It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Catholic Hospitals Being Forced

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 12:32 PM

Originally posted by FlyersFan
If the hospital refused her
a hysterectomy, it was for other reasons, NOT because of her
ability to breed. At this point she can't and the hospital knows it.

I can see how you would have thought that that was my point, but it wasn't. Sorry I wasn't clear. My point was that DJ thought a hysterectomy is ok, but drew the line at the Morning After Pill. I was simply trying to point out that we all draw our line in a different place.

I was questioning that if a hysterectomy is ok, but the Morning After Pill isn't, and that's where HE draws the line, who is supposed to draw the line for everyone? That's why each woman has the choice because NO ONE AUTHORITY has the right to draw that line for every woman.

It's a little off topic and confusing, granted. Sorry.

And thanks for your answer about Catholic hospitals.

Back on topic:

Does anyone know if hospitals get government funding? I can't find anything on it. IF they don't, then these hospitals can make their own rules.

The only thing we can do is boycott them. I will never go to a Catholic Hospital again and I suggest that if you disagree with this policy of forcing religious morals on people in a vulnerable position (illness or medically needy) you also go somewhere else.

posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 02:07 PM
i found this piece of information on how religion is getting hold of the way Women are treated depending of personal religious views in many states in the US.

Many states now leave it to hospitals to offer or not birth control methods and even if the woman in question is a case of rape they still can refused treatment and the Morning after pill.

Now when it comes to Catholic administrated hospitals they can alter their policies any way they want.

Catholic hospitals have their own policies – or lack thereof. Some will provide EC, but only to women who have convinced them that they have been raped. Directive 36, handed down by the Vatican, states that in cases of sexual assault, a woman may receive EC from a Catholic provider. However, many Catholic facilities require a pregnancy test and a full medical exam, which discourages women and, by delaying the provision of EC, reduces the likelihood that it will be effective.

Where does all this is going. . . . Same old same old. . . . control of women bodies trough religious base opinions and views.

Well If this is not an attack on women rites regardless then what do you call it.

Denial of a needed treatment of hysterectomies, to birth control to women on reproductive years even if she is a legally married woman, to victims of rape.

I have to said but can any religious people here including fellow woman can tell me what in the heck this is supposed to accomplish?

Saving fetuses for Jesus/ I guess even in a brutal rape of a girl is still considered one more for God.

Like I said it only affect women that can not afford to pay for personal doctors of personal private care.

Regardless of religious views is still like a say over and over a desperate way to control women choices and women lives.

According to the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, an estimated 25,000 American women become pregnant after being raped every year. But only 167 of 597 US-based Catholic hospitals surveyed in August 2002 offered emergency contraception as an option to women who have been raped, according to "Emergency Contraception in Catholic Hospital Emergency Rooms," a study conducted for Catholics for a Free Choice. The study also reports that Catholic hospitals provide health care to one in five people in the US.

I still see it for what it is a fight against women and the need to bring women back under submission.

I still am trying to understand how women can back this type of assault on their own bodies and are more than willing to make other fellow women be assaulted too.

One thing is for a believer to give away their rights to their body and that is just fine and dandy for me but, "Do me a favor and stay away from mine."

[edit on 11-12-2005 by marg6043]

[edit on 11-12-2005 by marg6043]

posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 03:11 PM
I don't think religion should any place in the medicial field. I always thought that hospitals were neurtal. If you are a hospital than they should have to give the same services as all other hospitals.

[edit on 11-12-2005 by freespirit]

posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 03:27 PM

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Sorry but I can't see anything in the link you provided that's applicable to this conversation.

Sorry--wrong link. Here is the text. It is part of the 2006 Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. (HR 3010, Title V--General Provisions, Sec 508, d1)

(d)(1) None of the funds appropriated in this Act may be made available to a Federal agency or program, or to a State or local government, if such agency, program, or government requires any health care professional to provide, assist in the performance of, or train others to perform abortions, in violation of that individual's religious beliefs or moral convictions.

(2) None of the funds appropriated in this Act shall be used by a Federal agency or program, or by a State or local government to require any hospital to perform or assist in the performance of an abortion, to train for, or to make its facilities available for the performance of an abortion, in violation of that institution's religious beliefs or moral convictions.

[edit on 11/12/05 by lmgnyc]

[edit on 11/12/05 by lmgnyc]

new topics

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in