end of the road wrote: » i personally don't believe the refusal to perform an abortion on demand, or proscribe the medication for abortion on demand, will impact on one's mental health in most cases. i
Bannasidhe wrote: » It is and it isn't a valid comparison. The mechanic's refusal is unlikely to seriously seriously impact on your mental health - as a broken indicator isn't any where close to being the same as a crises pregnancy. But - refusal of service is still refusal of service and no-one should have to pay for something they didn't get - consultation me hole. I get that you are putting a doctor's right to act according to their conscience above a woman's right to body autonomy but seriously, arguing that they have a right to charge the woman for the privilege is too much. I don't have a problem with a doctor refusing as long as they are up-front about it so no woman has to waste her time with some pseudo consultation and they don't seek to profit.
Bannasidhe wrote: » Ummm... as far as I know manslaughter is when a person didn't mean to kill another person while murder requires intent to kill.... Explain how you don't think abortion isn't murder?
end of the road wrote: » i'd imagine it's the same reason why manslaughter isn't murder even though it is killing.
end of the road wrote: » no, but again it's not a valid comparison
lazygal wrote: » Exactly why isn't abortion murder if it is killing? Is it in a distinct category of killing for some reason?
King Mob wrote: » Drat... by ignoring all my points, they magically went away. However, you are still putting GPs rights on a pedestal, while you don't seem to care that much about other people's rights, especially women's. You think that gps you argee with deserve extra protection. But when it comes to women seeking abortions, they just have to put up with being protested at, insulted and harassed. Tough **** to them. But it's a moot point, as you don't believe that abortion is killing, because you said that abortion isn't murder.
end of the road wrote: » of course they will check if she is okay. they want to help her by not helping her kill her unborn unnecessarily.
end of the road wrote: » i'm suggesting that a gp's wish/right not to partake in the killing of unborn should be protected. it's not about extra protection, it's about not expecting someone to have to kill when they do not wish to do so.
SusieBlue wrote: » I wouldn't hold out much hope for them checking if the woman is okay if they are refusing to provide a medical service just because they don't want to.
King Mob wrote: » How ****ing magnanimous of you. Well again, you go back to this claim that abortion is murder. So I will again bring up the fact you claimed it wasn't. You will ignore this point. It will make you look very dishonest. However, people will also disagree with GPs refusing an essential medical procedure. So they should also be prepared for people to disagree with their actions. Again, no reason why they should be given extra protection here. And again, you are pretending that harassment = death threats out of ignorance or dishonesty. But again, lets leave that aside. Doctors can do exactly the same, So no reason for extra protection here. So why does being not anonymous force them to do so? It can't be that they'd be concerned by protesters, as you are arguing that they aren't that big a deal and should be expected. Are you saying that GPs are somehow more sensitive than women seeking abortions and need more protections? Or is it you just care more for one group than the other?
Bannasidhe wrote: » You are assuming a great deal in your efforts to make it ok for a Doctor to profit from someone who wants an abortion while claiming their conscience won't let them write a prescription. If you told the mechanic your indicators were blinking quickly and they said one of your bulbs is gone but refused to replace it would you pay them 60 quid?
end of the road wrote: » this is not a valid comparison as no actual consultation has taken place with the mechanic. with the gp however, they will likely be checking to insure the woman is okay and all else, which i think would constitute as some bit of a service.
end of the road wrote: » i have to an extent.
end of the road wrote: » however i do believe they know better then to be killing their unborn unnecessarily, and they know that killing their unborn may have consiquences within reason, such as people disagreeing with their actions.
end of the road wrote: » i have already said women going to abortion clinics who are harassed have the ability to call the police who will investigate their complaint, it is illegal to harass somebody. so they don't have to deal with being harassed if they are.
end of the road wrote: » a gp has a right to not be expected to partake in the taking of life, and should be protected from being forced to do so.
Bannasidhe wrote: » I take it then you would have no issue paying a mechanic who refused to work on your car as a matter of conscience (perhaps they are Jewish and it's nearly sundown on a Friday evening in Winter - they're religion forbids them to work on the Sabbath). The job won't take long but they just don't feel in all conscience they can do it. You didn't know the mechanic was Jewish or you would have gone else where, you ask the mechanic to recommend another garage but it's dark now and that would be work so they refuse. On your way out the Gentile at the front desk hands you a bill for the 'consultation'. Would you honestly reach for your wallet?
end of the road wrote: » i'd imagine a gp is unlikely to take a fee in that situation, all though if they do, i'd imagine it will be because they have provided a very basic consultation.
King Mob wrote: » Again, that's not what you were arguing previously. Leaving that, your lie, and your confusing, contradictory statement about abortion suddenly being murder now.... (cause you're bravely ignoring those issues again.) Why, if it's as easy as reporting it to the guards, should GPs have the right to be anonymous? Why do you feel that women going to abortion clinics just have to deal with getting insulted, shouted at and harassed? But then also think that GPs who refuse a service should be protected? What's the difference there? Do you similarly have no sympathy for those women cause they are taking part in the act of killing?
end of the road wrote: » harrassment is already illegal as it should be. if a woman attending a gp or clinic is harrassed and calls the gards, as it stands her complaint will be investigated.
King Mob wrote: » Bit of a double standard there. (Among an abject lie on your part.) Also, funny and telling that you're including the women who go to these places. They are ok to harass in your eyes. Also, why are you saying abortion is killing now? Previously you said it wasn't murder?
Bannasidhe wrote: » Do you think it's acceptable for a GP to take a fee when they refuse to perform the service their client wants? Particularly if the GP has not made their intention to refuse known prior to the consultation? Patient: " I'm pregnant and I just can't... I can't be... I can't cope... I was raped... and.. I would like... I need... to terminate this pregnancy, can you write me a prescription for abortion pills please" Dr: "I'm afraid I can't do that, it goes against my conscience" P : "... oh... um... can you tell me what Doctor will... maybe another Doctor close by...??" Dr: " No. I can't do that either. That's also against my conscience. You can pay the receptionist on your way out."
end of the road wrote: » i guess it may depend on the gp and what has actually been done in terms of consultation. perhapse attending the practice may still be enough to charge the fee.
end of the road wrote: » the difference is abortion workers are engaging in, or taking part in some way, in the act of killing. therefore i won't have a huge amount of sympathy for them, unless they are the victim of something serious such as assault or death threats or violent crime, of which the law will punish. if they are just being called names as is mostly what happens, then to me it's not really different to say, insulting clampers.
King Mob wrote: » Funny how they get that right. But when it comes to the women who go to abortion clinics and the people who work, you don't seem all that concerned with their rights to privacy... Again, you were quick to place the blame away from the people harassing women and abortion workers. So surely, the blame lies with these doctors too? If not, what's the difference?
end of the road wrote: » they don't need to be anonymous and if that's not what they want that's up to them. i'm saying that they have a right to be if that is what they want.
King Mob wrote: » Why exactly do doctors who will refuse to perform abortions need to be anonymous? Because they are afraid of getting protesters outside of their door? Surely that would be their own fault in your eyes, no?
Bannasidhe wrote: » I would assume that such doctors would refund any consultation fee. It would be a bit rich to charge someone for a refusal to perform a service.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/867a9f20e705add43a3ada2e4f4480cc.svg)
