Answer my question. If people were dying in the streets all around you, at the rates they are dying hidden behind the anticeptic walls of the abortuaries, would you "get yourself all worked up," and decide that maybe you and society needed to take legal steps to stop the carnage? Or would you maintain your wimpy, "well, I'd never do that, but I don't want to impose my (alleded) morality on anyone else" attitude?
Your agenda is abortion and mine is the humane treatment of those that are labeled as "mentally ill" and if I were to apply your logic to my argument we could be here for another entire evening.
Should the records of "mental patients" be kept as confidential as psychiatrists would like?
Maybe, maybe not.
Privacy and confidentiality among the many CEOs and how they run their recovery business? Yes, darned good call.
I find it appalling that people were court ordered and forced to become human guinea pigs for the makers of Neurontin.
I am more concerned about the ethically correct treatment of those that are already here.
On the other side of the coin, I don't see you on your soapbox over that.
Pick which moral dilemma the democrats of the 50s-70s have created for us and get up on your particular soapbox.
Just remember that yours isn't the only soapbox.
BTW, now that I looked at your post # 12, I would like to thank you for expounding upon my attitude for me. At least I know where I stand now. Thanks!