Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Culling the herd of poor people

I mean, when is the last time a public university hospital answered to an archbishop? Or a Jewish hospital voluntarily elected to place itself under the ultimate authority of the Pope?

The University of Louisville Hospital and Louisville's Jewish Hospital want to merge with St. Joseph's Hospital and St. Mary's Hospital under an agreement that would result in placing them under the authority of a Catholic health care organization and the prospect has set off wailing and gnashing of teeth among Caring Liberals who fear it will interfere with their philanthropic plans to sterilize poor people and control their numbers through birth control.

These benevolent liberals are concerned about the fate of "reproductive services" (defined as services that prevent reproduction) that they fear poor people will lose access to under an agreement that would result in placing the two non-religious hospitals under Catholic strictures on abortion, sterilization, and birth control.

The Church, for its part, operates under the old-fashioned notion that poor people should be treated with dignity and respect, and that those goals properly excludes the attempt to decrease their numbers like they were a herd of elk.

What's nice to see is the new breed of Catholic hierarchy which are slowly replacing the liberal leaders of the past (who were the ones in charge, we might point out, during the mishandling of the priest abuse scandals), and who are, praise be, standing up for Catholic principles. Here's the account given of Archbishop Kurtz's take on the situation in USA Today:
Louisville Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz said Thursday he would only approve a merged hospital system under Roman Catholic ownership if all the participants, including University Hospital, agreed to follow the church's ethical rules for medical care.

In other words, the Archbishop is standing on the principles of the Church, and is apparently willing to let the deal go if those principles cannot be followed. Which leaves, of course, the other parties, who must either stand on their ethically questionable principles that violate the sanctity of human life, or on their concern for the financial bottom line.

This is one of the tragedies of modern health care: hospitals now are all about making money. In fact, one of the things the Catholic Church needs to do is to return the practice of medicine under their control into a charitable enterprise it once was.

8 comments:

Singring said...

Another polemic post, another complete absence of any kind of evidence that any liberal anywhere wants to 'sterilize' poor people.

'Logical thinking' in full force once again here at VR.

Martin Cothran said...

"Louisville hospital merger probably means poor women won't get their tubes tied at University Hospital any more"

Headline, Kentucky Health News: http://kyhealthnews.blogspot.com/2011/07/louisville-hospital-merger-means-poor.html

Martin Cothran said...

"The state's top consumer protection official said he wants to review a proposed hospital merger amid concerns that women may not have access to tubal ligations at a Louisville hospital that serves as a safety net for the poor."

Health on NBC.com

Singring said...

'"Louisville hospital merger probably means poor women won't get their tubes tied at University Hospital any more"'

I have to admit, Martin, this is some really excellent evidence. It's really, really good evidence that women probably won't get their tubes tied at University Hospital anymore.

What it unfortunately isn't is evidence for is that liberals want to 'sterilize' poor women by forcing them to have their tubes tied.

'...concerns that women may not have access to tubal ligations at a Louisville hospital that serves as a safety net for the poor."'

Great! More evidence that women may not have access to tubal ligations that serve as a safety net for the poor.

But somehow, I missed the part where the 'consumer protection official' or anyone else says that he wants poor women to have their tubes ligated or wants to force them to do so. It isn't even specified from whence these 'concerns' arise and if they are properly articulated.

Of course, with the stringent kind of 'logic' employed here at VR, from the premise 'someone wants women to have the option to have their tubes tied' directly follows the conclusion 'therefore, liberals want to sterilize poor people'.

Aristotle would be proud.

The fact that I, as a socilaist who is in favour of universal healthcare and social programs, have to listen to these accusations from someone who supported Rand Paul, the senator who wants to abolish all social programs and equates public healthcare with 'slavery', is just the icing on the cake of absurdity.

Martin Cothran said...

What it unfortunately isn't is evidence for is that liberals want to 'sterilize' poor women by forcing them to have their tubes tied.

Oh, I get it. I'm supposed to provide evidence for something I never said. I'll have to admit: you got me there. I don't have evidence for what I didn't say.

Samual said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Singring said...

'I'm supposed to provide evidence for something I never said.'

From this post:

'...has set off wailing and gnashing of teeth among Caring Liberals who fear it will interfere with their philanthropic plans to sterilize poor people and control their numbers through birth control.'

From Monday's post:

'In fact, isn't it anti-reproductive services the Caring and Sympathetic Liberals want to perpetrate on poor people?'

Have your short-term memory checked, Martin.

Singring said...

PS: the primary definition of 'perpetrate' is, according to Webster Miriam:

': to bring about or carry out (as a crime or deception) :'