In what can only be seen as another Islamic attack on the West, thousands of Islamic ninjas laid waste to several British hospitals over the weekend. Hospital staff were taken by complete surprise as the turquoise colored warriors blended in with doctors and patients alike.
Ok, so I may have embellished a little bit on the details. And maybe they weren’t really ninjas. Well, ok.. they didn’t really attack the hospital either. But I had a few of you going I can guarantee that much :)
On a serious note though, I do find this story a little fascinating. Honestly, I think the garbs are somewhat stupid. You’re going to a hospital to get treatment for an illness and that’s what’s important. So what if a doctor can see your ankles when he’s going to be looking at your insides potentially? I respect a Muslim woman’s desire to follow her religion’s rules, but it’s getting to a point where they are so intolerant that they want others to change to conform to their needs. What’s next? Islamic hospitals?
I’ve been in the hospital a few times and there were crucifixes in my room. Did I go running to the staff to have them removed? Did I take them down and threaten lawsuits? No, I accepted the fact that I was in a religious hospital and just went about my business. I was on their turf so I played by their rules. It’s that simple to me.
Doctors say that many women do not show up for vital operations because they fear the procedure will mean them breaking strict Islamic law."
What is wrong with these people? And I mean that in a sincere way. The first law of any person’s life should be to stay alive and healthy. To hell with any religion that endangers it! That’s just ignorant. Christians are guilty of this if I recall correctly. I remember hearing of some who are against transplants and other medical advances. And you know what… fine! It’s better you don’t get treatment and just disappear. That’s Darwinism at work. Hopefully you didn’t reproduce yet and pass on your "stupid" gene.
Just absurd. Anyone disagree? Because I’d love to hear it.
No related posts.
What is wrong with these people? And I mean that in a sincere way. The first law of any person’s life should be to stay alive and healthy. To hell with any religion that endangers it!
I had a friend that once came to school very ill, and was that way for quite some time. When I asked why he didn’t go to the hospital he said that his mother didn’t believe in that sort of thing and that if god had wanted us to use unnatural chemicals and machines to heal our bodies, he wouldn’t have given us prayer. It was one of those things, looking back, that started me down my path to not having faith. How could any mother look at a child with a fever of 105F, pale, sweating and not able to eat, and just decide to ‘leave it to god’. I’m a man and it even offended my non-existant maternal instincts. I later found out that he was also to be denied blood transfusions and organ transplants as these were not part of the body that god gave him.
I know he was a Christian of some type, but I don’t know what denomonation that was. Still a terrible thing when all the advances of modern medicine are denied to people, or are denied by people, because “god” “said” you shouldn’t.
I don’t disagree, but “hopefully you didn’t reproduce yet” seems pretty optimistic. Seems to me that the majority of people I see in hospitals are old (past reproducing old). Yeah, maybe they’ll lose a couple of percent of their population that they could have saved. But speaking of Darwinism, isn’t letting the very sick die in the interest of the healthy? I know, I’ve heard the parable of the ruler that exiles all the old people and then an old guy someone stashed in their attic solves the 3 riddles that the enemy ruler gives because old people have wisdom (ok, I don’t really remember how it goes). But realistically there’s some point where it’s best for the group/society to give up on a sick individual and move on, and I think a lot of western societies are overshooting and trying too hard to keep people alive, even as these fundamental types are not doing enough.
However, as an individual, I’m all for what keeps me alive (assuming I’m functional and not in horrible pain) and I’m happy to pass the buck on to the rest of society if I would have to. Not planning on it, but hey, things happen.
So yeah, I think the individuals that let themselves become sick/die are fools. The groups that encourage them aren’t necessarily, though. A religion is a thing in and of itself and if letting people die is beneficial, it’ll sure include some ideas about why the people should be damned pleased to do so.
Jones, he was probably Christian Scientist, or possible a JW. CS’s disapprove of the use of anything but prayer to treat illness, while JW disallow blood transfusions and similar stuff.
Also, if he was under 18, not treating him was probably illegal, and had someone complained CPS would have intervened.
JW’s are forbidden to accept blood or organs from another. Even under 18 in the Netherlands they carry a card in their wallet (for which a doctor MUST check). As long as it is signed by a parent and themselves it’s valid. Of course, with young children, doctor tend to “loose” this card.
Why would you do this? Well, if dieing young is the price to pay for eternity in heaven (instead of oblivion or eternity in hell) I’d take it to. (were it not that I don’t believe in fairy tales)
This merely reinforces my view that most religious people are insane. Muslims seem to get it the worst in Europe, but I haven’t actually been to the USA and had to put up with “proper” Christians yet, so my physical point of view is a bit subjective.
Anyway, aren’t they meant to protect the body god gave them, along the range of “no suicide”?
Sorry, that should be “strongly religious”…
Eh, I don’t see a problem with providing medical gowns that make patients feel more comfortable. On the flip side, if I woke up in a hospital room after an accident and saw a cross on the wall, I would ask to have it taken down (assuming I was able to speak). To a non-Christian, a cross is nothing more than a means of ancient execution. It’s not the sort of thing we want to see when we are recovering from illness. I’d be like having a noose hanging from the room’s door knob.
sidfaiwu, I finally disagree with you :) If you’re in a religious hospital for instance, St Mary’s or something similar, and you see a cross… you would have them remove it??
I can’t see justifying that or even caring. Honestly I just see a cross as a decoration and a piece of history. It means nothing to me and it shouldn’t mean a damn thing to any Atheist/Agnostic. Actually when I see a cross I kinda laugh inside knowing that people worship those things ;)
As for the gowns, I still feel they’re stupid. I have no problem with them being provided, but I just want to see where this will lead us. Will hospitals have to add mosques and temples soon?
It just never ends. My point being that people of faiths need to learn how to deal with secular buildings and organizations.
Hello gasmonso,
In one aspect, I agree with you. I would expect a religious hospital to have crosses and if I were severely injured/sick I probably wouldn’t care enough to say anything. If I was well enough, I would care and would politely ask to have it removed. If they refused, I’d put up with it and doubt I’d ask again. I certainly wouldn’t take legal action.
I suppose you can think of a cross as a historical/religious decoration, but I know it as a particularly brutal form of capital punishment that the Romans used quite often. All and all, it’s a very unpleasant object. When I see Christians wearing crosses as necklaces, it’s like seeing someone with a mini electric chair dangling from a chain around their necks. Ironically, it looks completely appropriate on a typical goth.
Beyond the gowns, I can see justification for having religious space inside of hospitals. Hospitals are common places for deaths and the dieing. It would make sense for them to have access to something they believe is crucial to their approaching afterlife. The problem is in who is going to pay for the space. If the hospital itself is maintaining the church/mosque/temple, then patients and anyone with medical insurance would ultimately be picking up the tab. I would have a problem with this. If, however, the space was funded from a separate, private institution, I see no problem.
It’s always tricky when having to deal with this sort of thing. On the one hand, Muslim women would be mortified, I’m sure, to be paraded around in a normal hospital gown. Their family too, I’m sure.
On the other hand, a good point was raised in the article and by Gasmonso about the limits of political correctness. Just where do we draw the line? It comes down to a clash of interests, in which case I would logically say that “when in Rome”…
However, it does come down to the people, and if they are more comfortable with one choice over another then so be it. My less tolerant half would argue that the gowns need not be so damned covered up… if anything to allow better visual diagnosis.
But I ramble. There is no answer to this problem, only compromises which leave neither party satisfied and start a whole host of other issues.
If you think how much skin you show is a greater problem than whether or not you’re going to live, than I would say you have more things to think about than your health.
When it comes to this kind of thing, I don’t care when the parents do it (they know the risks), but with situations like the one with Jehovah’s Witnesses mentioned above, I can’t help but fear for the children of these people. Their life is in someone else’s hands, and that person has put their life on the line for what? If you put your own life at risk for something like that, fine, but when you start risking people who may not know or be able to help themselves, then there is a serious problem. I feel nothing but support for the doctors who “lose” those identity cards. And if I would have to let people die in order to be granted passage into heaven, I think I would choose life.
I find the idea of religious hospitals strange anyway. We only have “neutral” hospitals. They do contain an area for christians and another for muslims and most a third for “general silence”. Having crosses hanging everywhere in a hospital would sure inspire quite a few lawsuits over here.
I agree with agnostic about the “when in rome” part, but the question is where to draw the line with it.
all religious people are dangerous, but muslims are by far the worst. why are we trying to cater to their crazy ass ways???
let them bitch and moan, noone should care…
boris, i disagree, Jehova’s Witness are by far worse, denying a child blood transplantation that could save his life and trying to cure him with his prayer…
I couldn’t care less if moslem women covered themselves up like that, except that my potential mates in this area are quite few due to most girls’ strong religious believes.
Hospitals should be secular, as well as countries(to hell with G W B for his “Atheists shouldn’t be seen as US citizens”) and if any religious people have a problem with it, let them buy 3ed party gowns which are accepted at the hospital, if they want to waste their money, let them. Hopefully natural selection soon rids of us of all those freaks and we can start truely embracing the feature.
Agony
Why should hospitals be secular? Government hospitals, yes, but if Catholics wish to start a hospital, why shouldn’t they? I’d rather have the choice of going to a state hospital or a Catholic hospital or an agnostic private hospital then having no choice and getting to go only to the state hospital. And if agnostic private hospitals are allowed, then by what possible form of ethics could a legal religion capable of allowing the same sort of treatement as any other by forbidden? So long as they’re doing everything humanly possible to save my life, I really don’t care if they add the divinely possible on top. Might even help!
(PS: Religious folk breed more than secular agnostic/atheist/non-practisers. Natural selection is getting rid of the group that isn’t breeding faster than the group that’s dying having bred.)
PS: Religious folk breed more than secular agnostic/atheist/non-practisers. Natural selection is getting rid of the group that isn’t breeding faster than the group that’s dying having bred.
I always love this argument that we’re going to be bred out by christians. As has been noted in so many other topics, they’ve become so scared of exposing their children to other world views (evolution, islam, gays) because they fear that it will wreck the faith of their children. Either the faith is slowly weakening allowing secularism to spread easier (we don’t need genetics to convince people of logic) or they’ll become an isolated group and fall prey to the standard weaknesses of isolated breeding populations (inbreeding, smaller population size). either way, I don’t see this as natural selection working against non-believers. Its just a survival mechanism, Religious folk have more children, much like mosquittos, due to the fact that so few will survive as a Religious person until adulthood.
Felix the Cassowary Says:
September 8th, 2006 at 10:08 am
“(PS: Religious folk breed more than secular agnostic/atheist/non-practisers. Natural selection is getting rid of the group that isn’t breeding faster than the group that’s dying having bred.)“
Interestingly, I agree with this statement but not in the context in which you meant it. When I read that I initially thought you meant that the increasing insanity of religous people was causing more and more people to realize they are wierdos, thus making more Agnostics and Athiest (hence, breeding them).
As for the post subject. A few years ago, I think here in Florida where I live, some Muslim woman tried (dont know the outcome) to SUE the DMV because they would not let her have a drivers license picture in her full burka. Now, sit back and absorb that for a moment to let the full impact of stupidity sink in. What the HELL is the point of a picture on a drivers license in which you are obscured from head to toe? One wonders if it was a big joke or was the person really THAT damaged?
Michael you are correct about the drivers licence issue. Luckily common sense prevailed and the woman was denied the licence. She appealed and was struck down again.
The way I look at it is very simple. If you don’t want to abide by the rules for the licence, don’t get one. Take the bus and shut-up.
Complete story here: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1479552/posts
Although most muslim women i know wear veils,ALL of them don’t wear veils like this one,they only cover their hair,and wear long sleeves,besides,when you come to a hospital you care more about your health and not what you have on.
I’m curious what CMS your site is constructed on? It seems to be actually good and I like all the customer features which might be available. Sorry if that is the fallacious place to ask this however I wasn’t sure how to contact you – thanks.