British Columbia

1357 readers

62 users here now

News, highlights and more relating to this great province!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

MAID lawsuit shines spotlight on faith-based health organizations - Under 1995 agreement, B.C. allows organizations to withhold services that conflict with beliefs, values (www.cbc.ca)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

"There's all kinds of care that they could be denied because governments are allowing faith-based institutions that are publicly funded… to deny care based on their religious beliefs and values."

top 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If you provide a service, you should not be able to discriminate.

Or, on other words,

If your religion prevents you from doing your job, find a different job. If your religion prevents you from being a kind and decent person, find a different religion.

And I would extend that to being “a merciful and empathetic person”, as well.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think the argument is that they don't provide that service.

[Some of] These organizations pre-date the legality of the services they are not offering.

I understand a person feeling that killing a person is at odds with their hippocratic oath. I understand a person feeling that killing a person in any situation is a sin.

I don't personally agree, but I see where they are coming from. Doctors shouldn't be obligated to kill patients.

That said: organizations don't have religious beliefs, people do. If there are doctors at these hospitals that are merciful and compassionate people that feel medical assistance in dying is appropriate for a patient, then they should be able to provide that service to the patient, regardless of which hospital they are in.

People shouldn't have to consider which hospital to go to to get appropriate care.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

killing a person is at odds with their hippocratic oath.

I think you need to review what that oath entails. Because it does not include not killing someone. It is about doing the least amount of harm… and there are some harms that are much worse than death.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Friend, I explicitly say i don't agree at the beginning of the next paragraph.

I understand a person feeling that killing a person is at odds with their hippocratic oath. I understand a person feeling that killing a person in any situation is a sin.

I don't personally agree, but I see where they are coming from.

and there are some harms that are much worse than death.

Friend, I agree, but they think they are sending patients to hell by killing them before they convert.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Since the government doesn’t assign these jobs to people, there is no infringement in forcing them to carry out their duties. They are free to find a different job

It’s like Sikhs and motorcycle helmets; they don’t have to ride a motorcycle so requiring a helmet isn’t infringement though religious wear should be illegal in public anyway as it infringes on other people’s rights