Coakley - Catholics shouldn't work in the ER

[red states rule]

Coakley is doing to best to insult, smear, and piss off as many different groups in MA as possible

It is going to be some day in MA on Tuesday





How can a Massachusetts Senate candidate possibly offend 39 percent of voters in her state? If it's Democrat Attorney General Martha Coakley, she would tell devout Catholics not to bother working in an emergency room (H/T Jim Hoft - Big Government). In the audio clip below, Ms. Coakley chokes on a question from radio host Ken Pittman referring to the conscience clause. Under the conscience clause, workers in health-care environments ranging from doctors to maintenance men can refuse to offer services, information, or advice to patients on issues like contraception, blood transfusions, etc..if the workers are morally against it. Here is how Ms. Coakley handled the matter. (audio and transcript below):

Ken Pittman: Right, if you are a Catholic, and believe what the Pope teaches that any form of birth control is a sin. ah you don’t want to do that.

Martha Coakley: No we have a separation of church and state Ken, lets be clear.

Ken Pittman: In the emergency room you still have your religious freedom.

Martha Coakley: (……uh, eh…um..) The law says that people are allowed to have that. You can have religious freedom but you probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room.

http://washingtontimes.com/weblogs/watercooler/2010/jan/14/martha-coakley-devout-catholics-probably-shouldnt-/






<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ifqXHqF5Q10&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ifqXHqF5Q10&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[PostmodernProphet]

/boggle.....she also said there are only 100 Al Queda in Afghanistan.....around minute 4

[red states rule]

Given how she feels about Catholics, what about Muslims?

Should they not work in ER's since some may not want to treat women with STD's?

[Gaffer]

Given how she feels about Catholics, what about Muslims?

Should they not work in ER's since some may not want to treat women with STD's?

or Jews.

[red states rule]

I hope Dems keep running candidates who keep pissing off different groups of people everytime they speak

[stephanie]

Coakley and Obama is the face of the Democrat party today...

and it ain't a pretty picture..

I hope the Democrats of old see this and start leaving the now, Socialist-Communist-Fascist-Progressive Democrat party..

[red states rule]

Coakley and Obama is the face of the Democrat party today...

and it ain't a pretty picture..

I hope the Democrats of old see this and start leaving the now, Socialist-Communist-Fascist-Progressive Democrat party..

Yes she is

US Constitutional rights for terrorists

Higher taxes for all

Obamcare

Cap and Trade

Support Obama or you are a racist and/or extreme

So typical of how the change libs want to bring America

[stephanie]

Yes she is

US Constitutional rights for terrorists

Higher taxes for all

Obamcare

Cap and Trade

Support Obama or you are a racist and/or extreme

So typical of how the change libs want to bring America

She is Union Stooge, bought and paid for..I hope the people of Massachusetts do the right thing this time.

[red states rule]

She is Union Stooge, bought and paid for..I hope the people of Massachusetts do the right thing this time.

Her husbands former Police union has gone with Brown. Not all unions walk in lockstep with the Dems

Talk about a slap in the face

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?t=26113

[Binky]

I would think that if one is a doctor or nurse and it's your job to work in the emergency room, you do it or you get fired....Your religious and/or political beliefs should have nothing to do with it.... One should know that he/or she is going to have to do things or take care of those that don't coinside with their beliefs WHEN THEY TAKE THE JOB. If they didn't want to do that, then maybe they should've taken another line of work......

[Kathianne]

Already covered by federal law:

http://www.uspharmacist.com/content/d/pharmacy_law/c/12276/


...Analysis

One of the oddities about these regulations is whether they are even needed. Federal laws prohibiting discrimination against “conscientious objectors” have been in existence for several decades. It has been at least 30 years since the federal government gave physicians and nurses the ability to opt out of performing abortions without fear of recrimination.4 The new rule would go further by making clear that other health care workers, whether or not they are licensed, registered, or certified under state or federal laws to provide medical care, may also refuse to provide information or advice to patients who might want an abortion, sterilization, or related procedure.4 For example, comments from HHS indicate that an employee of an institution where abortions are performed could refuse to clean the instruments following the procedure.

In announcing the release of the regulations, HHS Secretary Michael O. Leavitt indicated that the law is necessary to “protect the moral conscience of persons in the health care industry.”4 Leavitt also said he had intended to issue the rule as a final regulation before the Obama administration took office. (Sometimes when there is a political change in presidential administrations, the outgoing administration may enact “11th-hour” or “midnight” rules as a way of preserving their legacy.7) Leavitt asserted that some professional health care organizations threaten to brand practitioners as “unprofessional” when they fail to put the health care concerns of patients above personal opposition to any given behavior. He criticized the development of an environment in the health care field that is intolerant of individual conscience, certain religious beliefs, ethnic and cultural traditions, and moral convictions. Leavitt said the rule was focused on abortion, not contraception. That may be the cruelest understatement of the intended effects of the regulations. One provision states that no person may be required to assist in a “health service program or research activity” that is “contrary to his religious beliefs or moral convictions.” The HHS rule says that the law should be enforced “broadly” to cover any “activity related in any way to providing medicine, healthcare or any other service related to health or welfare.”1,4

One of the battles over these rules is expected to take place right in the middle of the pharmacy. Plan B emergency contraception or any drug that could be labeled “the morning after pill” will put the right-to-life and the right-to-chose coalitions at loggerheads at the pharmacy front doors. Surely there will be debates about what is an abortion relative to prevention of implantation of a fertilized egg. These regulations do not even provide a definition of this important concept. Instead, while acknowledging the public outcry for a definition, HHS commented, “questions over the nature of abortion and the ending of a life are highly controversial and strongly debated.”1


A Notable State Regulation

Another intriguing twist is that just as the federal government was releasing these broad regulations, the Illinois Supreme Court released its opinion on December 20, 2008, allowing pharmacies and pharmacists to challenge a diametrically opposed state administrative rule that demanded that health care professionals dispense Plan B or similar emergency contraception medications.8 The ruling in Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich reversed two previous lower-court decisions. Former Governor Rod Blagojevich9 promulgated a rule in 2005 forcing pharmacists to fill all requests for such medications irrespective of the pharmacist’s objections on the grounds of personal, moral, or religious beliefs. In a controversial statement about the Illinois rule, the governor said, “Rather than try to get the legislature to pass something…through executive order action, I forced these guys to fill prescriptions for birth control for women who come in with prescriptions from their doctors.”10

The notorious “pro-abortion” governor also said in his 2005 State of the State speech, “Now, I understand that several bills have been introduced that would overturn my executive order to protect women’s reproductive freedoms…So let me make something else very clear—if any of those bills reach my desk, they are dead on arrival.” He further explained, “Think about what we’ve been able to do since I’ve been governor. The reproductive freedoms of women are more protected in Illinois than any state in America. That’s in [stark] contrast to the advances and assaults coming from the Bush administration.”10

What this Illinois Supreme Court ruling means is that pharmacies and pharmacists can still challenge the law; it does not overturn the law for the time being. If it were reversed, pharmacists in Illinois would have the same right of conscience contemplated by the federal regulations.


...

[red states rule]

Chris Matthews is worried that if Brown wins, there are no votes left for Dems to BUY

The MSNBC "reproters" bashed Coakley, and Matthews agreed. The excuses are strating - all to protect Obama from any blame

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697//vp/34885100#34885100

and

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/01/16/chris-matthews-worries-there-arent-democrat-votes-buy-massachusetts-t