WHEN DID WE VOTE FOR
COMMUNISM?
Posted on 04/03/2010 1:44:47 AM PDT by Suvroc10
The Florida doctor who allegedly refused to take patients by hanging a sign on the front of his practice's door said that he was angry and also discouraged when he tried to inform himself and then his patients about the chaos that is Barack Obama's health care "reform." Appearing in an exclusive cable TV interview with Fox News' Neil Cavuto, Dr. Jack Cassell also clarified that his sign telling patients who voted for Obama to "seek urologic care elsewhere" was misinterpreted and blown out of proportion, as he was adamant that he would still take care of patients regardless of their political leanings and just wanted to send a message about the problems with Obama's health care "reform." It was gratifying to hear the good doctor tell his side of the story away from the liberal, mainstream media's spin, as they had been unfairly piling on and basically accusing him of turning away Obama voters.
(Excerpt) Read more at associatedcontent.com ...
As a doctor he has the right to refuse treatment to whomever he wishes and for whatever reason he wishes. Therefore, he does not have to treat liberals, homosexuals, smokers, obese people, etc, etc.
If someone doesn’t like it, there are other doctors. But the doc was clear right from the start, he would treat irregardless of political stupidity. He would just prefer to not treat Caligula sychophants.
I would have no problem with doctors turning away 0bama voters. Let them have their government health care that they want so badly.
Tried to watch the video. It is not available.
Agreed. If only Democrat scumbags were made to have "Democrat scumbag" tattooed on their foreheads.
Eventually, Obamacare may force him out of business anyway.
Doctors are not supposed to pick and choose who they will treat based on whether they like that person or not. It goes against some very fundamental medical ethics...
And people with cancer too?
Bullsqueeze!!!!
A doctor is NOT required to treat all comers - neither is a lawyer required to represent anyone that wishes to hire him - nor is a men’s golf club required to admit women.
I am not required to entertain gays in my home, and YOU are not required to build a house for a purple transvestite Peruvian, if you don’t want to.
It is people like you that has a large segment of our population thinking that “health care” is a “right”.
And this doctor did not pick and choose his patients. He did state a preference. He still has that right.
Oh BS! They can pick whoever they want. They are not obligated to HAVE to treat anybody they don't want too. And what does it matter now anyways since Obama is going to choose who treats you and what treatment you're ALLOWED to receive?
What the doctor is objecting to, is the RATIONING of care that will begin in a few months, and the absolutely stingy attitude of the bureaucracy that is forming up even as we discuss the matter.
Up to now, highly advanced medical procedures have been available to anyone who has the means available to pay for these services. This shall no longer be the case, as some standard of “fairness” of access will be applied, and the access will be on the basis of “first in line, first served”. No cutting or line jumping allowed. Not for any amount of cash, because that would be “unfair”. Not for any excuse of emergency need, as that would interfere with the “schedule”, and skew the budget.
And if you miss the appointment, for any reason, an automatic rerouting to the rear of the line.
Like Rush, we may have to go to Costa Rica for medical services on a priority basis.
For which any sum of money would not be an object.
The “National Civilian Defense Force” will be put in place first to emphasize the “desirability” of maintaining the flow of services to prospective victims, er, patients, and failure to comply shall be dealt with on a summary basis.
Being a doctor isn’t like selling groceries were you have the right to chose who you do business with, it is a vocation that gives you a responsibility to use your skills to treat those in need, even if don’t like them or even if you find them abhorrent as human beings.
If a person wants to pick and choose who they deal with, I suggest that they should open their own grocery store and sell groceries to whoever they want, and leave that place in medical school to someone who is willing to follow the hippocratic oath...
Being a priest, nun, monk, or preacher is a “vocation”.
Being in any other field is a career or “profession”. There is a difference.
Graduation from medical school (or in my case, nursing school) in now way makes me a slave to the masses.Do we even deserve to be paid? How much? By whom? And, who gets to decide what is a “fair” remuneration for our services?
Following your rationale, All doctors, (and myself) should be slaves to society. Why stop at medical professionals? Aren’t police officers, firefighters, and teachers just as vital to society? Isn’t the guy that collects our trash vital to the health and well-being of the community.
No, FRiend - your way is COMMUNISM - and that is NOT what we believe in here in this Nation.
No one is saying you should be slaves or shouldn’t be paid for your work. my mother and grandmother were both nurses and my grandfather was a firefighter.
They didn’t get to choose who they treated or rescued based on whether they liked them or not. They treated them because they needed help that was their job to help and they got on with it. The very idea that they should have the option of not treating someone or dragging them out of a burning building because they disagreed with their politics would have struck them as a completely bizarre. As for myself, I was once a volounteer St John Ambulanceman, and it would have been outrageous for me to refuse to treat a casualty just because I didn’t like them (if they were being violent or abusive, maybe, but other than that, I would have had a duty to help them because I had put myself in that position of having that responsibility).
Like I said, if you don’t like the idea of being made to treat people you don’t like. You have chosen the wrong career. Start your own business dealing with commodities and working for yourself. Then you will have the right to deal only with people you like...
Nope. All Americans are still free, at least for now. A physician, doctor, nurse, or dentist is not my slave, and I have no right to demand that they treat me. They are my equals, and I can request service, just as I do with any other free American in a voluntary economic transaction.
I don’t believe he is practicing in an “emergency care” facility or a hospital. As a private practitioner he does have that right and said he would take care of them which very well could be no more than a quick assessment and referral.
While there are many valid points in your last post, there is also a glaring error in logic.
As a nurse, I am employed by a hospital. The hospital serves many different patients (clients) that I would not chose to associate with voluntarily outside of that setting. Drug addicts, drunks, crazies, homosexuals, atheists, ignorant rednecks, etc. However, my employment is with the hospital; not with the patients themselves. I have NEVER refused to serve any patient for any reason, nor have I ever indicated to them that I would not be serving them if I could possibly avoid it.
If, for instance, my employer decided that I had to work on a mental illness unit, then I am free to seek other employment because I choose not to work exclusively with the mentally disturbed. If the hospital decided to only allow liberal Democrats to be admitted, then I would seek other employment because, frankly, dealing with liberals gives me a rash. In that instance, I could make the decision about the type of clientele I wished to serve, and act accordingly
The Doctor, OTOH, is an independent professional - he is not employed by a hospital to serve in an emergency room. He is (and should be) able to pick the clientele he wishes to serve; just as any other professional does. I know many doctors that have “fired” patients (refused to treat them any longer) for any number of reasons. He is his own employer - and therefore is free to decide what patients he takes on. REQUIRING him to treat anyone he did not wish to, in effect, make him a slave.
BTW - an employer can refuse to hire you, or fire you, for almost any reason; except sex and race, or in some places sexual orientation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.