Posted on 12/19/2002 10:26:29 PM PST by The Old Hoosier
Whether the doctor is a conservative or a liberal is immaterial.
The issue is being truly pro-life, including the mother's life. Many conservatives are rabid on this to the point of passing laws to force women to die for the IDEALS of others. It is vicious and evil.
I'm almost certain you are correct. It would essentially be a "violation of church and state" to take a religious stand on abortion procedures at a state funded hospital and one of the pre-requisites for state funding is to agree to follow all the same requirements as if it were a state run hospital.
Disgusting individual with thirty years' history aborting babies, but the resume on his website states the following for the Wesley Medical Center (which I assume later became an HCA hospital, since it's later mentioned as HCA Wesley):
1970 - 1975
Chairman, Medical Records, Utilization, Pharmacy Committee - Department of Family Practice
1974 - 1980
Executive Committee Medical Staff
1979 President, Medical Staff
TEACHING EXPERIENCE
1970 - present Clinical Instructor Family Medicine Residency, Wesley Medical Center/HCA Wesley
1973 - 1975 Volunteer Community Supervising Physician - Family Practice Residency - Wesley Medical Center
1976-Present - Clinical Instructor, Department of Family and Community Medicine - Wichita State Branch, University of Kansas School of Medicine
Present - University of Kansas School of Medicine - Wichita State Branch / HCA Wesley Medical Center
So according to this, he's now a teacher at the University of Kansas School of Medicine. But he's also the director of that Women's Health Care clinic, which performs third-trimester abortions, and which does not appear to be affiliated with HCA (it's not on their website)
Tiller and botched abortion at HCA Wesley: HERE
The abortion was botched in a clinic, and completed in HCA Wesley after the woman was rushed there in an ambulance. I don't know why this organization finds it suspicious that the hospital will not release her name or condition. The son of a good friend was in the hospital recently, and the hospital wouldn't tell ME anything either. It was not my business, and not my right to know.
What would convince me that Frist should divest is evidence that elective abortions are performed, since HCA's status as a for-profit hospital would mean they are "making money off of abortion" even if said abortion was a medical necessity. I wish these boycott lists would state a little more than "abortions performed" as the reason, since nearly all hospitals will perform them under certain cirumstances (which is worse--charging money for an emergency abortion, or deeply discounting an elective one?). I have to make a distinction between elective and non.
Oh, and if they had mandatory abortion training in their teaching hospitals (if they own any) even when the law doesn't require it (as it soon will here); that would also convince me.
Otherwise I'm still going to think of this article as highly deceptive and aimed right at Frist.
Of all the ridiculous utterances ever spewed out your piehole, that one is the worst yet.
As for Askel's "brilliance"? If you understand even half of her psychotic rants, it puts you in her category.
LOL. Frist can't win for losing. Now that the Dems don't have Lott to kick around anymore, keep an ear out for plaintive wails of "Bill Frist makes millions of dollars by denying reproductive rights to women all over the U.S.!"
Actually they do to the only one who that is able to hear them, God almighty.
Not that they need to, since God knows all.
Judgment will come in God's time; no earthly government system can stop the laws of God almighty.
It appears that, unlike Mr. Gore, and Mr. Clinton, Rev. Jackson, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Nunn, Sen. Frist has gone from a mostly pro-abort position to a mostly pro-life position. I'll take that any day.Ill take it in one of 51, not in the leader of the 51. That is a big difference.
I recall one. Sen. Hatch. I was quite bitterly disappointed in his failure to support life in this area.Yeah, pretty close.
Nonetheless, the pulling of a lever marked (D) will not occur through the efforts of my fingers.Nor through mine. I vote every time, and I vote pro-life. That never means Democrat, never means green, etc. However, it does not always mean Republican.
patent +AMDG
I understand your position and other people's about investments and similar issues. However, the difference is that Frist's investment in HCA is HUGE; HCA is a major provider of abortions, including late-term abortions; Frist's history on abortion is conflicting (he has said that he is "personally pro-life but" thinks abortion should remain legal, then flipped and said he was pro-life except rape, incest, life of mother.)
Putting the issue of his financial stake in the abortion industry for a moment, Frist has waffled on abortion issues. He is described as a "moderate" by the press (not that I believe everything the press says), and I question his conservative credentials. I do believe that it's important to have a pro-life conservative as leader of the Senate. I don't think Frist is the man for the job.
I agree with many of your points, and when I learn of major pro-abortion activities that corporations, like See's Candy, participates in, I avoid doing business with that company. It's not an easy road to hoe, but Jesus never said following Him would be easy.
Each of us can only do what we can to stop abortion. We all have families and jobs and churches and activities and commitments that prevent us from devoting 100% of our time to saving babies; but if anything we do saves one life, it is worth it.
We know that Frist has invested a substantial amount of money in an organization that performs abortions, including late-term abortions. We can ask that he divest himself of these holdings because of the seriousness of the matter. We can withhold support of him because his actions and words don't match.
There are other solid conservative, articulate Senator's who would make great leaders. Let's look at some of them. No one is 100% perfect, I agree, but this investment is personally disturbing to me and I couldn't in good conscience support him.
I agree, I want more information from the sites that claim that HCA provides abortions, and I'm working on it, but because I have found the information on a number of diverse websites, I tend to believe it's true.
Sen. Frist appears to have started out as pro-abort, and has seemingly changed to a pro-lifer.No, that isnt even close to what Im saying. I dont see how saying Ill take it in one of 51, not in the leader of the 51 can lead you to think I dont want people to switch to the pro-life position.Are you saying that's unacceptable?
What I dont want is this man, who seems tepidly pro-life at best, and who continues to support pro-aborts and abortion AFTER this supposed switch, as majority leader. If he seemed to be a real convert, I could accept him. He does not seem pro-life to me, despite the votes, when you consider his entire record.
Also, I really haven't found any evidence yet that HCA is really pro-abort. In fact, the only evidence I can find seems to indicate that the company has had a preference not to permit abortions in its facilities, when it has a choice.First, this would be missing the point of my argument. I have mentioned HCA, if at all, only in passing. Let me focus you in on what I would consider the focus of my opinion, and if you want to argue against that please do so:
If chosen, he will lead the senate, chose who sits on committees (in part), chose what bills come up for votes, etc. Unlike you, I dont agree that he is pro-life enough, nor do I consider it necessary to compromise as far as he has to win elections. It may be necessary in a national party election though Bushs election compared to Bush the elder and Doles losses seem to prove the contrary and it may be necessary as a party platform. It is not to win a Senate seat in MN, much less TN.Second, as to the original question, I believe that post 495 provided sufficient support for what little I did say about HCA, which is just that they provide abortions. Which they do. Regardless of that issue though, he still speaks like a pro abort, pro stem cell research, etc., and in my view a party with him as a majority leader does not represent me.Moreover, when you look at his voting record alongside his personal comments, his record doesnt match that of a person who is pro-life, but has to tone it down to get elected. It matches a person who is a pro-abort republican, but realizes he must be at least somewhat pro-life to get elected as a Republican in Tennessee. We have ample examples of weakly pro-life Tennessee Senators who recognized that they had to be pro-life to get elected down there, but once they moved on to bigger and better things they deserted the pro-life position promptly. See Albert Gore, who once was pro-life, supposedly. If even Mr. Gore had to pretend to be pro-life to get elected in TN, dont you think that its possible Mr. Frist has recognized the same?
You mention stem cell. I dont recall anyone whose efforts and comments disturbed me as profoundly as Mr. Frists did at the time that debate was raging. In short, I see little difference between Senator Frist and Senator Landreau from LA. She also opposed partial birth abortion in her votes, but you can hardly call her pro-life. It is a political necessity in her state. Yet the aborts down there support her. He may also have opposed funding, and I dont recall her position on that issue, but I can see opposing funding merely on fiscal conservatism bases. She, unlike him, actually opposed stem cell research.
Dominus Vobiscum
patent +AMDG
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.