Archive for discrimination

Obama repeals DADT for gays, sets sight on repealing conscience laws which will discriminate against pro-life physicians

Posted in Abortion, Constitution, Health Care, Obama with tags , , , , , , , , on December 21, 2010 by saynsumthn

While progressives cheer the recent Obama “victory” of the repeal of Don’t Ask/ Don’t Tell, which allows gays and lesbians to serve in the military openly, no one is speaking out against the Obama policy which would muzzle the rights of pro-life Christians.

Documents the Obama administration filed in November and December have Obama administration attorneys admitting the administration wants to finalize a rescission of the conscience rules but has been delayed because of other business — likely due to the HHS working on implementing the provisions of the ObamaCare law.

Jonathan Imbody, the Vice President for Government Relations at the Christian Medical Association, an advocate for medical professionals said medical workers stated that,

“The government is now telling the court, in response to a lawsuit by several states against the conscience-protecting regulation, that HHS plans to eliminate or replace the conscience regulation by as early as January 31,” Imbody added. “That means we must act to raise awareness of this threat to conscience rights, which has the potential to push life-affirming healthcare professionals out of medicine and strand the patients who depend upon them for care.”

“Whether you are a student or a doctor, federal conscience protections will have a significant impact on your ability to continue to practice ethical medicine. Don’t wait for someone else to stand in the gap on this one—take action yourself to protect your rights,” he added.”Share your story if you’ve experienced overt or subtle discrimination, contact your legislators, tell your patients and engage your colleagues.”

If the conscience clause is rescinded, many of the faith-based hospitals (Catholic hospitals make up 15-20% of hospital patient care in the US) around the country that provide services to millions of patients could be shut down rather than perform abortions.

The conscience clause is a necessary regulation to preserve the exclusive patient to doctor relationship. Without it, the government will be able to effectively limit where patients can go for care.

By giving ultimatums to healthcare providers on whether or not they perform a certain procedure they are morally opposed to, government is limiting the number of doctors a patient can see and interfering in individual care.

If the Obama Administration rescinds the conscience clause, it is only the first step towards allowing the government into personal, and sometimes life and death, decisions.

Death Panels, Eugenics, Rationing, Quality adjusted life ? what does Uncle Sam think your Life Value is?

Posted in Death Panels, Eugenics, Fascism, Health Care, Obama with tags , , , , , , , , on December 8, 2009 by saynsumthn

Health Care vs. the Value of Human Life

December 7, 2009 – by Sarah Durand
Posted on the blog: Pajamas Media

Don’t believe the left would cut medical costs by rationing care? Check out their formulas to calculate your life’s value.

Under the Democrats’ proposed health care reform legislation, we know that the government will have to determine some sort of rationing system in order to control costs. We are aware that part of the rationing will be absorbed in the discrimination that the bill inflicts upon the elderly; we know that it cuts $500 billion from Medicare [1]. What has remained puzzling is how exactly this rationing will be determined for the rest of us.

Similarly elusive is how the new Health Benefits Advisory Committee will decide whether or not you get certain medical treatments, regardless of the opinion of your doctor. After all, how do you put a dollar value on a human life?

If you think there is no answer to that question, you are way behind the progressives. In fact, most countries with socialized medicine, including Britain, are already using a mathematical formula that expresses the numerical value of one year of a human life in a measurement called the QALY [2], or “quality-adjusted life year.” In terms of determining medical care, the mathematical formula of the QALY is based on both how much a treatment may lengthen your lifespan and the quality of the life you will be living.

Basically, if you are in optimal health, the QALY of one year of your life is 1.0. But if you have any underlying conditions, like asthma or muscular dystrophy, your QALY is much lower.

Under the QALY system, the blind are worth less than those with sight, as those who can walk are worth more than those in wheelchairs. Sound like discrimination against persons with disabilities? It gets worse.

In a paper entitled “Cost-Effectiveness and Disability Discrimination [3],” the director of the Division of Medical Ethics at the Harvard Medical School, Dan Brock [4], argues “prioritizing health care resources by their relative cost-effectiveness can result in lower priority for the treatment of disabled persons than otherwise similar non-disabled persons.”

He says that type of system not only “implies that disabled persons’ lives are of lesser value than those of non-disabled persons,but it also “conflicts with equality of opportunity; it conflicts with fairness, which requires ignoring (some/most) differential impacts of treatment; it wrongly gives lower priority to disabled persons for equally effective treatment; it conflicts with giving all persons an equal chance to reach their full potential; and, it is in conflict with giving priority to the worse off.”

The “double jeopardy [5]” scenario that describes how the disabled are not only already suffering with an illness or disability, but are also given a lower priority of health care treatments to preserve or improve the quality of their lives, has been widely debated in countries with universal health care. It does little good to pass health care reform that restricts denying insurance to those with underlying conditions when treatment is still withheld from these individuals as an inherent flaw within the system.

As if that’s not bad enough, the health advisor to the president, Ezekiel Emanuel [6], is proposing a system even more deleterious. His system, similar to the QALY, is “the complete lives system [7],” which not only allows for discrimination against the elderly and disabled, but also targets the very young, i.e., our children.

Emanuel says of his system: “When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.”

Leave it to American progressives to take the QALY one step further by defining quality of life as how useful you are to society — that is, how likely you are to increase the government’s tax revenue, hence the emphasis on those between ages 15 and 40. Health care gets a lot cheaper by rationing care to all non-taxpayers.

According to Emanuel [8], “The death of a 20-year-old woman is intuitively worse than that of a two-month-old girl.” I doubt the parents of the two-month-old agree.

And, if you are a child with disabilities, the government has already completely given up on you. Emanuel believes [9] “services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed.” What’s worse, since he does not believe in “guaranteeing neuropsychological services to ensure children with learning disabilities can read and learn to reason,” once the public option puts the private sector out of business, these types of life-changing services for children will no longer exist.

Years of research in treating children with autism, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and dyslexia are in jeopardy of being rendered null and void. Years of progress in passing anti-discrimination laws may be undone in one single bill.

Article printed from Pajamas Media:

URL to article:

URLs in this post:

[1] $500 billion from Medicare:,0,5095885.story
[2] QALY:
[3] Cost-Effectiveness and Disability Discrimination:
[4] Dan Brock:
[5] double jeopardy:
[6] Ezekiel Emanuel:
[7] the complete lives system:–aytlpznG-DJKn43SWhTZv8lWL65qwppjfzGiQI6TYZR326d8a6AvGl0ezxGxI7_soaWMTv64S5wXPlvN74_1p&sig=AHIEtbSJ_7bTAwb8abvp6lKGCq6DLB-R0w
[8] According to Emanuel:
[9] believes:

READ: Death Panels? H1N1 shots refused to people over 64 years old ?

Pregnant Ft Worth teen almost has abortion after alleged school discrimination

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on December 4, 2009 by saynsumthn

Mackenzie McCollum was barred from playing on her school’s volleyball team in Ft. Worth, Texas, because she was pregnant. She fought back — and was finally allowed to play after she obtained a doctor’s note.

In the meantime, the school’s Coach allegedly told all of McCollum’s teammates she was pregnant without her consent. Once she was back on the team, he allegedly cut her playing time. The U.S. Department of Education is now investigating the matter.

She said, ‘I’ll just get an abortion. I’ll just end it. This’ll be over. Why are they doing this to me? Why is this happening?’” — Barbara Horton, Mackenzie’s mother, about the ordeal leading her daughter to consider terminating her pregnancy

One of the other players was really concerned and she’s like, ‘Well is she hurt? Did she get sick?’ And our coach is just like, ‘No, she’s pregnant.’ And I just kind of stopped. I was just like, ‘Did he just say that?’” –– Whittney Davis, Mackenzie’s friend and teammate, recalling the team meeting when their coach revealed Mackenzie’s condition

Read more: Here

Watch News Story Here:

Posted using ShareThis

Good for the Goose? New Law Discriminates Against Pro-Lifers

Posted in Abortion, Religion, Violence against women with tags , , , , , , , , , on June 9, 2009 by saynsumthn

A New York City law that will go into effect in July could make it easier for pro-life protesters to be arrested outside abortion clinics. Current law allows authorities to make arrests only if the person directly affected, such as a woman entering a clinic, is willing to press charges. However, the new law would allow third parties, such as clinic workers, to press charges if they witnessed the activity.

This is a very dangerous and ridiculous law. It leaves the decision in the hands of the very business making a profit off the abortions. What do you think they will do with all that power?

I wonder if the State of New York would also allow pro-lifers who witness women suffering from post abortion injuries to “press charges” against clinics? Suppose the New York State Medical Board allowed “third parties” to file complaints and never interviewed the person injured.

Perhaps the State of New York could save money by allowing all those who “Witness” a speeding car on the highway to issue a ticket to the offender.

The entire premise of this law is absurd and is meant to discriminate against the free speech rights of pro-lifers. I only hope and pray that if a false accusation occurs, those other pro-lifers who witness the accusation by the pro-abort will file charges as well.

I guess if we can dismantle the rights of all human beings to “Life” as granted in our Constitution, we can also chop out the right a person has to “face his accuser”. Just goes to show you the unlevel playing ground the pro-abortion mindset has.