Muslim Medical Students Getting Picky

[Guest trex]

And the bleeding hearts refuse to see the folly in catering to all these accomodations: the backlash!

The irony of it, instead of achieving tolerance and harmony, the seeming do-gooders are only pushing us all towards the opposite direction.

But how does that take away from us, if a muslim doctor only treats muslim patients, ot taxi driver refuses to pick certain fairs, how does that erode our culture? They just have their cultural beliefs, which they are particular to. It appears in other areas of our society already, without any harm

Chinese

Italian

Portugese

Greek

even Gay people, which seem to like living in their own community with gay barbers and dentists.

See you dont really understand Canada at all,

There are parts of cities where these people collect into comunities, they live there and sometimes the signs in their store windows are not even in english, as seen in some parts of "china-town". Yet it has been this way for many decades, and not a problem that threatens "our culture", by which I assume you mean, western white-dominated christian culture. I dont see how it matters or affects us, as long as all these diverse groups of people learn to live under the umbrella of canadian laws, they can do the things they want, worship the god they want, say the prayers they want, even build communities of like-minded people who have their own preferences. But they cannot break the law nor threaten any other group, even in their own community. Thats how it always worked, whats the problem with that?

None. But some of the newcomers have problems integrating, they need to be taught about how Canada works and the best places to do this is from their own community in Canada. The biggest problem is intolerance and intolerance grows due to actions from both sides.

[ScottSA]

But how does that take away from us, if a muslim doctor only treats muslim patients, ot taxi driver refuses to pick certain fairs, how does that erode our culture? They just have their cultural beliefs, which they are particular to. It appears in other areas of our society already, without any harm

Chinese

Italian

Portugese

Greek

even Gay people, which seem to like living in their own community with gay barbers and dentists.

See you dont really understand Canada at all,

There are parts of cities where these people collect into comunities, they live there and sometimes the signs in their store windows are not even in english, as seen in some parts of "china-town". Yet it has been this way for many decades, and not a problem that threatens "our culture", by which I assume you mean, western white-dominated christian culture. I dont see how it matters or affects us, as long as all these diverse groups of people learn to live under the umbrella of canadian laws, they can do the things they want, worship the god they want, say the prayers they want, even build communities of like-minded people who have their own preferences. But they cannot break the law nor threaten any other group, even in their own community. Thats how it always worked, whats the problem with that?

None. But some of the newcomers have problems integrating, they need to be taught about how Canada works and the best places to do this is from their own community in Canada. The biggest problem is intolerance and intolerance grows due to actions from both sides.

This is a perfect example, I think, of the blind lemminglike radical tolerance that may end up destroying this country. A complete failure to distinguish between the components and the totality of Canada. This is the mindset of "Hotel Canada," only reframed as a set of laws instead, as if Canada is merely a set of communes under an umbrella of laws, with no other identity or loyalty. Its the recipe for building a nicely aired pile of tinder in the middle of a torchlit procession, and it can struggle along for a time, as long as there is a hegemonic soft power containment. When the factions in this utopian vision start to achieve numerical parity, just watch what happens.

[Guest trex]

Canada has laws to protect its citizens. Among them are hate crime laws, and laws to protect women from abuse, and to ensure their equality. In some cultures those things, abuse, are permitted, and carried out by religious leaders. When they come to Canada, they have to leave those things behind. Thats what Canada expects and by law, makes sure. No system is perfect, but at least, the system is there, show me a better one, and why.

Now the best way to make sure that immigrants understand what we are talking about when we say Canada, is to work with their community. It doesn't matter. if they are Spanish or Punjabi, they're still going to live in Canada and be good Canadians. But they need to hear it from other spanish or punjabi Canadians, thats one thing we should do more of, in regards to the ones who are coming from intolerant societies.

Canada already has everything it needs to meet the future, we just need to be better at doing it. Canada is unique and should stay as Canada, not change into the intolerant attitudes that are spreading now in some lands.

[sharkman]

This is a perfect example, I think, of the blind lemminglike radical tolerance that may end up destroying this country. A complete failure to distinguish between the components and the totality of Canada. This is the mindset of "Hotel Canada," only reframed as a set of laws instead, as if Canada is merely a set of communes under an umbrella of laws, with no other identity or loyalty. Its the recipe for building a nicely aired pile of tinder in the middle of a torchlit procession, and it can struggle along for a time, as long as there is a hegemonic soft power containment. When the factions in this utopian vision start to achieve numerical parity, just watch what happens.

Unfortunately with our birthrate unable or unwilling to maintain even present population levels, our governments are willing to make a deal with the devil on immigration. In the lower mainland of B.C., where I live, communities all over are closing multiple primary schools to the outrage of parents who will have to truck children to some distant school that will remain open. Immigration solves one problem, and the accompanying economic fallout a shrinking population would create, but it authors an eventual crisis down the road. Since politicians would get punted out of office for the economic reccession that would linger with shrinking numbers, they seem forced to open the immigration floodgates.

So it seems Canadian voters are indirectly ensuring Canada's demise.

[Slavik44]

But how does that take away from us, if a muslim doctor only treats muslim patients, ot taxi driver refuses to pick certain fairs, how does that erode our culture? They just have their cultural beliefs, which they are particular to. It appears in other areas of our society already, without any harm

There is a very fine line between being accommodating and bending over backwards and taking it up the you know what. We are not dealing with a parade or a hookah lounge here, we are dealing with the TRAINING of doctors, individuals who should be both professional and well versed in the subject matter. It is one thing to specialize or only treat certain people and conditions. It is another thing to re-write the curriculum requirements to cater to your personal beliefs. If you want to do that, if you want to cater to your personal beliefs at the expense of other peoples lives, you can make your own institution and call it Mohammed's Medical School, I don't care...we make the Christians do it and you can bet your ass we should make the Muslims do it. Getting a degree from an institution carries with it the fact that you have fulfilled the curriculum requirements. What they are arguing for is the ability to get a degree with out fulfilling the requirements.

You mentioned that immigrants should learn to live under the umbrella of Canadian law. Perfect, under the umbrella of Canadian law...if a dieing women went to a doctor and the doctor refused to help her, would he be living under the umbrella of Canadian law?

If you apply to an institution, and want to get a degree from that institution, don't you believe that you should have to meet the requirements to get the degree? Refusing to do so, would be refusing to live under the standards set by the institution in order to obtain the degree. Which is fine you are free to do so. However, you are not free to refuse to meet the standards set out in order to get a degree, and demand that you still get the degree. The consequence of refusing to meet the standards, is the failure to achieve the accreditation that says you met the standards.

[Moxie]

Trex wrote: But how does that take away from us, if a muslim doctor only treats muslim patients, ot taxi driver refuses to pick certain fairs, how does that erode our culture? They just have their cultural beliefs, which they are particular to. It appears in other areas of our society already, without any harm

It's called discrimination and we have laws to prevent such behaviors. Cab drivers turning away blind people, have they no shame. It's rather amusing that you expect us to tolerate their demands for special treatment based on their faith but put forth no analogy on them integrating into their adopted country other than having their fellow Muslims explain that we don't tolerate certain customs like wife beating. In a civilized society like Canada society expects our immigrants to be civil enough to know that wife beating and honour killings are not part of our "Civilized Society". It's a no brainer, however they commence to practicing their culture unabated because we are suppose to tolerate barbaric custums in the name of Multiculture. No thanks, the myth of "Multiculture" has been proven to be harmful to a free society. Read a few Eurabia newspapers, it's a war zone these days. Interestingly, Diversity is the new buss word for the Multicultist. They know the gig is up.

Diversity in Holland: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/2403..._fatal_incident

[luvacuppajoe]

A Muslim dentist insisted that a young woman wear an Islamic headscarf before he would agree to treat her for toothache, the General Dental Council was told yesterday.

Link

[betsy]

Right now all these little demands by some Muslim students and others like that dentist, may not look too serious. However there is indeed serious cause for concern.

With the shortages of medical doctors, what are the chances that Canadians will end up complying with these demands, including wearing headscarves....or worse, converting to Islamic faith....just to get access to a medical doctor?

What, could the radical Muslims found another way towards Islamification of the west?

IMHO, this should be nipped at the bud asap. And it should be dealt with in a manner that would discourage others from doing the same.

Any Muslim doctors who try to impose any of these shenanigans to anyone seeking medical attention should be reported right away...and if proven guilty, fined quite heavily on the first offense...and lose his license on the second.

Students who don't want to complete their training as required by our standard should be booted out of school and should be blackmarked from becoming a doctor.

A medical physician has so much power. That power should not be abused or used to coersce or discriminate. A would-be physician who entertains such abusive notions obviously does not have the simple requirement for becoming a doctor: the desire to save lives.

Edited October 21, 2007 by betsy

[betsy]

The curriculum is the curriculum - if someone doesn't pass, for whatever reason, they aren't entitled to the degree. Refusing to study something means that area of the curriculum can't be mastered, which means that person can't make the grade.

Its interesting that there was a long thread previously, debating whether or not doctors should be allowed to refuse the morning after pill. It seems that some people here think it is OK for Christian doctors to refuse a woman treatment because of their beliefs, but are up in arms about Muslim medical students making similar choices. For the record, I think any time someone puts their own irrational superstitions ahead of someone else's medical needs, they should lose the right to call themselves a doctor.

If I'm not mistaken, the doctors who refuse the morning pills are in a moral dilemma simply because they view the fetus (as soon as it is concieved) as a human being....and giving the morning pills is, in their view, committing murder.

This is a direct violation of their oath: to save lives.

This oath of saving lives is universal among physicians, I might add.

And whether they refuse or not, I think it is safe for me to assume that these Christian doctors are nevertheless fully-trained in their profession. That they did not refuse or lack any training regarding pregnancy or lack any knowledge of contraceptives, just because they do not approve of premarital sex. In other words, they've met our Standards. And if push comes to shoves, if for some reasons they are forced to do an abortion, at least we know they can!

That is a far cry from the issue we are discussing right now where-in the demands are simply descriminatory.

And these are coming from students! There's one big difference there already between the two incidents!

Just imagine how these students would be when they become fully licensed! When they have that power! What other outrageous demands they'll impose!

Just so to refresh your memory...these are the reasons why the Muslim students refuse to take the course:

Some Muslim medical students are refusing to attend lectures or answer exam questions on alcohol-related or sexually transmitted diseases because they claim it offends their religious beliefs.

Some trainee doctors say learning to treat the diseases conflicts with their faith, which states that Muslims should not drink alcohol and rejects sexual promiscuity.

First of all, as a simple example, how will they be able to treat...or properly diagnose someone with a liver problem if they lack the full knowledge?

As a patient, don't you feel alarmed that you might be under a doctor who's actually a quack???

And then what? They'll refuse to treat someone who has liver disease unless they determine and satisfy themselves that this patient did not contract the illness from drinking alcohol?

What is this? A Monthy Python skit?

Surely, you can see and understand the stark difference between the two incidents.

I'm actually surprised that you'd even think of comparing the two.

Edited October 21, 2007 by betsy

[Moxie]

The Muslim dentist should be fired and never be allowed to practice again, if he treated me is such a manner he'd be passing bits of fabric for a month. Their intolerance is the issue, they can leave their religion at home. This is a slippery slope and if we give an inch women's rights will go back to their favorite era c. 700.

The morning after pill does not distroy a fetus, that's an excuse not a reason. Hours after sex the sperm and the egg haven't even been introduced, it prevents the union. Thus the pious doctor has no moral delemia at all.

I'm beinging to believe these males are using Religion to abuse females.

[kimmy]

Suppose we have a Christian revivalist faith healer, who "treats patients" by smacking them on the forehead and shouting "Hallelujah!"

Or suppose we have a Santeria witch-doctor whose solution to every medical problem involves chanting and sacrificing a chicken.

Should these two characters be allowed to choose their own medical curriculum, graduate from a university medical program, and obtain an "MD" designation?

I mean, why not? Since the solution to every medical problem is either a smack on the forehead or a slaughtered chicken, these two individuals don't actually need to take any courses. (except, possibly, Chicken Carnage Technique 352 or Advanced Forehead Smacks 220.)

I mean, it would be religious discrimination if we prevented them from obtaining a medical degree to practice medicine according to their religious beliefs, right?

Right?

Of course not. It's a huge load of crap.

These individuals are free to keep on chanting, sacrificing chickens, and smacking people on the forehead, but it is moronic to suggest that they be sanctioned to do so by an academic institution and the medical regulatory board.

Which is why I still can't get over Jennie's earlier suggestion. It's not just stupid, it's offensively stupid.

-k

{WAP! "Hallelujah!" WAP! "Hallelujah!" WAP! "Hallelujah!"}

[sharkman]

Okay, I understand the wap hallelujah, but surely you can come up with something for the chicken! As one of the faithful who regularly sacrifices chicken (for my stomach), I demand equal time, can I get a witness?

[luvacuppajoe]

The morning after pill does not distroy a fetus, that's an excuse not a reason. Hours after sex the sperm and the egg haven't even been introduced, it prevents the union. Thus the pious doctor has no moral delemia at all.

I'm beinging to believe these males are using Religion to abuse females.

That's only one possibility. The morning after pill is designed to work in one of three ways, depending on how soon it's taken and at what point of her cycle a woman is in.

The makers of this pill describe the process as follows:

There are 2 pills in the pack. One should be taken immediately (within 72 hours of unprotected sex), and the second, 12 hours later. plan B is more effective the sooner you take it.

plan B does 1 of 3 things:

• It temporarily stops the release of an egg from the ovary;
  
• It prevents fertilization; or
  
• It prevents a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus.
  

Plan B website

An egg is viable for up to 24 hours once inside the fallopian tube, sperm for about 48 -- conception is entirely possible well within the 72 hour timeframe of Plan B.

It doesn't always act as an abortificant, but it can, as it was designed to. A regular birth control pill is designed to work in exactly the same three ways, albiet in smaller doses, which is why some of the most ardent pro-life doctors won't prescribe The Pill to their patients (although we don't usually hear about them).

[cybercoma]

The Muslim dentist should be fired and never be allowed to practice again, if he treated me is such a manner he'd be passing bits of fabric for a month. Their intolerance is the issue, they can leave their religion at home. This is a slippery slope and if we give an inch women's rights will go back to their favorite era c. 700.

The morning after pill does not distroy a fetus, that's an excuse not a reason. Hours after sex the sperm and the egg haven't even been introduced, it prevents the union. Thus the pious doctor has no moral delemia at all.

I'm beinging to believe these males are using Religion to abuse females.

Birth control destroys fetuses. Anytime a woman on the pill has sex with her partner and they don't use a condom...a fetus is slaughtered. Pharmacists and doctors should be ashamed of themselves. They're nothing more than mass murderers.

Heck, since the morning after pill prevents the union of the sperm and egg and is being considered murder, I guess condoms have been murdering babies for decades too. They prevent the sperm from reaching the egg, in most cases, as well.

Trojan Man should be up on millions of first degree murder charges.

[cybercoma]

a collection of cells that you can count on two hands qualifies as a human baby even less than an acorn qualifies as a tree.

[M.Dancer]

Birth control destroys fetuses.

You don't know how birth control pills work.

In order for a fetus to be destroyed there first has to be ovulation, then fertilization. The pill contains hormones that supresses ovulation so there can be no fertilization.

Edited October 22, 2007 by M.Dancer

[Wilber]

This is bizarre. You want the certification, you meet the standard, you don't dictate it. If you don't like what is required to meet that standard, go to school somewhere else. When I see a certificate on a wall, I want to know the practitioner completed the whole program, not just the bits he chose. Let's hope the freedom to fail is one freedom that is still taken seriously.

Some trainee doctors say learning to treat the diseases conflicts with their faith, which states that Muslims should not drink alcohol and rejects sexual promiscuity.

Doctors who won't treat diseases. There's a concept. Why would we waste positions in medical school for them?

[luvacuppajoe]

You don't know how birth control pills work.

In order for a fetus to be destroyed there first has to be ovulation, then fertilization. The pill contains hormones that supresses ovulation so there can be no fertilization.

Sometimes. Suppression of ovulation is only one of the ways in which it's designed to work. It also changed the cervical mucous to make it more inhospitable to sperm. The third is that it changes the uterine lining, making it thinner so that implantation of the egg, should fertilization occur is more difficult.

Then again, sometimes all 3 methods fail and pregnancy results anyway.

[betsy]

The morning after pill does not distroy a fetus, that's an excuse not a reason. Hours after sex the sperm and the egg haven't even been introduced, it prevents the union. Thus the pious doctor has no moral delemia at all.

I don't want to get into the morning pill debate again.

Whether the morning pill kills a fetus, or prevent fertilization or whatever.....my point is that due to more than one reason, the two incidents regarding the Christian Doctor's refusal to prescribe morning pills and the Muslim students' refusal to complete their training are not comparable at all.

The reason most notable is simply the fact that the Christian Doctors refusing to give morning pills are doing so in the belief that they are violating their oath of saving lives. Whether you agree or not with their belief and whether they're wrong or not, the fact remains that their focus remains on saving lives!

Isn't that what being a doctor is supposed to be?

[betsy]

Since some of you had brought in the issue of the Christian doctor, let me ask you this question...that includes Melanie too....

For those brave and open enough to answer, please explain the reason for choosing that doctor.

Question:

If you are a pregnant, unmarried woman, and there are only two doctors left on earth, which would you rather go to for an emergency physical check-up? You have to choose one.

The Christian doctor who refuses to prescribe morning pills because he believes that by doing so he is killing a human being....

or....

The Muslim doctor who had not bothered to take the necessary lectures/exams/requirements on areas that he find offensive such as alcohol-related and sexual diseases (hiv, herpes, the simple clap etc..,) and who demands that you wear a head scarf when you see him.

Note that both doctors view pre-marital sex as immoral.

I bet there's no question that you'd be lining up with the Christian doctor!

Edited October 23, 2007 by betsy

[cybercoma]

You don't know how birth control pills work.

In order for a fetus to be destroyed there first has to be ovulation, then fertilization. The pill contains hormones that supresses ovulation so there can be no fertilization.

I was being sarcastic.

[cybercoma]

The reason most notable is simply the fact that the Christian Doctors refusing to give morning pills are doing so in the belief that they are violating their oath of saving lives.

Actually, the doctors referred to their faith in the articles in that thread, not their oath.

[Melanie_]

Since some of you had brought in the issue of the Christian doctor, let me ask you this question...that includes Melanie too....

For those brave and open enough to answer, please explain the reason for choosing that doctor.

Question:

If you are a pregnant, unmarried woman, and there are only two doctors left on earth, which would you rather go to for an emergency physical check-up? You have to choose one.

The Christian doctor who refuses to prescribe morning pills because he believes that by doing so he is killing a human being....

or....

The Muslim doctor who had not bothered to take the necessary lectures/exams/requirements on areas that he find offensive such as alcohol-related and sexual diseases (hiv, herpes, the simple clap etc..,) and who demands that you wear a head scarf when you see him.

Note that both doctors view pre-marital sex as immoral.

I bet there's no question that you'd be lining up with the Christian doctor!

I'd find a midwife - and I was once pregnant and unmarried, at age 18.

Betsy, remember that I already have said that the Muslim medical students shouldn't be able to graduate if they don't meet the curriculum requirements. But their objections are based on their religion, just as the Christian doctor's objections are based on his religion. When it comes to other people's medical care, I believe the doctor's religion is irrelevent, and the patient's needs are all that matters. No doctor should be able to impose his/her religious beliefs on someone who doesn't share them.

[Borg]

How far should a country or society go to accommodate religious beliefs, surely any students who refuse to comply with the medical standards should be booted out. Better still, why not ask students the pertinent questions before allowing them into the medical school. Better that seat go to someone who really wants to practice medicine and help ALL people.

Not to worry - they will graduate, leave for their home world and then return here at the top of the immigration ladder - as Canadian trained doctors.

We will reap what we sow.

Oh heck, kick them out.

Oh wait - that would not be very Canadian of us. Might as well lower the standard and then let those folks return to Canada - or better let them stay - after all we are still short a couple of doctors - even if they missed a few classes they do have a Canadian medical degree.

Too funny. Only in Canada.

Borg

[betsy]

I'd find a midwife

There's no such things as midwives in that scenario.

and I was once pregnant and unmarried, at age 18.

If you go to the Christian Doctor, the worst thing that could possibly happen to you will be having to listen to his lecture of immorality, and perhaps his attempt to convert you to Christianity.

He might talk you out of what you might be asking him to do...but I don't think you have any reasons to be concerned about your own personal sfaety. He is into saving lives, remember?

Whereas your fate with the Muslim doctor is quite, let's say.....uncertain. With this doctor's abhorrence of anything having to do with sexual diseases/alcoholism and his insistence on the head-dress, is it far-fetch to assume he is a fundamentalist?

Of course you do know how they regard women. What more, how they think immoral women ought to be dealt with. He'd give you a physical, alright!

You'd be lucky to get out of his office with your head still attached to your body.

Better yet to have a good grip on other possible scenarios, the broadway play "Little Shop Of Horror" comes to mind.

For those of you liberal-minded women who support this kind of shenanigans from these Muslim students....you better think again!

And mostly for your own good (since most women dealing with morning-after pills, abortion, pre-marital sex, some sexual diseases) are more likely to be liberal-minded like you....you better be loud in nipping this farcical demands of these students right on the bud. And make sure people with minds like these do not ever become doctors in our society.

After all, of all people in this society, you should be alarmed the most!

Edited October 23, 2007 by betsy