When I read "Christian pediatrician denies child service because parents are tattooed.", I was just simply disgusted. Another fine example of an upright Christian playing his role as village idiot.

Wow. I know that this issue isn't necessarily "Wiccan material", but I just had to throw this in. It probably disturbs me more because I am a parent with tattoos. I'm also well aware that most of my children's medical care providers are most likely Christians and Latter Day Saints. Nobody is ever made a comment about my tattoos, piercings, and sometimes blatant "pagan-ish" paraphernalia I might wear from time to time. But if any of those "professionals" word ever deny one of my children medical attention based on my appearance I would absolutely lose it. I would turn them over for review so fast it make their head spin and if it resulted in a prolonged suffering to any degree of one of my children I would sue the crap out of them.

Really, where in Christian dogma or doctrine does it say anything about tattoos, piercings, etc.? What kind of jackass associates or attributes their personal prejudices and fears with their religion? I am really starting to reconsider some of my own assumptions about Christians in general. I was really beginning to believe that every Christian was a naïve, bigoted, narrowminded, and self-righteous idiot. Now I think I understand and appreciate the situation a little more. I'm beginning to suspect that it has nothing to do with their religion and there might actually be some really "good" Christians. Maybe it's just the idiots like this and the evangelists on television that make the whole look bad. Yes, I think I will mull over this for some time, and maybe I need to reconsider some of my own possible misconceptions regarding these people.

Of course, it's hard for me to think differently about them when I am very aware of what they say and accuse Wiccans of, and display such a gross ignorance of not only other religious beliefs, but most especially when it regards their own. This fine pediatrician is probably even being regarded as being "strong" in his faith, to the degree that he would even deny a child medical attention based on what he defines to be acceptable as a "Christian". Yeah, come to think of it, maybe I really don't want to reconsider.

What's most interesting is that other patients of this doctor have had very different experiences. One of these patients claiming to have tattoos and having never had the issue brought up or been a reason to be denied medical attention. This makes me wonder if it was not so much the tattoos but maybe the symbolism represented by the tattoos. With this doctor be okay if the tattoo was laden with Christian symbolism? I have known several doctors personally, as clients, and as professionals who I have sought out for their services and expertise. I have never known any of them to harbor or express such prejudice. Especially when it came to a child.

I even know factually that the Hippocratic oath that every doctor swears to, originally and quite possibly still, invokes the names of various gods and goddesses. So if a "Christian" doctor swears by the same oath are they not obligated to adhere to it because they are Christian? This is probably irrelevant. I'm just confused how any doctor could deny providing medical attention or services to a child in need of them. Regardless of their religious orientation. And this very denial seems very "unchristian-like", but I'm not in a position to comment on what is appropriate to their spiritual expression. It just seems that this is another fine example of how Christian philosophy and dogma are at least accepting of allowing suffering and harm. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe what he has done is just as appalling to Christians as it is to me. I would hope so, and if any Christians spoke up and confirm that, I might personally reconsider my regard for them.

Apparently this doctor displays or notices patients that is is a "private office" and that "appearance and behavior standards apply" that he has based upon his Christian faith. That's all fine and dandy and I can even relate to and respect his right to set such standards, but my impression it was the parent(s) who had tattoos, and not the child. The child was the patient not the parent. So those standards, I suspect, were not an issue with the patient. In the end, all he did was deny a child the medical attention they needed, and demonstrated once again the love, compassion, forgiveness, and acceptance that Christians claim to be the cornerstones of their faith.

|









Xero User: Login To Leave A Comment |No Comments