? Not sure - it could be more or less than that number. But it's a lot.

It is a negligible amount. Anything that happens less than 1% of the time isn't worth worrying about to me.

Cool, literally every cause of death and every accident with serious injury of every kind is not worth worrying about, given each are less than 1%.

[Centai Mal]

Honestly, if you’re a medical professional, and you think that trans people don’t deserve healthcare - not transition-related care, mind you, but cancer treatment or checkups - you should not be a medical professional.

You didn’t sign up to only help the people you agree with, you signed up to help people.

[Liriena]

You know, Hakons makes an interesting point.

And based on that point, I think we should consider banning all religious hospitals.

Why are we letting religious groups set up private medical institutions so they can then pick and choose what healthcare they provide based on their own individual doctrine? If you ask me, any religious group that tries to create an institution that provides an essential service, only to then condition how they provide that essential service on the basis of superstition and non-medical dogma, has its priorities all wrong on both the medical and religious side.

Plus, no private healthcare means specific groups can't de facto shape society around their interests by virtue of having the resources to provide essential services when and where the secular state doesn't.

[Centai Mal]

You know, Hakons makes an interesting point.

And based on that point, I think we should consider banning all religious hospitals.

Why are we letting religious groups set up private medical institutions so they can then pick and choose what healthcare they provide based on their own individual doctrine? If you ask me, any religious group that tries to create an institution that provides an essential service, only to then condition how they provide that essential service on the basis of superstition and non-medical dogma, has its priorities all wrong on both the medical and religious side.

Plus, no private healthcare means specific groups can't de facto shape society around their interests by virtue of having the resources to provide essential services when and where the secular state doesn't.

I'm ok with medical institutions being run by religious groups, BUT ONLY if they're held to the same standards as non-religious hospitals. You do not get to force your religion on anyone else, and I say that as a Catholic

[Liriena]

You know, Hakons makes an interesting point.

And based on that point, I think we should consider banning all religious hospitals.

Why are we letting religious groups set up private medical institutions so they can then pick and choose what healthcare they provide based on their own individual doctrine? If you ask me, any religious group that tries to create an institution that provides an essential service, only to then condition how they provide that essential service on the basis of superstition and non-medical dogma, has its priorities all wrong on both the medical and religious side.

Plus, no private healthcare means specific groups can't de facto shape society around their interests by virtue of having the resources to provide essential services when and where the secular state doesn't.

I'm ok with medical institutions being run by religious groups, BUT ONLY if they're held to the same standards as non-religious hospitals. You do not get to force your religion on anyone else, and I say that as a Catholic

I'm kind of a hardcore commie when it comes to services like healthcare and education, tbh.

[Crockerland]

You know, Hakons makes an interesting point.

And based on that point, I think we should consider banning all religious hospitals.

Why are we letting religious groups set up private medical institutions so they can then pick and choose what healthcare they provide based on their own individual doctrine? If you ask me, any religious group that tries to create an institution that provides an essential service, only to then condition how they provide that essential service on the basis of superstition and non-medical dogma, has its priorities all wrong on both the medical and religious side.

Is education an essential service?

[Liriena]

You know, Hakons makes an interesting point.

And based on that point, I think we should consider banning all religious hospitals.

Why are we letting religious groups set up private medical institutions so they can then pick and choose what healthcare they provide based on their own individual doctrine? If you ask me, any religious group that tries to create an institution that provides an essential service, only to then condition how they provide that essential service on the basis of superstition and non-medical dogma, has its priorities all wrong on both the medical and religious side.

Is education an essential service?

It's a human right so yeah. It's why I support the Finnish model.

[Crockerland]

Why should your religion give you a pass on denying people equal protection under the law?

Equal protection under the law doesn’t include forcing religious people to denounce their religion in practice.

Yeah, it does. (Brown v. Dade Christian School, Runyon v. McCrary)

[Nobel Hobos 2]

You know, Hakons makes an interesting point.

And based on that point, I think we should consider banning all religious hospitals.

Why are we letting religious groups set up private medical institutions so they can then pick and choose what healthcare they provide based on their own individual doctrine? If you ask me, any religious group that tries to create an institution that provides an essential service, only to then condition how they provide that essential service on the basis of superstition and non-medical dogma, has its priorities all wrong on both the medical and religious side.

Is education an essential service?

My answer: K-12 education is essential, adult education not.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I think you’re kind of exemplifying why the Trump admin felt it needed to make this measure. You seem to want to force religious hospitals and healthcare workers to take part in surgeries or therapies they find contrary to reason and faith.

"Reason and faith" actually sounds rather heretical. Are you saying hospitals refusing to perform a procedure can't just cite "faith" ... they also have to give a good medical reason?

[Kowani]

Is education an essential service?

My answer: K-12 education is essential, adult education not.

This is the 21st century.
Adult education is just as essential.

[USS Monitor]

especially on the fourth anniversary of the Pulse shooting

I wonder if the timing is intentional trolling.

It's a dick move either way.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

My answer: K-12 education is essential, adult education not.

This is the 21st century.
Adult education is just as essential.

OK, but I'm thinking on a covid-19 time scale. Maybe I misinterpreted "essential" that way.
Adults could take a year off, and if they self-study they'll probably do better in their course than if they'd gone right through.

EDIT: So this is about colleges and universities refusing to serve on religious grounds?
Still I think it's MUCH more important in K-12 than in tertiary education. Adults have more choice.

[Luziyca]

especially on the fourth anniversary of the Pulse shooting

I wonder if the timing is intentional trolling.

It's a dick move either way.

I would honestly be surprised if it wasn't.

He did, after all, previously plan the Tulsa rally to take place on Juneteenth before moving it to June 20th because of the backlash the original date caused.

[Centai Mal]

I would just like to point out that today SCOTUS ruled that job discrimination against LGBTQ people is illegal based on Title VII, which can be used to argue against doctors not treating trans people.

In other words, suck on justice, transphobes

[The Lone Alliance]

I would just like to point out that today SCOTUS ruled that job discrimination against LGBTQ people is illegal based on Title VII, which can be used to argue against doctors not treating trans people.

So in other words it's a new ruling that's designed to be released at the same time the SCOTUS makes it toothless?

I wouldn't be surprised if it was done on purpose then to appease low information voters.

[Centai Mal]

I would just like to point out that today SCOTUS ruled that job discrimination against LGBTQ people is illegal based on Title VII, which can be used to argue against doctors not treating trans people.

So in other words it's a new ruling that's designed to be released at the same time the SCOTUS makes it toothless?

I wouldn't be surprised if it was done on purpose then to appease low information voters.

Honestly no one was totally sure how SCOTUS would vote on this, and I personally think the timing was to coincide with the Pulse shooting anniversary, but they still need to argue the legality on court, this just provides an avenue to do so

[The Republic of Fore]

Oh and by the way? This thing that you're just writing off as freedom in action? Yeah, it's legitimately killed people.

And we have what proof that person isn't lying? Oh someone said it on twitter, so it must be true! And even if they aren't, that's one example. Whoopity- do.

[The Republic of Fore]

What part of "don't base your argument off extremely rare circumstances" can you not understand? Trans people aren't demonized. Doing anything but kissing their ass can destroy someone's career.

Please direct me to this magical planet you hail from where trans people aren't degraded, discriminated against, more likely to experience sexual abuse, have higher than average suicide rates, get murdered and see their killers walk free on flimsy defenses, etc.
I could go on but I already have major depression, I don't need to make it worse.

Also if you think recognizing trans people as valid and deserving of medical care constitutes kissing their ass, you clearly lack the basic ethics needed for the medical profession.

Please direct me to this magical planet you hail from where screaming hate mobs don't try to verbally lynch anyone who says something they find remotely offensive about trans people. And I think being forced to baby their feelings counts as kissing their ass.

[The Republic of Fore]

Because we're not your servants.

That's cute.

I'm studying to be a doctor myself.

Call me when they teach you the meaning of the Hippocratic Oath.

I can refuse to treat whoever I want.

Then what's the fucking point of being a doctor?

Why should I be forced to treat you?

Because treating people is a doctor's fucking job.

Oaths don't mean anything to me.

Then don't be a doctor. Simple. As.

I hate to break it to you, but it will always happen.

It shouldn't, and doesn't have to.

This isn't lalaland.

If "Lalaland" is free of discrimination, maybe we should strive to be more like it.

You conjour up as many imaginary protections as you want. It won't change anything.

See you in court!

Unless you find yourself in Florida needing neurosurgery I doubt that'll be a problem.

Don't throw a temper tantrum when someone finds these posts and uses them to prove you're unfit to hold a medical license.

1. It's true.
2. It amazes me how many people outside the medical field love to whine about the oath when they're demanding something. I hate to break it to you, but doctors refuse to treat patients all the time. Repeating "b-but the oath!" Won't change that.
3. Treating the people I do want to. And making money.
4. And there's plenty of other doctors that can treat them. They don't need this exact one.
5. Or just don't don't whine incessantly "but the oath but the oath!"
6. It will, keep living your imaginary fantasy land if you want, but you can't force people to not have opinions you don't like.
7. No, we shouldn't. We should stop being over sensitive babies and learn to deal with it.
8. Have fun getting counter sued into bankruptcy for wasting my time!
9. Yeah I doubt that'll happen.