- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Catholic Health Initiatives-Iowa, a faith-based health care provider, is arguing in a medical malpractice case that the loss of an unborn child does not equate to the death of a “person” for the purpose of calculating damage awards.
In Iowa, court-ordered awards for noneconomic losses stemming from medical malpractice are capped at $250,000, except in cases that entail the “loss or impairment of mind or body.”
Attorneys for the CHI and MercyOne hospital are arguing the cap on damages still applies in cases where the “loss” is that of a fetus or unborn child.
CHI’s status as a nonprofit, tax-exempt entity is based on its stated mission of providing health services “in the spirit of the gospel.” The ethics guidelines it approved in 2018 state that the corporation is committed to “respect the sacredness of every human life from the moment of conception until death.”
You must log in or register to comment.
“Faith-based health care provider” is one of the saddest euphemisms I’ve heard in a while.
Why do y’all have a problem with this? Y’all think it’s just a clump of cells. A parasite.
It’s hypocrisy in the name of saving a buck. Should we not want intellectual consistency from religious affiliates that seek to dictate the terms of our laws and our lives?
No! Everything is black and white and about which team I said I was on!
This is some primo dumbassery right here. Delicious, and stereotypically conservative: obliquely combative, willfully ignorant, or bless-your-heart special. Maybe even a nice mashup of the three…
Hot damn, my guy. You remember all those anti-abortion laws where the basic reasoning is that “abortion is murder”? The rest of us do, and we insist that the Catholic church make consistent legal arguments. Many of us also think those fuckheads also have shitty views in general.
We’re pointing out the hypocrisy. Did you really not understand that? It’s ridiculously obvious. Or are you just being a contrarian?
Abortion? It’s a person, you murderers!
We fucked up? Well it’s a fetus, not a person!
Well, the problem is that “Faith Based Institutions” are exposed to any amount of liability for anything at all. Obviously, these people were infallible and it was the sinful patients who were at fault.
They claim a viable delivery was possible. How far along was it?
According to the article, she first was admitted at 34 weeks.
I mean they cover up child rape . Totally on brand for them and most religious organizations
Now, now, the Laws of Hammurabi clearly state what to do here…
22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
So you will note that punishment is only given out as the woman is harmed, as this is a life. Miscarriage shmishcarriage, it’s not a life yet so no harm done, no punishment given.
It’s an open and shut case, Your Honour. The husband can demand all he wants but no life was harmed here, no eyes, no teeth, the $250,000 cap applies as “the court allows”.
Numbers 11.
Abortion is only wrong when it’s a woman’s choice.
CURIOUS
There is zero point in ever listening to what a conservative is saying. It changes based on whatever they think is beneficial to them in that exact moment. They’re like the demons from Frieren.
but will they make it right in the end by giving her a new fetus (from someone who died in a fire).
Rules for thee and not for me
I’ve encountered many situations of priests having girlfriends, boyfriends and even whole ass families on the side and the parishioners were…okay with it? Like, being celibate is one of the basic prerequisites for your job and you are violating it so casually? No wonder the Catholic church is hemorraging members, this type of in-your-face hipocrisy has become commonplace.
That is an even more finicky situation. Roman Catholic priests cannot marry, but Eastern Catholic priests can, and there are exemptions that can be made for Roman Catholic converts. On top of that, you may have seen a “high church” protestant group (looks like a Catholic Church) like Anglicans who generally can marry or date.
Yeah an Anglican priest can be indistinguishable from a catholic one except for the fact that she and her wife have kids.
There’s also the part about being backward, hateful and wrong. I don’t even have to mention that one other thing but you know exactly what it is.
The reason behind priests not being allowed to marry originally had nothing to do with their faith though. It’s because Catholic priests were bequeathing church assets to their children when they died. The church just put a thin veneer of dogma on top of the reasoning when they used the dictate of no marriage to stop the theft.
A hypocrisy is you
I don’t know why I’m still surprised by the hypocrisy at this point.
Money is far more important than principles. -Modern Christianity
Historically Christianity hasn’t been much different unless you go way back.
I dunno, there was some pretty cool stuff going on in central/south america in the 60s. Ernest cardenal and solentiname come to mind.
Yeah and Jesus was a pretty groovy dude but his religion hoards wealth.
I remember talking to a historian in Portugal who said she loved the Vatican for its history, but hated it for its opulence.
Less than twenty years after the Catholic church formed “rat lines” to smuggle Nazis to South America to protect them from prosecution for their crimes against humanity.
It’s okay though, they both apologized to and forgave themselves in their own heads so it’d be rude to bring it up.
Not really. They banned priest marriage so they could stop paying pensions to widows and would inherit all their property, and throughout the Catholic existence they were selling pardons for sins.
Even the establishment of Christianity was a cash grab. They gentrified Jesus because Jews weren’t interested in this particular messiah and it was the gentiles who had the cash at the time.
The Christian Schrodinger Fetus … it is neither dead nor alive … worthless nor valuable … you don’t know what it is until you see it and once you do, it is probably already dead
Blessed are the rich and powerful, for they fill God’s collection plate
They indulge but also by the indulgences
“But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!”
-George Carlin
Abortion is MURDER! UNLESS it Costs us MONEY in Which case Abortion is NOT MURDER!
-People who Follow the
10987some Commandments!
Oh Yazz!
Hey hey now. Dont be bashful. You and your ilk has screamed that it does. In your eyes, you killed a person. You can’t switch when its uncomfortable for you.
Could this case set a precedent if they win? Will that allow abortion to become legal?
No.
Like, it could be a brick in the road, but it won’t.
No, Trump would immediately sign an executive order even though its supposed to be beyond his powers and anyone with a lick of status will bend over like they were just struck with the rod of God.
Tells you what this is really about.
I would love to have the judge question them directly on the sanctity of human life and how it does not apply in this case but applies to abortion.
Hell, if we can get a hold of the plaintiff and ask them to lose the case so that we can build case law off of the ruling, we might be able to get the Catholic church on record as saying abortion should be legalized.
No, they’ll just say it’s only valid if they do it, like an annulment vs. a divorce
Annulment usually implies that the marriage was never consummated. Annulments exist outside of religion as well.
Them losing doesn’t guarantee anything if it isn’t well argued. They need to try to win and put up the best defence. If they fail then there will be a solid case to take it further if they throw it, higher courts will look at it and the arguments and see that it doesn’t apply.
Unfortunately, they can and will.
Just dig up their past statements. They’ve definitely said shit on abortion before, they’re religious they can’t help it.
Hypocrisy is a defining feature of Abrahamic religion.
religion has never been about truth or consistency, it’s a matter of power
