A National Health Service trust in the UK has announced that it will deny treatment to patients it deems are ‘racists’ or ‘sexists’.

submitted by [deleted] from twitter.com

all 37 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted]  (8 children)

[deleted]

    [–]go1dfish 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.

    — Gerald Ford

    [–]Otacon 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Remember when the IRS was weaponized against conservatives toward the beginning of the Obama administration

    Can I get the rundown on this?

    [–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-28/obamas-irs-admits-specifically-targeting-tea-party-conservatives

    https://www.wnd.com/2018/01/another-court-rebukes-irs-for-targeting-tea-party/

    [–]Otacon 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Will read up later. Thank you kindly

    [–]cumcrust 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    BuT RacISts DoNT DesERve HealTHCaRe

    [–]black_hole_son 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Many countries provide public health sytems just fine. America is so backwards in so many ways.

    [–]thefadd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    This story isn’t about America.

    [–]Squizzel 8 insightful - 5 fun8 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 5 fun -  (2 children)

    will they charge for racism and sexism testing?

    [–]Assfuck 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

    You gotta loicense for testing though?

    [–]khsdafhlsadf 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    No; I'm pretty sure the nurse or doctor just gets to decide that they don't like your attitude or whatever, and you can die without repercussions for them.

    [–]magnora7 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

    It's not a national health service anymore if you're going to deny taxpayers access to it...

    [–]Otacon 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (17 children)

    Then it was bank accounts and mortgages

    Anybody got a source on this one? I'm out of the loop.

    Anyways it'll be interesting to see the right's reaction to this. This seems like the logical extension of the mentality the right applied to the whole "bake the cake" controversy some time ago. If you say that one group of people can and should discriminate because of their values then it'd be hypocritical to disavow such actions when applied by other people.

    Obviously this is a shitty thing for the NHS to do, and I do hope it gets revoked or the rulings are undone swiftly, but nonetheless the reaction will be interesting.

    [–]Cade_Connelly_13 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

    Trying to equate a private business with a public service funded by taxpayer dollars? Seriously?

    [–]Otacon 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

    Publicly funded services are already subject to this phenomenon. I haven't seen a whole lot of conservative outcry about catholic hospitals either.

    [–]khsdafhlsadf 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

    Now you're equating a single or small group of providers not providing elective procedures with a clear and highly restricted moral objection with a nations entire health system allowing denial of coverage, including emergencies it would seem, based on a values judgement of, let's face it, untrained and very likely biased individuals. This is probably the worst case of false equivalence fallacy I've seen in a long time.

    I've been flipped. I've been rooting for national healthcare in the US, but this is a rock solid argument against it.

    [–]Otacon 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Catholic hospitals can deny emergency service. I already pointed this out earlier

    [–]thefadd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Obviously, you’d be denied service in the UK, you racist POS.

    [–]Trucker_Joe 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

    One is a giant public service paid for by the people they want to turn away, one is small private business that didn't collect any money beforehand. One is an essential health service, one is a non-essential culinary art service. Vital differences and it's completely ridiculous to try to equate the two situations. There's a lot of nuance.

    Hardly anyone on the right would have a problem with some leftist bakery denying someone a cake as long as all bakeries are permitted to do so. No one's gonna die or have their health put in jeopardy from being denied a cake.

    [–]Otacon 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

    Something something publicly funded.

    Catholic hospitals are free to exclude as they please, and regularly excercise that right and yet receive funding the same as any hospital. That second story is an example of them refusing emergency services to a woman in a life-threatening situation, so there isn't even a grey area about it only happening with non-emergency procedures.

    And I am not aware of any conservative politicians, whether they're a twitter talking head or an actual politician, that are opposed to these rules around catholic hospitals.

    [–]khsdafhlsadf 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    Something something publicly funded.

    Pure mushmouth retardation. "Gender affirming"? FFS. It's a fucking sex change op. Completely elective, and there are still plenty of options for getting it done. This ain't even in the same league. If I was a mushmouth retard like you, I would just say "whataboutism." But, I'm not, and I won't. That argument is even more retarded than you're terrible illogical mess.

    [–]Otacon 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

    So not only did you shift the goalpost from "a publicly funded institution denying a taxpayer service is always bad" to "a publicly funded institution denying a taxpayer service is only bad if it's life threatening". Great.

    Not only have we moved the goalposts but we've now willfuly ignored the second article I posted of a woman being denied a LIFE SAVING operation due to deadly complications with her miscarriage, and the subsequent paragraph I posted afterwards.

    Why even reply if you're a dishonest mouthbreather?

    [–]khsdafhlsadf 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    So not only did you shift the goalpost from "a publicly funded institution denying a taxpayer service is always bad" to "a publicly funded institution denying a taxpayer service is only bad if it's life threatening". Great.

    No I didn't. This is idiotic to even suggest.

    I posted of a woman being denied a LIFE SAVING operation due to deadly complications with her miscarriage, and the subsequent paragraph I posted afterwards.

    Perhaps you shouldn't have led with the sex-change op story. I did go back and read that Huff Po article. It's a complete disaster. They've clubbed out the nuance and fail to give any real details (mercifully, I might add, I've been through a miscarriage with my ex-wife and would rather not read about one in detail but I would). That article reeks of agenda, and the fact that it is so light on details does not lend credibility to the author. If anything, attempting to use that article at all is more proof that you're not able to examine this with a critical eye.

    [–]thefadd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    oh jesus, talk about lowering the pyramid of debate

    what a fucking shill

    [–]Otacon 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Just because you disagree doesn't mean I'm lowering the pyramid. Get real

    [–]thefadd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    No, it doesn’t. And yet you are.

    [–]cumcrust 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    Those two things aren't remotely relateable. The people they deem racist or sexist, most likely arent. Those are just buzzwords. Somebody who owns a private business not baking a cake for religious reasons is not the same, as it is protected by the constitution. You can literally call anyone a racist and liberals will buy into it regardless of whether they remotely are.

    [–]Otacon 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Those two things aren't remotely relateable

    They seemed pretty related.

    The people they deem racist or sexist, most likely arent

    Moving the goalpost, and irrelevant. Would you have the same issue with what the NHS is doing if they accurately labeled people as racist? Most likely. So there's no point adding the qualifier that its bad because it's inaccurate (according to yourself)

    Those are just buzzwords

    Racism and Sexism are just buzzwords? Can I get a citation on that one?

    as it is protected by the constitution

    Lots of fucked up stuff is protected by the constitution. Just check my other replies ITT about catholic hospitals

    [–]thefadd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    you’re related

    [–]black_hole_son 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Trump is a well known racist, at least you and I can agree on that point.

    [–]Only71Genders 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

    And since the left says everyone is racist and sexists, they can now selectively deny service to anyone they don't like. Guessing white males will be at the top of that list. Especially breeding aged ones.

    [–]black_hole_son 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

    Do you have a sorce for your ridiculous statement? Of course not, because anyone with half a brain knows it's a bullshit blanket statement with zero merit.

    [–]thefadd 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    your ignorant comment is the sauce

    [–]Only71Genders 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Try Google. It's a good "sorce" for any questions you might have about the left, and the Jews. I'm not your personal assistant.

    [–]Snow 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

    Great for cut down the budget.

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Jerry Corbyn will fix this

    [–]black_hole_son 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Shit title is shit, this is not what the article says at all.

    [–]RuckFeddit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I guess all the muzzie men turning up there will die from no treatment then.