(no subject)

[neadods]

The Obama Administration is wasting no time in repealing the skewed 'moral conscience' act. This rule, passed at the nth hour of the previous Administration, allowed anyone in medicine the right to refuse to do anything that conflicted with their conscience without reprisal. The head of Health and Human services, in the face of already existing laws that protect doctors from not having to perform acts against their beliefs, felt that this was needed - and that if it passed and women were denied birth control (which he equates with abortion), that was "an important statement." (That web page now appears to be blank.)

I've had a few statements of my own regarding living in a country where people are already denying women their legal rights in the name of illegally enforcing said women to have to live within the dictates of beliefs they do not share.

Comments

[teenygozer.livejournal.com]

I wonder what a McCain administration would have done with this!

I also wonder what ever happened to the nurse/med tech who kept "accidentally" yanking out women's IUDs, then telling them it was a great opportunity for them to use some other form of contraception, as she felt IUDs caused spontaneous abortion? I seem to remember she was charged with assault, but that doesn't meant the charge stuck. I've tried googling some keywords but haven't found a follow-up on this story yet.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

I wonder what a McCain administration would have done with this!

Celebrated it as a return to morality, probably. Nothing like a complete lack of medical rights to enforce a return to abstinence.

I don't know what happened with the other story. If I see it appear again, I'll tell the results.

[stoplookingup.livejournal.com]

I really want to know why what I consider to be eminently sane, moderate policies that uphold the spirit and letter of the constitution -- like assuring an individual's right to the medical treatment she needs -- is in any way controversial? And why one extremist religious group has any say at all in government policy? In other words -- how the fuck did George Bush ever get to be president in the first place?

[neadods.livejournal.com]

And why one extremist religious group has any say at all in government policy?

Right around the point that they successfully equated their beliefs with "real citizenship." It's not just Bush. It goes back to Schlafly and Falwell and Roberts, etc.

There's a long and fascinating essay by Brad Hicks called "Christians in the Hands of an Angry God" that talks about the political co-oping of religion (because he is speaking as a Christian, he is viewing it by that lens rather than the co-opting of politics by religion.) It goes all the way back to Kennedy and is fascinating reading - although you'd have to google it, because I can't think of a link off the top of my head.

[stoplookingup.livejournal.com]

Google reveals that the essay is on his LJ here. And in his bio, he describes himself as Hellenic Reconstructionist Pagan, follower of Dionysus. 6'0" 290 pounds, bald with a graying red goatee; the horns only show occasionally. Polyamorous, leather-friendly, currently single. So...former Christian?

ETA: Have now read it. Well, that answers THAT question.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

Obviously, it's been a while since I read the essay! But I do remember it as dealing with the issue from the standpoint of religion, and it specifically saying that by the tenants of Christianity, certain things claimed are literally damnable.