Words of Advice:

"We have it totally under control. It's one person coming from China. It's going to be just fine." -- Donald Trump, 1/22/2020

“We will not see diseases like the coronavirus come here..and isn't it refreshing when contrasting it with the awful presidency of President Obama."
-- Trump Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany, 2/25/20

"I don't take responsibility for anything." --Donald Trump, 3/13/20

"If Something Seems To Be Too Good To Be True, It's Best To Shoot It, Just In Case." -- Fiona Glenanne

"Flying the Airplane is More Important than Radioing Your Plight to a Person on the Ground Who is Incapable of Understanding or Doing Anything About It." -- Unknown

"There seems to be almost no problem that Congress cannot, by diligent efforts and careful legislative drafting, make ten times worse." -- Me

"What the hell is an `Aluminum Falcon'?" -- Emperor Palpatine

"Eck!" -- George the Cat

Tuesday, December 3, 2019

So, How Far Do You Take Moral Superiority

In a post mainly about HIV/AIDS coming to rural areas because of opioid addiction, a "caring conservative" advocated not treating anyone who is gay who contracts HIV.

So I want to know: How far do you guys on the Right want to take medical Darwinism? Let's try a few hypotheticals:
  • You're a paramedic. You're called to an OD at a trailer park. You have Narcan and can easily save that person's life. Do you?
  • Second version of that:  The person ODing is the son of one of the richest men in the state.  Do you administer a dose of Narcan?
  • You're running an ER.  Several people come in, injured in a collision.  The driver is obviously intoxicated.  Do you treat him, or do you set him aside?
  • You're a cop, responding to a domestic incident.  A guy has beat the shit out of his girlfriend.  You've responded to calls involving these people before.  Do you do anything, because the girlfriend won't get a protection order, let alone leave the guy?
  • You're a first responder, responding to a crash where one vehicle smashed into the rear of a truck.  One of the cops on the scene picks up the driver's phone, examines it and pronounces that the driver had been texting at the time of the impact.  Do you let the driver bleed out in the wreck?
  • Same situation, the driver is a powerful politician in the political party you support.  You think the politician could eventually be president.
  • Two cars collided.  The occupants of Car A are in worse shape than Car B.  The people in Car A weren't wearing their seat belts.  The ones in Car B were wearing their seat belts.  Who do you treat first?
  • A motorcycle rider is brought into the ER who obviously was wearing shorts, a t-shirt and no helmet.  The rider's injuries are bad and consistent with not wearing safety gear.  Treat or no treat?
There are a lot more that can be dreamed up, depending on one's political leanings. Is there any place for applying a sense of moral judgment to treatment decisions? And if so, where do you draw the line?


CenterPuke88 said...

Because, Jesus!

dinthebeast said...

Yup. If you read the book, there's not much question about which side Jesus would take in these hypotheticals.

-Doug in Oakland

CenterPuke88 said...

Right Doug, he’d have those communists dragged right out of the place and toss any sinner into a pit, right?

0_0 said...

I'd do what I can. Triage might affect order.

If there is a trolley, I'm'na try to derail it.