Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You have no idea what my views on abortion are, do you? I provided another link, which I'll provide again...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath
I once again bolded the portions about abortion and the fact that they take some "form of oath" but not this one. Most doctors do not take the original oath because it precludes them from performing abortions...
Now, do you want to assume more about me or simply use your brain rather than your partisan goggles?
I read your link. It also says that portions of the oath were changed because they praise non-abrahamic deities.
What it also says is the modification you're talking about is still raised in discussions about abortion. I'd say it's a pretty sure bet that it's only raised by anti-choice advocates.
You tell me you're pro reproductive choice and I'll apologize for misjudging you.
I'm well aware of his credentials. He has simply strayed so far from the fundamental premises of the Hippocratic oath as to render it meaningless.
As for judging, I have never been a great advocate of the notion, "Judge not, lest ye be judged." Judge, and prepare to be judged.
You failed to grasp the point of my post(in response to Bully's response to DMP).
In fact, your response is exactly the kind of mentality I was making fun of in the first place:
And why should what you believe about the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual govern how everyone else treats a group of people?
The DSM provides objective criteria used in the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders. Religious dogma is rooted in the subjective interpretation of some divine being's will, in which case, one might as well rely upon augury and haruspices.
Yes, pressure from special interest groups is VERY objective and scientific reason to remove a disorder from the list.
Empirical data was the driving force behid the removal of homosexuality from the DSM, not pressure from special interest groups.
<blockquote>In a review of published studies comparing homosexual and heterosexual samples on psychological tests, Gonsiorek (1982) found that, a<b>lthough some differences have been observed in test results between homosexuals and heterosexuals, both groups consistently score within the normal range</b>. Gonsiorek concluded that "Homosexuality in and of itself is unrelated to psychological disturbance or maladjustment. Homosexuals as a group are not more psychologically disturbed on account of their homosexuality" (Gonsiorek, 1982, p. 74; see also reviews by Gonsiorek, 1991; Hart, Roback, Tittler, Weitz, Walston & McKee, 1978; Reiss, 1980). (<i>emphasis mine</i>)</blockquote>
A metanalysis of studies, while showing a few differences, consistently place both homo and heterosexuals within the bounds of normal human behavior. Sorry, but facts trump dogma.
Guess that depends on how one defines (or redefines) "normal."
James Dobson's organization crosses the line when it comes to their Focus on the Family Message. His holier-than-thou political lobbying for legislation is too intrusive. It's one thing to go around the country and proselytizing a moral values message. But it's another when you form coalition groups with other organizations and try to put pressure on lawmakers in order to enact moral values legislation and abstinence-only programs. I'm fully aware that that's how Washington works, but it's a bit ironic to watch the small government Republicans criticizing liberals and Democrats for pushing their values onto other people and then crawling into bed with the likes of Dobson, Falwell, and Robertson who likewise try to push their values onto other people. It wreaks of hypocrisy.
I don't dispute that a traditional nuclear family is the ideal situation for children, but Dobson's stance about abstinence-only programs and "traditionalism" is unrealistic. Unmarried people are going to have pre-marital sex. A recently published Guttmacher Report shows that "despite public opinion that premarital sex is much more common now than in the past, researchers say the number of Americans having premarital sex hasn't changed much since the 1940s." "http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=78654.
IMO, a message of both abstinence AND condoms is the most realistic and effective way to stop diseases and unwanted pregnancies. And whether you like it or not, same sex couples are forming families and raising children. Denying it isn't going to make it unhappen- it's already part of reality. If Focus on the Family wants to hold true to real principles of focusing on the family for the sake of all children, then they should come up with ways for gays and lesbians to be better parents. There's no reason to blame children for the lifestyle choices of their parents.
I'm not suggesting any civil rights be taken away from Dobson. I'm just calling him an intrusive, intellectually dishonest, religiously motivated hack who denies reality and uses his influence to pressure politicians in order to impose his beliefs on the masses. His coalition crosses the line when it coherces lawmakers into dictating policy and legislation for everyone, i.e. lobbying for gay marriage amendments, abortion, funding for stem cell research, condoms, etc. Focus on the Family is no different than PETA or the ACLU in that regard.
Coerce lawmakers into dictating policy?-----like any one of the thousands of lobbyists up there?---It's the American way, dude. Where have you been ??
^me said:I'm fully aware that that's how Washington works, but it's a bit ironic to watch the small government Republicans criticizing liberals and Democrats for pushing their values onto other people and then crawling into bed with the likes of Dobson, Falwell, and Robertson who likewise try to push their values onto other people. It wreaks of hypocrisy.
