‘Freedom-loving’ NRA dictates what doctors can say to patients
We’ve heard a lot of rhetoric the last couple of years about the importance of keeping government out of the sacred, private relationship between doctors and their patients.
It was all a bunch of bull-oney.
For instance, the Florida Legislature has now passed a bill that makes it illegal for doctors to ask patients whether they have guns in their home and whether those guns are stored correctly to keep them out of the hands of children. It’s a question that many pediatricians ask as part of their standard spiel, along with ensuring that poisons and medicines are kept out of children’s reach and that swimming pools are monitored.
As Dr. Paul Robinson, a specialist in adolescent medicine, testified in vain to a Florida Senate committee:
“What if I have an adolescent who’s been bullied, who’s not suicidal? I don’t think, under the current bill, I’m entitled to ask him if there’s a gun in the home, or if he’s carried a gun to school, or if he’s thinking of harming someone else with a gun.”
Asking such questions would be against the law.
If you happen to believe that a doctor should not ask such questions, fine. You have the right to tell the physician that it’s none of his or her business. You have the right to change doctors. But you cannot logically argue that it is government’s place to dictate what can and cannot be said between patient and doctor. The fact that such gross intrusions into rights of privacy and free speech come from the allegedly small-government, pro-liberty right isn’t at all surprising.
And then there’s Texas. This week, Gov. Rick Perry signed a bill into law that requires women seeking an abortion to first undergo a sonogram. The attending physician is required by law to “describe the fetus, noting the size and condition of limbs and organs.” In addition, the patient must then wait 24 hours after the sonogram is performed before undergoing the abortion. As one person noted, the bill does everything but require the woman to give the fetus a name and schedule its funeral.
“Indeed, this bill is designed to shame women, as if we are daft creatures unable to make personal, private medical decisions without the paternalistic oversight of legislators,” the head of a Texas pro-choice group noted.
Again, these are allegedly small-government conservatives, conservatives dedicated to keeping government out of our private affairs, especially in relationships such as those between a doctor and patient, dictating what must be said and what must not be said in the privacy of a doctor’s office.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
617 comments Add your comment
Joe Mama
May 26th, 2011
5:29 pm
Jewcowboy — “Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.”
That’s easy for YOU to say.
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
5:29 pm
jewcowboy
@ 5:23
Yeah! That’s it..
pogo
May 26th, 2011
5:30 pm
Good one josef @ 5:06. And MS doesn’t do a very good job of it either, do they? In fact, the real “word” for anybody’s software today is “mediocre”. But ,they only deliver what their customers really expect. They know that everyone expects every software package to have defects and they know that it will still sell. But when you think about it, “mediocre” could be applied to every facet of American society today, couldn’t it? Service, politics, government, wage’s, morality, courtesy, empathy, education, dishwashers, tools, etc. etc. The list goes on forever. Plenty of product, not much quality. And we accept this.
jm
May 26th, 2011
5:30 pm
Here’s a link to the original report showing the statement by Eugene Steuerle, a former Treasury guy. And surely Jay doesn’t think a NPO with Judy Woodruff and Warren Buffett on the board is biased.
$100,000 in, $300,000 out. With 10’s of millions of baby boomers, we’re screwed.
http://www.urban.org/publications/901397.html
BADA BING
May 26th, 2011
5:31 pm
cowboy….a CTS-V by any other name would be as sweet. Lay rubber for me.(These words mean what they mean, no sexual undertones what so ever).
jewcowboy
May 26th, 2011
5:32 pm
BADA BING,
“(These words mean what they mean, no sexual undertones what so ever).”
Jay
May 26th, 2011
5:33 pm
As to the NPR piece, I think it lays out pretty well, jm. We need benefit cuts and higher taxes to make it work.
And just to be clear, that’s a stark contrast to the RyanCare plan, which relies exclusively on benefit cuts and in fact accompanies those harsh benefit cuts with LOWER taxes on the wealthy.
jm
May 26th, 2011
5:34 pm
Jay 5:33 – well at least you acknowledge there’s a huge math problem. I think. But do you realize the magnitude of change necessary when revenues are only 1/3 of expenses? Even with a combination that includes tax increases?
BADA BING
May 26th, 2011
5:35 pm
cowboy…..I agree. Julius Caesar did have a big nose, and his wife was a slut. Well said.
Mighy Righty
May 26th, 2011
5:35 pm
Jay, a lttle more on my unadulterated liefrom the American Spectator.
Contemplating the 2012 election that can already be seen looming on the distant horizon, the President’s advisors were no doubt hoping that the “death panel” debate was… well… dead. But Obama himself inadvertently resurrected it when, in response to Republican budget proposals, he claimed that Medicare costs will be kept under control by the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). Obamacare opponents have been screaming about this committee since it was first added to the “reform” bill. And, since that time, anyone with the temerity to call it by its proper name — death panel — has been vilified by the Democrats and the “news” media. Nonetheless, that’s precisely what IPAB will be. Its sole purpose is to cut funding for some health care services seniors now take for granted. And those cuts will kill people.
Jay
May 26th, 2011
5:36 pm
just for clarity, those numbers are for a COUPLE, jm, not an individual.
Jay
May 26th, 2011
5:37 pm
Repeatedly an unadulterated lie in another format doesn’t change the fact that it’s a lie, Mighty.
The panel will recommend the most cost-efficient treatments; it will not decide if people live or die, or if a person’s live is worth saving, etc. It will do none of those things. None.
But if Drug A does the same thing as Drug B, but at half the price, the panel will recommend using Drug A.
The fact that conservatives complain bitterly about such a process while also complaining bitterly that Medicare is inefficient is simply mind-boggling.
Brosephus
May 26th, 2011
5:37 pm
Again, these are allegedly small-government conservatives, conservatives dedicated to keeping government out of our private affairs, especially in relationships such as those between a doctor and patient, dictating what must be said and what must not be said in the privacy of a doctor’s office.
They were for small government before they were against it, or is it the other way around???? Hell, I can’t keep up anymore. Anyway, it’s small government they want, but they want that small government to do every damn thing they ask for. “Small government” is nothing more than a buzz word to some of these people. It’s no different than saying “liberal”, “socialist”, or any other crowd rousing adjective/adverb/noun.
One of these days, the “grown-ups” will realize that they are actually the ones responsible for governing now and that they WWII generation is retiring. Maybe us young people should just skip over the baby boomers and take over governing for ourselves. Hell, I don’t think we could do any worse than our predecesors.
jm
May 26th, 2011
5:38 pm
Jay 5:33 – well, if you want to increase taxes only (which you didn’t say) to make it work, you’d have to approximately double all the personal tax rates.
Let’s say you only want to do 1/2 of it on tax increases, you’d have to increase the rates by 50%, so the rate of say 28% would have to become 42%. Then you’d have to cut benefits by 1/3, meaning you’d somehow have to cut those expenses, but if IPAB doesn’t work, you don’t seem to have an alternative answer.
Joe Mama
May 26th, 2011
5:41 pm
Righty — “Its sole purpose is to cut funding for some health care services seniors now take for granted. And those cuts will kill people.”
It’s absolutely amazing how some posters can emphatically assert that certain health care cuts will kill people, while others (e.g. the Ryan Plan) won’t. It has almost become an article of faith with some of them.
jm
May 26th, 2011
5:41 pm
Jay 5:36 – yes. So there are 76 million boomers. Avg deficit: $200,000. Meaning there’s an unfunded liability of $7.6 Trillion (just for those boomers), and assuming the cost differential doesn’t get worse (it will).
See the problem?
Jay
May 26th, 2011
5:42 pm
jm, please.
Your numbers regarding taxes would be valid ONLY if Medicare was the only thing that government funded. In other words, they’re not even close.
pogo
May 26th, 2011
5:43 pm
Jay, I know an Indian person that told me that both of his children whom have health problems are on Medicare. He also said that he has post-poned going through the immigration process because if he did, because of his income (which is pretty high) his children would no longer be covered. Now I don’t know if he is confusing Medicaid and Medicare or what but you stated that you must be a citizen to be eligible to receive the benefit. What is the real deal? And by the way, I really like this guy and his wife. They are both extremely hard working people. From his explanation, it seems that the system is being scammed by “illegals” that don’t want to be legal. And if this is true, then you know that the magnitude of this abuse is probably huge.
BADA BING
May 26th, 2011
5:44 pm
Little BoBo the bunny and his friend Sammy Squirrel were ——– in the park, when they saw Tommy Turtle. Hey Tommy, what the —-are you doing here? I’m just ——— here behind the tree so no one will see me. I —–here every day. Do you want to join me? Yes we do, so BoBo and Sammy and Tommy just ———all day long, and everyone was ——happy. *************What words should I use in these blanks? Will just any words do? Would some be more correct than others?
Jay
May 26th, 2011
5:44 pm
Pogo, what I posted reported that permanent residents or citizens who had worked and contributed to the system for at least 10 years are eligible for Medicare. Your friend may be a permanent resident; his children may be born here. I don’t pretend to be an expert on government health-care eligibility, except that illegal immigrants are not eligible for Medicaid or Medicare.
jewcowboy
May 26th, 2011
5:44 pm
jm,
“So there are 76 million boomers.”
Ice floes….
Joe Mama
May 26th, 2011
5:46 pm
pogo — ” He also said that he has post-poned going through the immigration process because if he did, because of his income (which is pretty high) his children would no longer be covered. Now I don’t know if he is confusing Medicaid and Medicare or what but you stated that you must be a citizen to be eligible to receive the benefit. What is the real deal?”
If he makes that much money, then I have to wonder how he/his kids could be on Medicaid in the first place.
jewcowboy
May 26th, 2011
5:46 pm
BADA BING,
“Will just any words do?”
I love Mad Libs!
Doggone/GA
May 26th, 2011
5:46 pm
“But if Drug A does the same thing as Drug B, but at half the price, the panel will recommend using Drug A”
And they aren’t going to dictate that drug B be discontinued. The most likely outcome is that the medical healthcare system will pay up to the cost of drug B, but if you want to take drug A instead – you will have to cough up the diffence in cost.
Heck, THAT is happening to ME right now. My company healthcare plan will pay for drug A for my stomach problems and if I could take it, it would only cost me the co-pay. But I can’t take it, I have an adverse reaction to it. So I have to take drug B – for which I have to pay the ENTIRE COST per month. And we’re talking about the difference between $20 a month and $60.
Jay
May 26th, 2011
5:48 pm
jm, again, your basic math is faulty.
the $100K and $300K numbers are for a COUPLE. So you’ve exaggerated the problem by a factor of 2.
Brosephus
May 26th, 2011
5:49 pm
Jay, I know an Indian person that told me that both of his children whom have health problems are on Medicare. He also said that he has post-poned going through the immigration process because if he did, because of his income (which is pretty high) his children would no longer be covered.
………
If he makes that much money, then I have to wonder how he/his kids could be on Medicaid in the first place.
It’s not uncommon for people to enter the US on student/work visas and have children while they are here. The children qualify for programs as citizens even though the parents are not citizens. Not really complicated, but I don’t know how the calculations of income play into whether or not people get benefits.
jm
May 26th, 2011
5:49 pm
Jay 5:42 – there was an error in those numbers.
Medicare budget currently (somewhat irrelevant): $400 Billion. Income Tax revenue $900 Billion.
The tax increase wouldn’t have to be quite as large, but close. The Boomer liability alone requires an extra $300B a year in revenue assuming costs don’t get worse (0 probability assumption). Meaning if paid for by income tax increases, taxe rates would have to go up by 33%.
If 1/2 and 1/2, rates have to go up by 17% and those giant cost savings have to materialize (not going to happen in my book).
jm
May 26th, 2011
5:50 pm
Jay 4:48 – not for the unfunded liability, do the math yourself. I divided the 76 million boomers in 1/2 before multiplying by $200k per couple.
The tax increase math was wrong, but not the unfunded liability. This is why the budget can’t be fixed….. liberals just do not want to acknowledge the huge size of the problem.
Jay
May 26th, 2011
5:52 pm
Correct, jm.
jm
May 26th, 2011
5:52 pm
$7.6 Trillion….. think about that. You could mint two cities with the population of the city of ATLANTA PLUS CHARLOTTE, POPULATED ENTIRELY WITH PEOPLE THAT ARE GIVEN $1 MILLION, for the cost of $7.6 Trillion.
Not a poor person among them, $7.6 million millionaires…..
Joe Mama
May 26th, 2011
5:53 pm
Brosephus — “Not really complicated, but I don’t know how the calculations of income play into whether or not people get benefits.”
I’m pretty sure that Medicaid is targeted toward the poor, but I’m not familiar with how it works or the qualifications standards. I’m much more familiar with Medicare. Since pogo said that the fellow made good money, I’m wondering how he got Medicaid coverage for his kids.
BADA BING
May 26th, 2011
5:53 pm
Out to eat. josef and cowboy….peace out. Word to ya mother.
Thulsa Doom
May 26th, 2011
5:54 pm
But if Drug A does the same thing as Drug B, but at half the price, the panel will recommend using Drug A.- Jay
Actually Jay consumers already make these choices. If the generic copay is say $2-$5 and works just as well as the brand name drug copay which costs say a $45 copay then the consumer with his doctor’s or pharmacist’s recommendation will take the lower cost generic. Exactly why do we need an unelected panel to decide this?
The fact that conservatives complain bitterly about such a process while also complaining bitterly that Medicare is inefficient is simply mind-boggling.- Jay
Actually what is mind boggling is the liberal view that Medicare is an efficient system. Let’s see- 60 billion dollars lost per year to waste, fraud, and abuse. Is that efficient Jay?
Medicare part A was forecasted in 1965 to cost 9 billion by 1990 but ended up actually costing 67 billion. Is that efficient?
Same with part b which in 1967 was forecast to cost 12 billion by 1990 but instead ended up costing 110 billion. – Yet more efficiency?
Then we had the home health benefit introduced in 1988 that was forecast to cost 4 billion in 5 years and ended up costing 10 billion. – What? A 3rd straight example of Medicare inefficiency?
3 strikes and you’re out.
Are these the efficiencies that you speak of sir?
The fact that liberals don’t complain bitterly about such a process while also complaining bitterly that Medicare is inefficient is simply mind-boggling. I took the liberty of revising your statement for you Jay.
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
5:54 pm
THULSA
So, a 6000 year long tradition makes it all right…gotcha. Still opposed to the 13th Amendment, ere ye? More of your fallacious logic…
BRUIN
“the $100K and $300K numbers are for a COUPLE. So you’ve exaggerated the problem by a factor of 2.”
What kind of couple is that, married or civil unionized?
Joe Mama
May 26th, 2011
5:56 pm
Doom — “Actually what is mind boggling is the liberal view that Medicare is an efficient system.”
NIFS
the watch dog
May 26th, 2011
5:56 pm
Doctors should ask questions, that is how they make a diagnosis.Asking about a gun in the house is fine, if he notices what appears to be a bullet hole in the patient. It has gone to far. The right to privacy is the most sacred of amendments, the whole bizare situation with continueious prying demeans the entire population.
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
5:56 pm
Brosephus…
Left a message here @ 4:55…
Brosephus
May 26th, 2011
5:59 pm
Joe
Not sure how it’s done, but I’ve come across Peachcare cards for USC children traveling with foreign parents. That stuff is out of my area of expertise.
Brosephus
May 26th, 2011
5:59 pm
josef
Who says they can’t own businesses? I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that half of the landscaping businesses are owned by Hispanics. They do a damned good job with anything that’s hand’s on work.
Joe Mama
May 26th, 2011
6:00 pm
Certainly would appreciate it if a parent could speak to the question of how Peachcare/Medicaid for kids works.
jm
May 26th, 2011
6:02 pm
Jay,
“And just to be clear, that’s a stark contrast to the RyanCare plan, which relies exclusively on benefit cuts and in fact accompanies those harsh benefit cuts with LOWER taxes on the wealthy.”
Just to be clear, RyanCare provides premium support for everyone that declines depending on your income. Ie, the richest get very little premium support and have to pay their own way. The poorest get completely taken care of. The average does not tell the story. The system is progressive and protects the poorest. You’d think the Dems would sign up for it, but we live in a twisted world.
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
6:03 pm
Brosephus….
They done took over! I was assuming he was the owner…might have just been hired help driving the boss’ truck…see, the fellow that was one of those people pro’ly had his license revoked…
Jay
May 26th, 2011
6:04 pm
So Thulsa, what’s the equivalent number for fraud, waste and abuse in the private health-care sector?
Well let’s see, shall we? The GOP-controlled House Ways and Means Committee posts the following numbers:
“The Federal Bureau of Investigation estimates that between 3 and 10 percent of health care spending is fraudulent. With the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimating current health care spending to be over $2.5 trillion, anywhere from $75 to $250 billion is lost annually to fraud. As much as $80 billion of this fraud is in the federal health care programs, including up to $50 billion in Medicare alone. “
So as much as $80 billion of fraud in the federal system, with a high-end estimated total of $250 billion in fraud in the system as a whole.
That leaves as much as $170 billion in fraud in the private sector.
Using your logic, Thulsa, it is now time to abandon the private sector.
Brosephus
May 26th, 2011
6:05 pm
I see Infosys didn’t correct the problems here. Two 5:59 posts, but earlier when I posted 5 mins apart, the Blogster told me to slow down……
Jay
May 26th, 2011
6:06 pm
Here’s the link, jm. And again, the numbers aren’t mine. They were posted by the GOP-controlled committee:
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=226203
Thulsa Doom
May 26th, 2011
6:06 pm
josef nix,
I could actually care less about the whole gay issue and gay marriage thing. Nevertheless they voted on it in a liberal state like Cali and the voters want to keep marriage as it has been for 6,000 years- between a man and a woman. The voters have spoken. End of story. Move on.
jm
May 26th, 2011
6:06 pm
Jay 6:04 – I think that conclusion regarding $170 Billion is completely faulty. I’d like to see the link. They don’t know the full size of the fraud, but they know its big. And there’s now way, $ for $ that private sector fraud is as high.
Do I have to go pull more #’s? ughh……
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZbtAFq7dP8
AmVet
May 26th, 2011
6:07 pm
Yo, cons! Take a look around.
Joseph McCarthy is no longer a paragon of the GOP (nor on his witch hunts) and Gil McDougald is not the rookie of the year.
I get it!
You desperately want to go back in time and make abortions illegal and deadly to women again. Telling women what to do with their own bodies may float your boat, but that boat has been sunk.
Your dreams ain’t ever coming back. Got that? Never. Ever.
Try to legislate your morality on something that you at least have a shot at, OK?
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
6:08 pm
Thulsa
Nowhere near the end of the story. You’re the one who brought it up. And like I said, let’s keep that 6000 year old tradition of slavery,,,and as I said, I thought you didn’t agree with anything Obama was for…and, agreed, you could care A LOT LESS!
And in case you’ve missed it, some of the strongest supporters of gay marriage on this blog are also some of the most conservative…
jm
May 26th, 2011
6:13 pm
Jay 6:04
Medicare and Medicaid spending: $793 B
Gov’t Fraud: $80 Billion
Gov’t Loss = 10%
Private Health Care spending: $1,900 B
Private loss (assuming you’re correct) $170B
Private Loss rate: 8.9%
Assuming all the $170B is accurate…. dubious….
Jerome
May 26th, 2011
6:14 pm
Said another way would it not make sense for a patient to review an x ray before having a hip replacement or have a doctor walk the patient through a CT scan before radiation therapy on a malignant tumor. The far left lives in denial- at least give the fetus the recognition of a cancerous tumor as uncomfortable as it may be.
Jay
May 26th, 2011
6:16 pm
Furthermore, jm, I have seen no claim anywhere that RyanCare would cover all the costs for the very poorest and almost none for wealthiest. It does speak of higher subsidies for the poor and lower subsidies for the rich, but nothing to the extent you claim.
As the CBO analysis concludes:
“costs to individuals (beyond those covered by the premium support payment) would be higher under the proposal than under traditional Medicare, and some individuals would therefore choose not to purchase insurance. To the extent that fewer people enrolled, costs for the premium support program would be lower than shown in this analysis, and the number of older Americans without health insurance would be higher.”
godless heathen
May 26th, 2011
6:17 pm
Jay:”Yeah, I saw that Godless.
Bogus.”
I think it was joke, Jay. i.e. Not meant to be a factual statement.
Thulsa Doom
May 26th, 2011
6:19 pm
Jay,
On the contrary Jay.
Using your own numbers provided above and using generally accepted numbers from a variety of sources medicare fraud, waste, fraud, and abuse is minimally 20%. Minimally Jay.
The numbers above state that in terms of overall spending on health care that the total is between 3 and 10% overall.
So factoring that Medicare alone has minimally 20% fraud but that the system in its entirety has as little as 3% to %10 overall fraud then its probably fair to guess that the amount of fraud that takes place in the private sector is anywhere from 3% to possibly 7% as a high.
Why? Because we have to factor in that the 20% attributable to Medicare alone skews the overall 3%-10% stats and means the private sector share of fraud would be substantially lower.
So the private sector amount of fraud like I said is probably 3 to 7 % max using your numbers of course. 7% as a high sounds a lot more efficient than 20% or more fraud. Right?
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
6:21 pm
AmVet
As per your wishes, we will keep killing over a million US citizens a year.
Happy?
Fred
May 26th, 2011
6:25 pm
Jay: Have you ever changed the mind of one of these closed minded Republican fanatics?
I know I’m open minded on most things (the French and Southern Baptists exempted) and have seen wisdom in some of the things you say as well as some folly. I’ve even seen wisdom in some of the things that people like Thulsa and jm post, but mostly, they just repeat rhetoric. I don’t think they ever even consider anything you right except as something the need to automatically refute on general purposes because you are an evil liberal.
How do you keep it up?
Jay
May 26th, 2011
6:27 pm
Faith in the American people, Fred.
Our numbers tell us an awful lot of people read this blog every day but never post here. They may be more open-minded about things than the folks who respond in knee-jerk fashion.
Mighy Righty
May 26th, 2011
6:27 pm
Jay, the NY Times piece used the term Death Panels. But I see the preferred terms are End of Life Panels so I will use them in the future. Sort of like there are no terrorists, they are domestic or overseas contingencies. And there are no U.S. Troops in Afghanistan they are all NATO troops. And the recession is over because, well just because. So do the end of life panels have unlimited authority to determine approved treatment on a case by case basis? They are not elected, so to whom do they report? They cannot make life and death decisions but they can decide whether or not to approve treatment the denial of which would result in end of life. That decision will be based on cost. Comforting isn’t it.
Jay
May 26th, 2011
6:27 pm
“…. generally accepted numbers from a variety of sources medicare fraud, waste, fraud, and abuse is minimally 20%”
Really, Thulsa? What would be the magical source of these “generally accepted numbers” etc.?
Because the GOP committee reports fraud of “up to $50 billion in Medicare alone,” and since Medicare in 2010 was a roughly $500 billion program, that’s a maximum of 10 percent, not the 20 percent you claim from these sources that you pulled from … somewhere.
In fact, the 10 percent maximum fraud percentage claimed by the GOP committee in Medicare is equal to the 10 percent maximum fraud number claimed in health care as a whole. Which means — brace yourself! — the government program is no more fraud-ridden than the private sector.
You sitting down, Thulsa?
AmVet
May 26th, 2011
6:29 pm
My goodmess, GLL.
Your complete disregard for the actual definitions of words is truly breathtaking.
I often joke about the Republican Dictionary of Made Up Definitions, but I’m beginning to suspect that there really is such a thing.
And you have one with Dick Cheney’s autograph!
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
6:29 pm
I read people like AmVet wagging their fingers at others and going on and on about a woman’s body, and often lecturing others for paragraphs on end and somehow they always never mention the person that loses their life.
I can’t imagine anything that would put their lack of respect for the life of that US citizen in perspective any better than that.
I just wonder when we became a nation that openly had no respect for the life of a fellow American.
Fred
May 26th, 2011
6:30 pm
Jonix? What does a ‘gay marriage” accomplish that a legal binding agreement doesn’t?
My cousin had a “commitment ceremony” and I think they have the legal stuff taken care o. I’ve been meaning to ask the same question her but have forgotten. They are content with what they have. I ask only for information.
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
6:31 pm
AmVet
It’s not about a definition.
Doggone/GA
May 26th, 2011
6:32 pm
“What does a ‘gay marriage” accomplish that a legal binding agreement doesn’t?”
Marriage is a contract. There are laws all over the place in regards to that contract. In order for a legal binding agreement to take it’s place, it would have to delinate EVERY and ALL of what those existing laws already cover. And even then, it could be subject to challenge.
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
6:32 pm
Doggone/GA
In California, Civil Unions were purposefully made to have every single legal ramification as a marriage. But it’s still not good enough.
Fred
May 26th, 2011
6:36 pm
If you say so Doggone. My wife and I have complete, unlimited power of attorney for each other but do you think I can go ask her doctor what she went in for last week? Or get Chase to tell me how much is in her bank account? LOl Or even the cell phone company to tell me how much her bill is if I wanted to pay it?
I don’t THINK so…….
AmVet
May 26th, 2011
6:36 pm
It never is with you, GLL.
You just make up your own bizarre language, pretend it’s the truth and then act stunned that not everybody agrees.
When it’s really nothing more than straight up ignorance.
C’est la vie…
Joe Mama
May 26th, 2011
6:37 pm
GLL — “Whatever makes you feel all noble for wanting to ignore the slaughter of over a million people a year.”
What people would those be?
Fred
May 26th, 2011
6:38 pm
Oh and on the ORIGINAL topic Jay blogged on? I tell the Doctor it’s none of their business. If he wants to find out if I have a gun break into my house and see if he gets shot or whooped with a big stick………
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
6:38 pm
FRED
I’ve no problem with what you call it so long as it’s the same document name and same registration for all concerned…otherwise it’s not “equal.” You say “the legal stuff taken care of…” Yeah, so do we and it cost an arm and a leg in lawyer’s fees, etc. All of which breeders can avoid by signing a single piece of paper…
USMC
If you’re here…that was a blow, wasn’t it…we’ve got limbs down up here, how ’bout y’all?
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
6:39 pm
AmVet
Whatever makes you feel all noble for wanting to ignore the slaughter of over a million people a year.
If assigning a life to a definition does it for you, you’re a lesser man that I am.
Doggone/GA
May 26th, 2011
6:40 pm
“somehow they always never mention the person that loses their life. ”
That’s because a person DOESN’T lose their life.
Joe Mama
May 26th, 2011
6:41 pm
Jay, my 6:37 to GLL appeared two minutes prior to the post to which I responded.
I don’t know what the AJC’s web setup is, but I suspect you have multiple servers caching/doing the work, and that their clocks don’t match up.
AmVet
May 26th, 2011
6:42 pm
A rather massive pine tree across the street just fell across my neighbors yard. I think there’s no real damage but gonna check on them. A real gully washer here.
Hopefully back in a jiffy…
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
6:42 pm
GLL
Separate is not equal…and words have meaning…besides, how long before certain provisions for Group A are denied to Group B…that’s quite feasible when two categories are involved…
No, it’s still not good enough…
Doggone/GA
May 26th, 2011
6:42 pm
“But it’s still not good enough”
Nope, it isn’t. Because it still “seperate but equal” and we already know that doesn’t work over the long run. And if it’s EXACTLY the same as marriage, then call it was it is: MARRIAGE
Joe Mama
May 26th, 2011
6:45 pm
Speaking of marriage, I’m going to go strengthen my pair bond with my wife. We’re very covalent.
Doggone/GA
May 26th, 2011
6:45 pm
“As long as I can remember, women have talked about the baby inside their body”
That is a biological neccessity to enable the woman to nuture herself and the child she expects to have. But it doesn’t change the biological FACT that the developing embryo and foetus is not a SEPARATE being until it takes it’s first breath outside the womb.
And with all the best will in the world, there is STILL a point where we cannot remove the foetus from the woman’s body and assist it artifically to develop normally. Until it reaches the developmental stage where we CAN do that it is totally and completely dependent on the woman’s body and is nothing more than a symbiote of her body.
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
6:45 pm
Doggone/GA
Whatever it takes for you to feel better about what you support. As long as I can remember, women have talked about the baby inside their body. I would rather not change definitions in order to feel better about the purposeful death of another human.
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
6:47 pm
Doggone
Nyanh, let’s call it civil union for both…I’m spiteful that way!
Doggone/GA
May 26th, 2011
6:47 pm
“I’m spiteful that way!”
Philosophically, I wouldn’t argue. I’m just taking the more practical view: the laws on marriage already exist and it’s easier and cheaper to simeply define marriage as being between 2 consenting adults than it is to change all those laws.
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
6:47 pm
Joe Mama
You really don’t know who those people would be? Maybe that’s the problem.
AmVet
May 26th, 2011
6:47 pm
“Citizens, fellow Americans, people.”
Like I said you just make up dumb stuff, that no educated, informed, rational person could possibly agree with, and then can’t figure out why people think you’re illiterate.
Buy a dictionary. A real one.
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
6:48 pm
Maybe it’s just me. but “…going to the chapel, and we’re going to get civil unioned” or “…Sadie, Sadie, civil unioned lady..” just, well, loses something in the translation…
Fred
May 26th, 2011
6:49 pm
Wow. The blogs are crazy. posts appear and disappear and are placed in random orders. Did all this start happening because I went away for a few days lol? I’m sorry. I’ll try to be back but I’m BUSY right now.
Jay: Thanks. You are have a good point. Although I’ve been too busy to post, I HAVE read your blog and a good many of the comments. Many times I WANT to post, but the blog is old and folks have moved on.
Jonix: Thanks. You and Doggone pretty much said the same thing. Something for me to think about. A quick thought though: Even us ‘breeders” don’t get off scott free with a piece of paper. We have to jump through the same hoops. Who was the guy who wanted to take his wife off life support because that’s what they had talked about and agreed about but her parents sued him? Same with financial issues and other health issues. Lawyers have made EVERYONE’S life hell.
AmVet
May 26th, 2011
6:51 pm
Well, the neighbors aren’t home but there’s no damage to their house.
But part of the tree is laying across the street. I’m sure DeKalb County is swamped with other things, but they’ll get here.
They rock and have always been very responsive and efficient. (Blows that image for some of you, huh?)
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
6:51 pm
Doggone/GA, josef nix
So what they did in California is a compromise that gives gays all the legal ramifications that they want and gives everybody else what they want. A true win, win, but of course with liberals, the only win is a complete destruction of any and everything that they can’t bring themselves to agree with.
Wow, you guys are sure open minded.
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
6:52 pm
AmVet
Whatever it takes, big hero. My standards for what I believe are a bit higher than what you are apparently able to digest.
And the people on this blog that think I am illiterate are not exactly the kind of people that would earn my respect. Sort of like AmVet.
Doggone/GA
May 26th, 2011
6:52 pm
“Who was the guy who wanted to take his wife off life support because that’s what they had talked about and agreed about but her parents sued him?”
And they eventually lost, because he was her legal guardian and they were not.
Kamchak
May 26th, 2011
6:55 pm
Did all this start happening because I went away for a few days lol?
Yeppers.
It’s all your fault, Fred.
Doggone/GA
May 26th, 2011
6:55 pm
“Same with financial issues and other health issues. Lawyers have made EVERYONE’S life hell.”
But in this case it’s NOT the lawyers that are the problem. It’s religious fanatics who want to claim marriage as a RELIGIOUS institution. It is not. It is, and always has been, a legal contract.
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
6:56 pm
LLB
I’m not out for compromise. I’m out for equality. And, uh, that California law was overturned…they wouldn’t have been able to do that if both sets of folks had the same “legal ramifications…”
FRED
“…first we kill all the lawyers!”
Doggone/GA
May 26th, 2011
6:56 pm
“So what they did in California is a compromise”
Yep, it’s a compromise. So was the “separate but equal” situation in race relations. That one didn’t work, neither will the one in California.
AmVet
May 26th, 2011
6:58 pm
Words have meanings, josef???
I think that has become an outdated concept!
It’s all very fluid and non-empirical, you see.
Don’t know or like what a word’s definition truly is?
No problem! Just disregard it.
Voila!! It part and parcel of the “new school” of debate…
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
6:58 pm
Okay, know it alls, why does the Protestant wedding ceremony have the tradition of a male “giving away” the bride, but the Catholic and Jewish ones do not?
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
7:00 pm
LLB
Listen carefully…if it’s equality, how could it and not heterosexual unions be overturned? Explain that, please.
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
7:01 pm
josef nix
No. You got equality. You just refuse to accept anyone else’s feeling but your own group. It’s how progressives have muscled their own ideas into legislation since the beginning.
josef nix
May 26th, 2011
7:01 pm
IMAM
Mine and GLL’s 7:00 and 7:01…time warp again…
Fred
May 26th, 2011
7:01 pm
I have a question Doggone. i mean it seriously, this puzzles me. if a woman has an abortion, all well and good. but if someone murders a pregnant women, they are charged with TWO counts of murder. one for the woman and one for the fetus. How does that work? I don’t understand it. I’ve been wanting to ask Boortz that for years because he’s a lawyer (a piss poor one) but he would think I’m “slamming” abortion, go on a rant, and hang up without answering the question.
I don’t see the difference in terms of legality. Either the fetus is a fetus, or it’s a person. How can it be treated differently in two completely different situations. It’s not logical to me.
Good little liberal
May 26th, 2011
7:02 pm
AmVet
Like the term: unborn child? Oops. There I go making up my own definitions again. No one has ever used that before.