Published
Due to a few people, including myself that thought that the hemophobic thread was homophobic and stated such...here is a homophobic thread...lets keep it nice now :).
I too (as one person stated) had a male homosexual whos partner was his MPOA. Sadly, most of the information was told to the patient and not his partner. His partner was so confused about the pts care, what the plans were, and was trying so hard to arrange after care that would fit their needs. No one really would discuss it with him, even though he proved he was a MPOA.
TILL I came along! I got everyone involved together and we discussed our short term and long term goals in a way both patient and partner could understand. There was quite a family dynamic involved with the pts family (against the pt being homosexual with a partner..they treated the partner like slime!), but the partner was the LEGAL MPOA! So I got in there and made it clear to everyone :).
It all worked out great, all sides were happy...(the patient was suicidal and depressed when he came in, so he wished to go to a psych inpatient to get better...bless his heart! He was so saddened by this family/partner fight he was just so sad looking and you can tell he just couldn't take it anymore!!!). And the MD's and RN's felt that they did actually get the info to the right persons involved and felt good about it. It was just that no one really got into that situation deep enough to figure out whom they should be talking with r/t the dynamics and fragile nature of the patients mind (we didn't want him to kill himself over his family and partner fighting!!!).
But would this have been the same if this was a married hetrosexual couple???? Would the wife or hubby automatically get the info with no question???
Makes me wonder....
*groan*The country's founding was by a bunch of guys who were mostly Deists - some with an open hatred/contempt of Christianity.
Did Christianity play a role? Absolutely. But to say the laws were/are "wholly" based on Christian views of the Bible isn't supported by historical evidence.
Common Law predates the arrival/dominance of Christianity in Europe and we derive our laws from British Common Law.
This is true. I assume you are referring to the Constitution as being based on
British Common Law, and not all the statutes, or Executive Orders, and such.
ZASHAGALKA, RN
3,322 Posts
I agree with you. But, this country was ALSO founded upon fleeing religious persecution.
Most of religion has to do w/ the rules for living together in society. Look at the 10 commandments. More than half of them are related to society building: don't lie, don't steal, don't commit adultery, honor your parents, etc.
Are we being religious by saying that murder should be illegal? Or simply acknowledging the obvious: many key tenets of religion coincide w/ society building.
So I agree with you. This nation's laws are based in Judeo-Christianity values. . . with one key difference: this nation's laws specifically interject that its citizens need not belong to the religion upon which its laws are founded. So long as your values don't affect the community, our nation's foundations lend to support the view that those values need not belong to the values that 'founded' this nation.
Having a law that serves NO other purpose but to enforce a particular religious observation actually runs COUNTER to the founding principles of this nation.
~faith,
Timothy.