| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84
Comments:
<0> you don't value education
<0> you value working hard
<0> and working smart
<1> notice that aren't protesting in republican held states
<2> but, the same logic that applies to a patient and abortion, OUGHT to be the same as a patient and a drug.
<1> they are only protesting in LIBERALLY/Democratically held states
<3> Many villages in poor nation are supported on what illegals send home
<4> lupine: the right to privacy was established a general concept but specifically to women seeking abortions in roe v. wade. you have to come up with some compelling extrapolation to fit that to doctors.
<5> gopp: Do you have way too many windows/tabs open up as too?
<0> `426Hemi that for sure,
<0> Publius what do you mean
<2> ajofi: i agree. There is no "right to privacy" for doctors.
<0> Publius what do you mean
<5> gopp: I have like 12 websites open
<5> from interesting links
<5> lol
<0> oh I do t
<0> o
<0> Publius my firefox was 455mb
<0> yesterday
<4> And then you have to come up with an explanation as to how a right to privacy translates into their right to refuse offering prescription drugs they morally do not agree with
<0> guess why
<2> ajofi: but I take it that you can not recongize a basic "if" proposition
<5> gopp: what does that mean?
<1> Bush in 2012!
<6> as far as I know, Doctors do not have a right to privacy, but you can toss em in jail if they release your records, er something
<2> ajofi: You prove my point to occ
<5> 426Hemi: If you don't stop leaking our plans
<0> Publius oh, my firefox was taking 455mb of memory alocation, that = many windows / tabes open
<0> tabs
<1> i say we nuke califonia
<5> gopp: LOL
<0> I like laymen
<1> we can get rid of Pelosi and Boxer all in one shot
<0> I am a laymen
<2> ajofi: please learn the basics of an "if-then" construction. you wish to argue the "if" position
<1> I like getting laid man
<0> `426Hemi how chuky cheese shumber
<0> `426Hemi he your senator
<2> gopp: i had firefox chunk up to 2GB of data..
<0> he opens his money
<0> Lupine hahaha wow
<1> Schumer is trying to become a majority leader
<2> so much for superior OSS programming :P
<7> Is that Bush-Blair pre-war memo legit?
<0> `426Hemi he runs your state with high taxes
<0> the highest in the nation
<1> =(
<4> lupine: this was not an if-then argument
<5> 426Hemi: I'm placing bets on the frenchies bringing out teh guillitine for Chirac
<1> hahahha Publius
<1> i have been wondering about that myself
<0> the highest in the nation = hillary clinton + nyc
<5> LOL
<1> I brb i need a soda desperately
<5> 426Hemi: wait
<5> 426Hemi: open this article first: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/27/airborne_laser_test/
<3> Does a doctor issue a drug on what he thinks is best for you or what the drug companies tell him is best for you?
<2> ajofi: yes, it was accepting the premise that "if" that there is a right-to-privacy in the pharmasicst-patient relationship
<2> ajofi: even thou, "right to privacy" logically does not apply, if a woman publically walks into a known abortion clinic
<2> stanely: hopefully the first, but may seccumb to the second.
<2> stanely: there is a third answer thou: the doctor proscribes what the PATIENT thinks is the best for him/herself!
<4> where is the "then" portion?
<8> Heh... give me morphine, I'm not addicted, really!
<4> i see two "ifs" and zero "then"
<3> Lupine...nice observation
<2> ajofi: oh, that "IF" there is a right-to-privacy.. THEN the govn't can not regulate/force the medical decisions between a pharmacist and a patient
<2> but I ***umed you were paying attention earlier..
<2> i guess I over-estimated your short term memory/retention
<5> Dominus: Getting ready for the eclipse tomorrow?
<8> Publius: I'll probably be asleep, heh.
<3> It would be interesting to see how many people resort to herbal medication because they cannot afford perscription meds.
<4> lupine: You ***ume that the right to privacy applies to the relationship and not to just one of the actors. Your if-then is flawed.
<5> Dominus: I know you are a science nerd! right?
<8> Somewhat... but I've seen one or two eclipses.
<8> They're.. disappointing.
<8> :)
<2> ajofi: it would have to apply to both: otherwise, the abortion doctor would be free to go to the state "she is having an abortion", at which time, the state can prevent it, without violating the privacy.
<2> right to privacy = your information is not disclosed to teh tgovn't.
<9> yeah, I've seen a full eclipse... it's not that big of a deal
<5> Dominus: but the International Space station is moving position over the mediterranian so it can get the best view of one ever
<2> it's ***inine-on-its fact to claim a "right to privacy" where anyone else can yell it to anyone at the top of their lungs
<5> sp
<5> lol
<3> 1,000 years ago a full eclipse would be a big deal
<8> Publius: oh, so additionally that stupid space station is going to be blocking my view as well?
<4> lupine: the right to privacy is a revocable grant to the health care professional.
<9> Publius bu, it's the best view of something which blocks the view of the sun... so isn't that the worst view of the sun? :P
<2> if it must be granted, it is not an inalienable right
<5> Dominus: probably. But because we have the INTERNET...we can see what they are:)
<9> StanleyI you could hardly tell anything was happeneing the one I saw
<2> ajofi: but you are merely showing the "if" is a bogus ***umption. it is inherently self-contradictory
<8> Yeah, which means I won't have to get out of bed for it :P
<9> it wasn't even as dark as it is when it's overcast
<5> KoBushi: did you know you can watch the Mars Rover mope around Mars live on Nasa.gov?
<4> lupine: baloney. anyone with a right can waive the right
<5> LOL
<3> I am amazed those rovers on Mars are still working
<5> Dominus: That is what I meant originally. You must be a few years older than me. ;)
<8> StanleyI: it's all just a Hollywood studio anyway.
<5> Stanley: me too
<5> Dominus: YES
<5> that's European pride at its finest
<8> Publius: I know, I was joking the joke, or whatever :)
<3> It took the Americans just 66 years from the Wright Brothers to man on the moon
<10> no rights are inalienable ;)
<5> Dominus: I've read some good essays one that. I've also read Abbas' thesis on how the Holocoust is a Zionist conspiracy. Both well written. Both freakin wrong
<2> ajofi: correction, the example is someone ELSE waving the right. in this case, the doctor.
<10> mahmoud abbas did a holocaust denier thang?
<5> occ: His doctoral thesis
<4> lupine: you haven't established the doctor has such a right.
<3> No one took a photo of Armstrong on the moon...he was only in the reflection of the helmet visor
<10> sheesh
<5> StanleyI: That conspiracy is just about as good as the 9/11 ones
<10> haha, not to accuse you of it, stanley
<8> Yeah, and how the hell does a flag wave without air?
<2> You know.. if a obviously pregnant , say 7 months woman publically walks into a publically known abortion clinic.. and publically comes out no longer pregnant ... isn't that now probable cause she had an abortion, and hence, grounds for a warrant to be issued, without violating "the right to privacy"?
<10> but i love love love the "the moon-landing was a conspiracy!" crowd
<2> the abortion is all documented, written down, etc..
<5> DOminus: Well if we are calling JFK and LBJ liars...we might agree
<3> I was reading of the moon landing..hence the knowledge
<2> there are witnesses, etc..
<8> Publius: I would have asked JFK.. if he wasn't conveniently killed.
<4> lupine: it is widely considered that roe vs. wade is bad law. The outcome they wanted may be right, but the way in which the court made it law is not considered good law.
<2> stanely: there is a picture of armstrong's shoe :-)
<5> Dominus: That is one of the few valid conspiracy's. The whole Alien thing is too
<8> Hehe
<2> ajofi: right, but it *IS* the law of the land. And hence, would also apply to the intimate and privledged relationship between a patient and her doctor. In this case, a pharmacist.
<5> Dominus: YOu know I had to have one or two
<3> Yes..footprints..ect..but Buzz just forgot to take Armstrongs photo
<8> Based on your set of arbitrary criteria?
<5> Dominus: BAHHAHA
<8> :)
<5> Dominus: stole our tactics eh?
<8> Haha
<11> will someone run a traceroute on this addy for me?
<11> cpc3-oldh3-5-0-cust51.manc.cable.ntl.com
<4> lupine: i will return to your ***ertion that it applies to the relationship itself. but roe v. wade makes clear the right to privacy applies to one party, and must be honored by the other. it does not imply a reverse obligation of any sort.
<8> Goes to NL, hehe.
<4> it does not imply a doctor can refuse prescribing appropriate drugs on the basis of morality either.
<8> Damnit
<5> CometBaby: will this ghetto IP tacer program I dled offline work?
<5> oh
<8> Of course it does, I'm in NL.
<8> Haha
<5> Dominus: Good eye
<5> online
<5> lol
<12> IM here now
<12> for a few anyway.
Return to
#politics
or
Go to some related
logs:
#politics
#stocks
#politics
adrianna chase
psylocybin mushroom plugs'
#gamedev
#computers
#stocks
#politics
#worldcup
|
|