Citing Catholic Rules, Doctor Turns Away Bleeding Woman With Dislodged IUD

[Machine_Elf]

What would Jeezus do?

[Bricker]

@BigT

I understand that. But, speaking as a Catholic, do you think that it is ethical by Catholic standards?

That’s the issue I have with you treating ethics as being personal. It’s also institutional. You have ethics you follow as a lawyer, and you have ethics you follow as a Catholic. You talk about the former, so I think you could talk about the latter.

What I’ve read before suggests that Catholicism teaches a duty to treat a dying patient. There may be some exceptions if the patient themselves doesn’t want to be treated, depending on what I read. But that’s it.

For example, this from the Catholic Health association appears to say that there is a requirement to treat due to the sanctity of life. Only those acts which add increased suffering are wrong.

I don’t know enough the medical condition at issue.

[Measure_for_Measure]

@chorpler

Sorry for this hijack, but is “phariseetic” really the adjectival form of Pharisee(s)? I find it oddly intriguing…

Probably not. Regardless it was invented on the fly (though not for the first time, judging from the internet).

Over here and moreover here, the word pharisaic is used. That sounds more credible, though it lacks the whiff of snark that I was pursing upthread.

[foolsguinea]

“Pharisaic” is standard.

[jayjay]

@Czarcasm

The heartless fuckwads had the law on their side.
All is right with the world.

I thought that was every Bricker post…

[SteveG1]

@elucidator

I must have gone to a different Sunday School than these people, the Jesus I got wouldn’t even scold you for helping someone bleeding and in pain.

More like “Yeah, sure, its on the books, technically a sin…Don’t worry about it, we cool.”

Yes. This sounds more like a legalistic “follow the letter of the law and to hell with the right of it” thing … the Pharisees.

You can kill through deliberate inaction, as surely as you can through direct action.