Private hospitals exempt on pill law
amban
Headline: Private hospitals exempt on pill law
Date: December 7, 2005
By Scott Helman, Globe Staff | December 7, 2005
The state Department of Public Health has determined that Catholic and other
privately-run hospitals in Massachusetts can opt out of giving the
morning-after pill to rape victims because of religious or moral objections,
despite a new law that requires all hospitals who treat such victims to
provide them with emergency contraception.
The decision, which is likely to result in a legal challenge, reignites an
issue that has been fiercely debated on Beacon Hill: who should have access
to emergency contraception and which hospitals, pharmacies, and medical
centers should be required to provide it.
The ruling set off criticism from reproductive rights advocates and other
backers of the new law, who believe rape victims should have wide access to
what they say is a safe, effective means to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
But it heartened conservatives and Catholic groups, who oppose the
morning-after pill because they believe it amounts to abortion in some
cases.
The ruling, which the department plans to outline to hospital CEOs in a
letter this week, says the new law applies to all hospitals but does not
nullify a statute passed years ago that says privately-run hospitals cannot
be forced to provide abortions or contraception.
''We feel very clearly that the two laws don't cancel each other out and
basically work in harmony with each other," Paul Cote Jr., commissioner of
the Department of Public Health, said in an interview yesterday.
The new law, which was passed overwhelmingly by the Legislature this summer
over the objections of Governor Mitt Romney, takes effect next week. Backers
of the measure yesterday said the department's decision is evidence that
Romney, who said during his 2002 campaign that he supported broader access
to emergency contraception, is actually fighting to undermine it.
''We're very disappointed that the Romney administration is not honoring the
intent of the Legislature, who voted overwhelmingly to protect the health of
rape victims," said Melissa Kogut, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice
Massachusetts.
The emergency contraception pill, also called Plan B, is a high dose of
hormones that women can take up to five days after sex to prevent pregnancy.
Supporters say that the pill prevents pregnancies by halting ovulation,
fertilization, or implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterine wall, but
that it has no effect on a firmly implanted egg. The only connection to
abortion, they say, is that it will reduce them by preventing unwanted
pregnancies.
But opponents who believe that life begins at conception contend that the
pill can cause a ''chemical abortion" by hampering implantation in the
uterine wall.
The Department of Public Health decision is welcome news for Catholic
hospitals who do not provide emergency contraception and feared that the new
law would make them do so. (In 2004, NARAL surveyed the 71 hospitals in
Massachusetts with emergency rooms and found that one in six did not offer
emergency contraception to rape victims. Among the nine Catholic hospitals
included in the survey, NARAL found that six did not offer it.)
Judy Mackey, a spokeswoman for Saint Vincent Hospital in Worcester, which
does not offer the morning-after pill, said it would have been difficult for
the hospital to navigate between state law and Catholic tenets.
''I'm glad they sorted it out and it's a clear path for us, because
obviously being in the gray area is not good," Mackey said. The dilemma, she
said, was ''how to be legally compliant and compliant with our religious
objectives?"
Lawmakers, however, said the Legislature had something very different in
mind: that rape victims could get emergency contraception at any hospital,
Catholic or not.
''There is no mistaking the intention of the law," said Senator Susan C.
Fargo, a Lincoln Democrat and cosponsor of the bill.
The question of whether the new law would trump the existing statute
preventing any private hospital from being forced to provide an abortion or
contraception was central to the debate earlier this year in the
Legislature. State Representative John Rogers cited the existing law in an
unsuccessful bid to exempt Catholic hospitals. Without that exemption, he
said he believed those hospitals would have to give emergency contraception
to rape victims under the bill.
Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly, the state's top law enforcement official
and a Democratic candidate for governor next year, criticized the Department
of Public Health decision yesterday.
''We believe the law is clear and that it applies to all hospitals," Reilly
said in a statement. ''We expect all hospitals to follow the law."
Reilly's aides would not elaborate on whether the office would defend the
ruling if it is challenged.
Romney's communications director, Eric Fehrnstrom, said the governor felt
that the decision made sense because it ''respects the views of healthcare
facilities that are guided by moral principles on this issue."
Fehrnstrom and Cote said the governor had not pressured the department to
come up with its legal interpretation.
''The staff at DPH did their own objective and unbiased legal analysis,"
Fehrnstrom said in an email. ''They brought it to us, and we concur with
it."
State Senator Pamela Resor, an Acton Democrat and lead sponsor of the new
law, said lawmakers might file legislation that specifically repeals the
prior statute.
''We'll pursue it any way we have to," she said.
Reproductive rights groups say it is unfair to limit hospital access for
rape victims who are not able to choose which hospital they go to -- if
they're taken there by ambulance, say, or because there's not another
facility nearby.
''Rape victims shouldn't have to worry about the affiliation of a hospital
when they go to an emergency room or are brought there by an ambulance to
receive necessary care," said Angus McQuilken, public affairs director for
the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts.
Administration officials dismissed those concerns, saying it is unlikely
that a rape victim would face a hardship because some hospitals choose not
to provide emergency contraception.
''I don't think that's a hypothetical that really holds water," Cote said.
Seven other states with emergency contraception laws require all hospitals
to provide it to rape victims.
None of them exempt hospitals opposed to providing contraception or abortion
services.
People on both sides of the issue in Massachusetts agreed on one thing: that
this is hardly the last word.
''Generally this is a victory for religious freedom and for conscience
rights," said C. J. Doyle, executive director of the Catholic Action League
of Massachusetts.
''It's encouraging, but we're not out of the woods yet."
Scott Helman can be reached at she...@globe.com.
To see this recommendation, click on the link below or cut and paste it
into a Web browser:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/12/07/private_hospitals_exempt_on_pill_law
amban
Maureen McM
amban wrote:
Ominous.
It will embolden the Christian right to push farther, to threaten boycotts of pharmacy chains
that provide the pill and get them to withdraw it's availability....
>
>
>
>
> [Image]
--
Maureen McMahon
Membre de L' Academie des Femmes
One of the Lesbian Immortals of the Left Bank
We never die....
"She would clench her hands in a kind of fury. How long was this persecution to
continue. How long would God sit still and endure this insult offered to His creation?
How long tolerate the preposterous statement that inversion
[homosexuality/Lesbianism] was not a part of nature? For since it existed what else
could it be? All things that existed were a part of nature."
"The Well of Loneliness" ---Radclyffe Hall
amban
"Maureen McM" <BonV...@LadyHeathers.Palace.org> wrote in message
news:43979C99...@LadyHeathers.Palace.org...
>
>
> amban wrote:
>
>> The following appeared on Boston.com:
>> Headline: Private hospitals exempt on pill law
>> Date: December 7, 2005
>>
>> By Scott Helman, Globe Staff | December 7, 2005
>> >>
>
> Ominous.
> It will embolden the Christian right to push farther, to threaten boycotts
> of pharmacy chains
> that provide the pill and get them to withdraw it's availability....
This is one of the reasons why we must continue to challenge the church even
though we have left.
AMBAN
>
>
> --
> Maureen McMahon
>
HCB88
news:dn95u...@news2.newsguy.com...
>
> This is one of the reasons why we must continue to challenge the church
> even though we have left.
>
Challenge the Church by reaching into your pockets and building your own
hospitals rather than trying to misuse the force of the civil laws to coerce
It into committing acts that it considers immoral.
If it were up to me, I would serve notice on the government that Catholic
hospitals will CLOSE THEIR DOORS rather than be forced into violating
matters of conscience.
Those hospitals were charitable institutions, and when the people turn their
backs on that fact, it is time for the bigmouths to fill the void with their
own alternatives.
But those with the loudest criticisms are always the ones with the slimmest
pocketbooks.
Newk Indofman
"HCB88" <H...@lavasoft.dk> wrote in message
news:dn9pjh$jq2$1...@domitilla.aioe.org...
> If it were up to me, I would serve notice on the government that Catholic
> hospitals will CLOSE THEIR DOORS rather than be forced into violating
> matters of conscience.
Let it be done. Our society doesn't need the Catholic Church.
HCB88
"Newk Indofman" <Wi...@FullVoice.org> wrote in message
news:q%Zlf.1792$pE4....@tornado.socal.rr.com...
Tell that to one of the regulars here, who had surgery in a Catholic
hospital not that long ago, rather than seeking care from a Pagan
institution . . .
Alan Ferris
>"amban" <Trollssmellfu...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>news:dn95u...@news2.newsguy.com...
>>
>> This is one of the reasons why we must continue to challenge the church
>> even though we have left.
>>
>
>Challenge the Church by reaching into your pockets and building your own
>hospitals rather than trying to misuse the force of the civil laws to coerce
>It into committing acts that it considers immoral.
So you would not object to Jehovah Witnesses buying up all the
hospitals in your town and banning people from having blood
transfusions.
--
Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
()'.'.'()
( (T) )
( ) . ( )
(")_(")
amban
"Alan Ferris" <al...@spamddandd.com> wrote in message
news:g6dhp1h6i2i5tms2j...@4ax.com...
Yep Jimmer is on his last drop and the ambulance takes him to a JW hospital.
Oops sorry Charlie we do not allow blood transfusions.
AMBAN
Newk Indofman
"Pagan"? This is America. We have a long tradition of strict separation of
Church and State. Move to Iran if this if this system isn't to your liking.
Maureen McM
Alan Ferris wrote:
Very simple, if they will not treat ALL emergency cases in a fashion that is
consistent with accepted medical practice, then they ought to lose their license
to have an emergency department and funding transferred to an institution that
will.....
>
>
> ()'.'.'()
> ( (T) )
> ( ) . ( )
> (")_(")
--
HCB88
I object only to foreigners that spout off their opinions about the domestic
affairs of the United States, as though they had any standing in this
country. Some people just don't know their place.
HCB88
"Newk Indofman" <Wi...@FullVoice.org> wrote in message
So WHY did a certain "regular" not go to one of the secular hospitals,
rather than to one that was owned and operated by the same Institution that
she has expressed such hatred for?
Her contempt for the Catholic Church didn't get in the way of her having
availed herself of Its medical care, did it?
Hypocrites.
Alan Ferris
I am thankful I live in a country where I can get the correct and
appropriate medical treatment in without having to worry what faith
the hospital or doctor is.
Here if medical staff object to any particular treatment due to faith
or morals then the hospital always tries not to put them in the
position of having to give it. Normally in a large hospital it would
rarely be that they are the only one on duty. However, if they are,
it is expected that they will act in the patients best interest.
Our family doctor is Catholic, but if my wife wanted the pill or
anything else there are 3 other doctors to see.
Alan Ferris
<BonV...@LadyHeathers.Palace.org> wrote:
>
>
>Alan Ferris wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 12:13:11 -0500, "HCB88" <H...@lavasoft.dk> wrote:
>>
>> >"amban" <Trollssmellfu...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>> >news:dn95u...@news2.newsguy.com...
>> >>
>> >> This is one of the reasons why we must continue to challenge the church
>> >> even though we have left.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Challenge the Church by reaching into your pockets and building your own
>> >hospitals rather than trying to misuse the force of the civil laws to coerce
>> >It into committing acts that it considers immoral.
>>
>> So you would not object to Jehovah Witnesses buying up all the
>> hospitals in your town and banning people from having blood
>> transfusions.
>>
>> --
>> Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
>
>Very simple, if they will not treat ALL emergency cases in a fashion that is
>consistent with accepted medical practice, then they ought to lose their license
>to have an emergency department and funding transferred to an institution that
>will.....
They would in this country. Also I am surprised, I would have thought
somebody would have sued them for malpractice.
But then UK doctors take the Hippocratic oath, maybe due to Catholics
view on oaths they don't do it in Catholic hospitals in the US.
--
Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
Bonnie Bitch
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of Alan Ferris
<al...@spamddandd.com>
What really scares me about all this
PC-nicey-nicey-kiss-ass-praise-a-llujah-christ-stain-insanity crap
here in the States WRT medical care -- what'll happen when a
pharmacist or doctor is a Christian scientist? (Those are the
whackjobs who pray for medical intervention from their sky booger
rather than seeking reality-based medical care, even for their kids).
Will I be denied my monthly supply of Advair because the pharmacist's
religion conflicts with my need to breathe in the winter?
I'm sorry, but these fucktarded nutjobs' right to practice their faith
ends where my body begins. They can jolly well fork over any and all
prescribed, necessary meds or become shoe salespeople.
Newk Indofman
Whatever medical care that person received or didn't receive in a Catholic
hospital is available elsewhere. What's really hypocritical is to argue from
the supposition that people who go to Catholic hospitals must all be
faithful Catholics. Why don't you Catholics start your own theocracy -- a
good location would be right next to your favorite extremist Muslim country,
since you have so much in common.
amban
I think this is the whole point, not everyone has access to more than one
hospital.
Amban
>
> Hypocrites.
>
HCB88
> hospital.
>
Not applicable in the specific instance that I was referring to.
Catholic hospitals were founded out of sense of charity, and I find it
unacceptable that anyone would attempt to impose their own ideology upon
such places, considering that they would misuse the power of the civil
government to force the employees to commit acts that they find personally
reprehensible and immoral.
Let the State build their own hospitals, rather than relying upon the
charity of Catholics, and then they can do what they want in them. What's
next? Abortion on demand, performed by Catholic doctors in Catholic medical
facilities?
For people that claim to cherish personal freedom, you seem to have no
problem making others conform to your view of the world, whether or not they
have obstacles like moral issues standing in the way.
HCB88
>>is
>>consistent with accepted medical practice, then they ought to lose their
>>license
>>to have an emergency department and funding transferred to an institution
>>that
>>will.....
>
> They would in this country. Also I am surprised, I would have thought
> somebody would have sued them for malpractice.
>
> But then UK doctors take the Hippocratic oath, maybe due to Catholics
> view on oaths they don't do it in Catholic hospitals in the US.
>
TAKE their facilities? Not in America. We believe in the concept of
private property here.
As for their funding, that is something that can go--along with all the
freeloaders that come in for services that have neither the money to pay for
them nor the insurance coverage to reimburse the Catholic hospital.
The State greatly benefits from not having to build and run their own
hospitals. All they do is pay out a pittance to others, who do all the
work. Sort of like an employer that gives a mileage allowance and demands
the use of the employees' cars. The employee has to purchase the vehicle,
finance it, maintain it, insure it, clean it--and put it at the employers'
disposal when needed during working hours. I wish that I could just pay
$.45 per mile and have a vehicle magically appear at my front door whenever
I required one.
Catholic hospitals do not have any ethical obligation to provide medical
services that are opposed to their religious principles. Catholic hospitals
are NOT the agent of the State, and the State is free to open their treasury
and build hospitals any time they want to.
If the Church were to close their hospitals, they would be relieved of a
huge burden, and the various communities would have to pony up lots of money
to replace those facilities--with no guarantee that the overall level of
care would be as good. Just look at Britain--people are always dying while
on waiting lists for treatment.
HCB88
> appropriate medical treatment in without having to worry what faith
> the hospital or doctor is.
>
Your country's socialized medicine is a joke. That is why people who have
the financial means go to other countries for their medical treatment. A
lot of them come to America.
> Here if medical staff object to any particular treatment due to faith
> or morals then the hospital always tries not to put them in the
> position of having to give it.
And in America, if a religiously-based hospital objects to any particular
procedure, it is not required to provide it, either. Catholic hospitals do
not hold a monopoly. Any organization that wants to provide euthanasia or
abortions is free to go and build their own institution--and the Catholic
hospitals will not stand in their way.
Normally in a large hospital it would rarely be that they are the only one
on duty. However, if they are, it is expected that they will act in the
patients best interest.
>
So why are your waiting lists so long that people die before their "best
interests" are met?
amban
>
> "amban" <Trollssmellfu...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>>
>> I think this is the whole point, not everyone has access to more than one
>> hospital.
>>
>
> Not applicable in the specific instance that I was referring to.
>
> Catholic hospitals were founded out of sense of charity, and I find it
> unacceptable that anyone would attempt to impose their own ideology upon
> such places, considering that they would misuse the power of the civil
> government to force the employees to commit acts that they find personally
> reprehensible and immoral.
The hospital in our town is now part of a catholic network and it is not the
only one in this area. So after thirty years do I have to change doctors
and hospitals?
AMBAN
amban
> "Alan Ferris" <al...@spamddandd.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>>Very simple, if they will not treat ALL emergency cases in a fashion that
>>>is
>>>consistent with accepted medical practice, then they ought to lose their
>>>license
>>>to have an emergency department and funding transferred to an institution
>>>that
>>>will.....
>>
>> They would in this country. Also I am surprised, I would have thought
>> somebody would have sued them for malpractice.
>>
>> But then UK doctors take the Hippocratic oath, maybe due to Catholics
>> view on oaths they don't do it in Catholic hospitals in the US.
>>
>
> TAKE their facilities? Not in America. We believe in the concept of
> private property here.
>
> As for their funding, that is something that can go--along with all the
> freeloaders that come in for services that have neither the money to pay
> for them nor the insurance coverage to reimburse the Catholic hospital.
Many working people do not have good health insurance coverage. These
people are not free loaders. Go walk in their shoes. In fact more and more
employers are cutting benefits and raising the cost of insurance.
amban
HCB88
> people are not free loaders. Go walk in their shoes. In fact more and
> more employers are cutting benefits and raising the cost of insurance.
>
But I don't see ARCers putting up the money for their medical needs--it is
charitable institutions like hospitals that are run by the despised Catholic
Church that are doing this work.
It is not up to anyone but the administrators of these hospitals to decide
whether they will provide any given medical procedure--not the government,
not the local political activists, not the politicians. These are private
hospitals, and they are under no obligation to fill the void left by
government's unwillingness to build their own hospitals. If the patient
wants an abortion, or a morning-after pill, they must seek this elsewhere.
HCB88
> the only one in this area. So after thirty years do I have to change
> doctors and hospitals?
>
You have the right to seek treatment at any institution that accepts your
insurance. You do not have the right to try to dictate that, as a condition
of licensure, those institutions provide every procedure that you happen to
want, regardless of whether the institution deems certain procedures as
immoral.
If that means that you would be better off changing doctors, then so be it.
amban
> "amban" <Trollssmellfu...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>>
>> Many working people do not have good health insurance coverage. These
>> people are not free loaders. Go walk in their shoes. In fact more and
>> more employers are cutting benefits and raising the cost of insurance.
>>
>
> But I don't see ARCers putting up the money for their medical needs--it is
You don't think so huh? You know nothing about us and I am willing to bet
that we have supported more unrelated people in need full time 24 hours a
day out of our own pockets in the last 10 years than the average private
person. No, I don't have to bet I know we have. How many people have
you helped in the past 10 years? And I am not talking about taking cast
off clothing to good will or an extra $25 in the collection basket. I mean
real help, having people live in your home and feeding them and clothing
them full time with no recompense.
There are many many people who have jobs and work and do not have adequate
health benefits. The catholic hospitals charge them just like any other
hospital.
AMBAN
Bonnie Bitch
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
<H...@lavasoft.dk>
>it is
>charitable institutions like hospitals that are run by the despised Catholic
>Church
Since when did Catholic hospitals stop charging top dollar for their
services and not release quarterly profit/loss statements?
Alan Ferris
wrote:
So according his ideas, nobody in the UK who is Catholic can go to a
hospital because they are secular.....
Alison
>
> I object only to foreigners that spout off their opinions about the domestic
> affairs of the United States, as though they had any standing in this
> country.
This is usenet, GayJimmer, not 'merka. Get used to it. The same rights that
allow you to post your self-hating homophobic drivel give us the right to
challenge it. Deal.
> Some people just don't know their place.
Ain't that just the truth ...
-- Ali
Eric the Blue
wrote:
>
I was in a motorcycle accident a few months ago and injured my
hand. (Before you make a comment, I was not at fault.) The nearest
hospital to where is live is not a Catholic hospital. But what if it
had been? Should I have been required to go far out of my way in order
to recieve medical care? And I live in an urban area. What of someone
who, if they did not want to go to a Catholic hospital, had to travel
over 100 miles to the next emergency room?
Did Christ turn away the sick? If He did not, what gives His
followers the right to do the same?
Eric the Blue
Maureen McM
Alison wrote:
Sis;.
Spent a chunk of time today responding to Ronan Mullen's article in the Examiner
on the SI board....take a look
Alan Ferris
>And in America, if a religiously-based hospital objects to any particular
>procedure, it is not required to provide it, either. Catholic hospitals do
>not hold a monopoly. Any organization that wants to provide euthanasia or
>abortions is free to go and build their own institution--and the Catholic
>hospitals will not stand in their way.
Reminds me of the Holy man passing by the injured man. Thankfully
there are still Samaritans in the world.
HCB88
For someone that resides in a country with socialized medicine (and a
mediocre example of medical services, at that) you have an unusually high
degree of concern over how things are run here in America.
I am not surprised, considering that the handful of ultra-Leftist,
anti-establishment people that sometimes call themselves "ARCers" all seem
to have negative opinions about anything and everything. They don't build
hospitals, they just complain about what they consider to be their
shortcomings--even if those hospitals are far distant from where they live.
Do any of you ever recover from your negativism?
Alan Ferris
<happy-holiday-to-arc-m...@your.house> wrote:
>Larry/Jimmer wanked...
>
>>For someone that resides in a country with socialized medicine
>
>Ah yes, the old myth regarding "socialized medicine"....
>
>One example here, jimmer, and then you can tell me how much you would
>pay in your country for the services...
>
>Person is a relative of mine.
>
>GP diagnoses knee replacement operation needed
>Referred to specialist of choice
>Operation scheduled at hospital of choice
>Pre-op x-rays, blood tests, physio meeting
>Meeting with dietician and anaethetist
>Ambulance ride to hospital
>Operation with surgeon and anaethetist of choice
>One week hospital stay
>Daily x-ray and blood tests
>Medicine as needed
>Daily visits by physio and surgeon
>Ambulance ride home
>Daily visits by nurse
>Daily visits by physio
>When would healed, daily visits to exercise pool to strengthen limb
>for as long as needed
Hell I have had over 13 ops on my knee, untold drugs and physio and
never once paid, except by paying my regular taxes.
amban
"Karen" <happy-holiday-to-arc-m...@your.house> wrote in
message news:n22sp19gm7aeedcss...@4ax.com...
> expensive thing.
>
> We don't have babies going without medicine, or children going without
> dental treatment, because the parent(s) can't afford it
Many working people here have to do exactly that. My Cobra insurance was
$600 a month. When it ran out and I had to acquire private insurance it was
only for ER care and hospitalization. It had a $2000 deductible. My son
broke his arm and we had to pay over $1000. It was a minor break that
merely needed a cast. We were paying hundreds of dollars a month for
nothing really. The adults skipped physicals because they were over $400
but we always paid for the children's. Doctors would give us samples
because some prescriptions for the children were over $200 a month. And
even now we pay a good amount each month for our health care and a co-pay
that continues to rise on our prescriptions..
I have seen elderly people crying at the pharmacy because they could not
afford their prescriptions. If there is such a thing as sin this is it.
AMBAN
Alison
Where I live, we have socialised medicine. It's pretty-much the same story,
though the NHS in the UK is often viewed as more efficient (which it is, IMO).
I have an condition which requires lifelong medication. Even my cholesterol
drugs cost upwards of €40 per month and my total monthly medical bill is about
€300. The maximum I ever have to pay is €85 per month for *all* my meds,
including those of my entire family & I have two kids. This ruling applies to
everyone in the state.
http://www.movetoireland.com/movepag/medcover.htm
> Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
-- Ali
HCB88
If you are entitled to psychiatric intervention you should consider availing
yourself of it. Your unusually high level of preoccupation with the
domestic affairs in countries that you do not hold citizenship in is
troubling.
Natalie Clifford Barney
HCB88 wrote:
It is called a Cosmopolitian viewpoint, one of the hallmarks of a thinking
person......
--
Natalie Clifford Barney
Le membre de L' Academie des Femmes
One of the Lesbian Immortals of the Left Bank
We never die....
"I am a lesbian. One needn't hide it."
Natalie Clifford Barney
Newk Indofman
And your opinion of the U.S. occupation of Iraq is what?
Bonnie Bitch
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of "HCB88"
<H...@lavasoft.dk>
>If I am entitled to psychiatric intervention I should avail
>myself of it. My unusually high level of preoccupation with the
>domestic and SEXUAL affairs of couples and singles
>who are not me is troubling.
OR
>Faggot! Faggot Faggot! <big gay squeal>
>Homo homo hmo! Homo! Homo! <big gay squeal/boa flip combo>
Choice of edition depends on whether Father Jimmer took his meds
and/or whacked off before saying Mass.
Alan Ferris
Don't worry Jimmer about such trivial facts, it is more important that
he be allowed to insult other countries that allow gay marriage, that
he take his instructions from Rome over the laws of his own country.
amban
"Karen" <happy-holiday-to-arc-m...@your.house> wrote in
message news:0a2up1h94i8i2lpj0...@4ax.com...
> larry/Jimmer wanked...
>>"Alan Ferris" <al...@spamddandd.com> wrote
>
> Larry, how much would you pay in your country?
I think Larry is an insurance man that is why he is against socialized
medicine. He is one of the bloodsuckers.
AMBAN
Alison
> Alison <cooties@mac[spam].com> wrote:
>>
>>Where I live, we have socialised medicine. It's pretty-much the same story,
>>though the NHS in the UK is often viewed as more efficient (which it is, IMO).
>>
>>I have an condition which requires lifelong medication. Even my cholesterol
>>drugs cost upwards of 40 per month and my total monthly medical bill is
>>about 300. The maximum I ever have to pay is 85 per month for *all* my
>>meds, including those of my entire family & I have two kids. This ruling
>>applies to everyone in the state. http://www.movetoireland.com/movepag/
>>medcover.htm
>
Yes.
> A relative receives insulin and all
> the necessary equipment free, and another relative receives thyroid
> medication free, as it is necessary for the rest of one's life.
That's right. Meds for epilepsy, PKU, heart conditions, etc are free for life
for ALL. Not bad at all.
Furthermore, there's an income threshold below which all medical treatment and
all medicine is provided free. My mom's having her hip replaced this week, as
it happens ... paid for by the state.
Any comments, Jimmer?
> Karen
-- Ali
Alison
>
> Sis;.
> Spent a chunk of time today responding to Ronan Mullen's article in the
> Examiner on the SI board....take a look
Ooh - just read it. Is it to be published, do you know? If so, I'll pick up a
few copies & mail ya one!
Well done on that article, though. I'd not read the original Mullen one until
now ...
-- Ali
Bonnie Bitch
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
<cooties@mac[spam].com>
Smart money says that Father Jimmer's comment will be:
"Faggot! Faggot faggot faggot! <>big gay squeal>
Homo homo! Homo homo faggot homo! <big gay squeal with boa flip> "
Alan Ferris
wrote:
Same here, if anybody is below a certain income threshold then they
receive all treatment and medicines free. Doctor, dentist and
opticians. So much more civilised than making many go without.
amban
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 23:16:40 -0000, Alison <cooties@mac[spam].com>
> wrote:
>
>>In <cd2up19v325ng2o7k...@4ax.com> Karen wrote:
>>> Alison <cooties@mac[spam].com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Where I live, we have socialised medicine. It's pretty-much the same
>>>>story,
>>>>though the NHS in the UK is often viewed as more efficient (which it is,
>>>>IMO).
>>>>
>>>>I have an condition which requires lifelong medication. Even my
>>>>cholesterol
>>>>about ?300. The maximum I ever have to pay is ?85 per month for *all*
>>>>meds, including those of my entire family & I have two kids. This
>>>>ruling
>>>>applies to everyone in the state.
>>>>http://www.movetoireland.com/movepag/
>>>>medcover.htm
>>>
>>> Do you get some medications free?
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>>> A relative receives insulin and all
>>> the necessary equipment free, and another relative receives thyroid
>>> medication free, as it is necessary for the rest of one's life.
>>
>>That's right. Meds for epilepsy, PKU, heart conditions, etc are free for
>>life
>>for ALL. Not bad at all.
>>
>>Furthermore, there's an income threshold below which all medical treatment
>>and
>>all medicine is provided free. My mom's having her hip replaced this week,
>>as
>>it happens ... paid for by the state.
>>
>>Any comments, Jimmer?
>
> Same here, if anybody is below a certain income threshold then they
> receive all treatment and medicines free. Doctor, dentist and
> opticians. So much more civilised than making many go without.
People here below a certain income get treatment and medicines under certain
governments programs. But it has to be very low and many people fall
through the cracks and you can't own property. Senior citizens usually have
Medicare which pays for medical but not prescriptions. There is a new
prescription program for them that just started and I don't know anything
about it except that my neighbor says it isn't worth it. There is Social
Security disability too.
But there are many working people who do not have benefits at their working
place and they do not get anything.
AMBAN
HCB88
>
> And your opinion of the U.S. occupation of Iraq is what?
It is "personal," that's what!
Newk Indofman
> "Newk Indofman" <Wi...@FullVoice.org> wrote in message news:RaCnf.4700
>>
>> And your opinion of the U.S. occupation of Iraq is what?
>
> It is "personal," that's what!
Hypocrite.
Miranda Writes, Devil's Advocate
From: H...@lavasoft.dk
Reply-to: H...@lavasoft.dk
> >homosexual .... homosexuals.... homosexual.....SODOMIZED.... homosexuals.
> >
> > sodomized
>
oohhhh <fap fap fap> homosexual <fap fap fap> homosexuals <fap fap fap>
homosexual <fap fap fap> SODOMIZED <fap fap fap> homosexuals <fap fap fap>
oh my god I'm so hard <fap fap fap> I want a hard cock up my ass <fap fap
fap> I want hot sticky cum all over my face <fap fap fap> I want it in my
mouth and dripping down my chin :^O--- <fap fap fap> I want cum pumped into
my willing gay ass (( ) <fap fap fap> I need it so bad <fap fap fap> fuck my
face <fap fap fap> I love to suck cock <fap fap fap> mmmm...great big hard
ones in my mouth :^O <fap fap fap> cock rings <fap fap fap> tea rooms <fap
fap fap> urinal sex <fap fap fap> sucking strangers cocks in filthy toilet
stalls <fap fap fap> leathermen <fap fap fap> hairy balls across my nose
<fap fap fap> glory holes <fap fap fap> sweaty jock straps <fap fap fap>
rimming my fuck buddies <fap fap fap> I love to think queer thoughts <fap
fap fap> I am HCB88 and I am such a FAGGOT <fap fap fap> I have sucked every
gay cock in Philadelphia <fap fap fap> I have rimmed Patrick Barker, the
one-nutted K of C gay boy fucktoy, SSAN: 516-585-6276, 11 Sep 48,
of 3025 Old Heritage Way, Beavercreek OH 45432, 426-8281, <fap fap fap> I'm
JimR and I'm so GAY <fap fap fap> I am Ahola and I am so QUEER <fap fap
fap> with my hard cock in my hand... :):):) <fap fap fap> I NEED to be
sodomized <fap fap fap> oh please Patrick give it to me again and again
<fap fap fap> ram it up my tight little boy pussy <fap fap fap>
oh...oh...oh...my balls are churning <fap fap fap> here it comes <fap
fappity fappity fappityfappity> UNNNGH...YUNNNGH...AAAAH...OH...
OH...OH...OH... oooooooooooohhhh...<whew>...now I've been a bad boy and made
a mess...the pages of my bible will be all stuck together now...oh
shit...I'll never be able to read deuteronomy again...goddamn...what if Mom
sees it...she'll know I've been flogging my gay dong and make me lick her
old mackeral snatch again...it wouldn't be so bad if she'd douche more often
than every six months...with her cheesy smegma her nasty old cunny is a real
tuna melt on a hot day...NO MOMMY I DON'T WANT TO PUT MY FACE DOWN THERE,
PLEEEEEEASE DON'T MAKE ME DO THAT AGAIN, PLEEEEEASE MOMMY DON'T MAKE ME DO
IT...oooooohhh...I'm so gay...I'm so bad...I'm so queer...I hate myself...I
am so useless...jesus loathes me because I like to be ass fucked...god hates
me because I love to suck cock...why did god make me so queer...I'm such a
fairy...a useless fuckstain...oh oh...now I'll have to suck off the priest
in the confessional to get absolution...I love the package he has under his
cassock though, it makes it worth the trip to the church...oh no...that's
making my sticker peck out again...I am SO queer...I am such a GAY
FAGGOT...I am SO fucked up...women despise me...so do most men...NOBODY
likes me EVERYBODY hates me, I'm gonna eat some worms...I'm so LONELY...oh
no...it's getting hard again...ooooohhhhhh <squick squick squick> I need to
do this all over again...I have to beat my gay meat all the time because
nobody except ugly one nutted Patrick will fuck me <squick squick squick>
he says I'm better than Barbara, though <squick squick squick> she won't
take it up the ass or swallow...I certainly will <squick slappity slap> WOE
IS ME...I'M NOT NORMAL <squick squick squick> I'm so queer <squick squick
squick slappity squick slap>> sitting here stroking my slippery cum covered
cock...<squickity squickity squickity>...one more sin won't make hell any
hotter <slappity squickity slappity squickity> I gotta get my vibrating butt
plug now...
JimR (aka HCB88)
--
Miranda Writes, Devil's Advocate
a.a. # 1596
EAC State Bar # 666
AFJC/ARC Denizen of Darkness# $665.99
Damned by Dore # 3:16 Abogada CUSSARD Numero Uno
Proud Alumna Fashion Princess and Club Partier Snobby Obnoxious Bitch# 1
(envy isn't attractive, dear)