# Has California finally lost its FREAKIN' mind?!?!?!



## Flight-LP (Oct 21, 2007)

Not directly EMS related, but guaranteed to mess with the heads of our children and cause an increase in lifestyle discrimination, both physical and mental..................

You have got to be FU*%^#! kidding me!!!!!!!!! Anyone got a big saw so we can cut them off and push them into the ocean????????


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58130


----------



## Ridryder911 (Oct 21, 2007)

Let the plagues begin.. seriously! We wonder why there is such problems & demise in the world? C'mon folks, has everyone lost their minds and God forbid if you disagree, you are labeled a heretic and phobic, and promote hate crimes! 

Just chalk it up to Oceanboard states, that presume they speak for all America. Just like another article I read where San Frisco is promoting "junkie centers" to allow them clean needles and health care workers to observe them as they inject illegal substances. No prosecution or arrest could be made.. 

Yep, real moral and logical thinking, some real fine people with integrity we have promoting things. 

R/r 911


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 21, 2007)

The World Net Daily

That's not exactly where I would read for unbiased or even educated opinions.  

As for as moral and logical thinking, did you happen to notice the other articles and ads on the page surrounding that article?

This is how you fuel the fires of hatred and intolerance by picking out something and skewing the facts to fit one's own moral values. 

From the article:


> Thomasson said it also forces every hospital in California – even private, religious hospitals – to adopt policies in support of transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality and opens up nonprofit organizations to lawsuits if they exclude members that engage in homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual conduct.



I thought healthcare institutions, regardless of religious affilitation, and providers were supposed to treat everyone regardless of their lifestyles.  That also includes recognizing life partners and privacy for those being treated that directly involves transgender or transexual conditions. 

I remember 3 little brothers (Ricky, Robert and Randy Ray) in 1985 who watched crying as firefighters refused to fight the fire that destroyed their home because they had....gasp!...HIV.  They were literally ran out of town. 

I would read more unbiased articles on this matter to get the facts before condemning a region regardless of your religious beliefs.

As far as SF's injection centers, that can be another thread.


----------



## Flight-LP (Oct 21, 2007)

Yea, not the best source, but the fact still remains that Governor Schwarzenegger signed SB 777 into law. While the media may be biased, there is still no logic to forcing others to conform to a minority way of life. Believe what you want, live the way you want, these are just fine, but keep it out of everyone elses lives and especially my childrens' schools. To think that some teenage boy can just go into the girls' locker room because he all of the sudden feels "oriented" to do so is just astounding. This is going to lead to problems and will affect other states as well. I want my children being educated on AMERICAN History and Geography. I do not want that altered because some radicals feel neglected because their social circle is not recognized or accepted enough. 

I have gay friends. I have gay co-workers. I have absolutely no issue socially with their decisions. Their personal life is their own. It is when they attempt to make their personal relations public or when they crusade with a sense of entitlement that they are owed something. Thatis what I have an issue with. Too many people take the daily liberties that we as Americans have and stretch them even farther. It absolutely makes me sick. Too bad our nation's leaders today do not have the ba*#s to stand up and say "you know what, enough is enough". 

People think they are entiltled to everything, from monies gained from lawsuits to supposed rights under their perception of the U.S. Constitution. "In god we trust" should be changed to "twisted or construed until self-satisfying". Between this and not being allowed to beat your child to prevent them from shooting up a school, fu#*$n society makes me sick...................

And, yes it was a shame what occured back in '85 to that family. The Fire Department was ignorant. But look how HIV and AIDS exponentially exploded into what it is today. Wasn't blood transfusions, wasn't drug abuse, it was unprotected homosexual contact. So while "alternative lifestyle" people are out fighting for their self percieved entitlement of rights, perhaps they should take a step back and see that they are also partially responsible for one of the worlds worst pandemics in history. Now how much of your taxpayer money has been spent to fight this? BILLIONS! Health Insurance premiums are soaring, the housing market is in shambles, and yet we pay BILLIONS of dollars towards research for a disease that could have reasonably been controlled or even possibly eradicated had we just not decided to give in as a whole society. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Not hating the players, hating the game...................... 

Canada is looking better and better every day!


----------



## Flight-LP (Oct 21, 2007)

Here's a more unbised version.......................

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_0751-0800/sb_777_bill_20070223_introduced.html



Vent, don't confuse religion with sociology. I bring my viewpoints to the table based off of society in the U.S. as a whole. As Rid stated, California has no right to speak for a nation. Arnold's action is a promotion and justification of belief's that this country, as a whole, does not support. So much for his presidential run anytime in the near future!

As for religion, my Lord, Jesus Christ, made his views quite clear! But that is a topic for another day..................


----------



## medman123 (Oct 21, 2007)

Flight-LP said:


> And, yes it was a shame what occured back in '85 to that family. The Fire Department was ignorant. But look how HIV and AIDS exponentially exploded into what it is today. Wasn't blood transfusions, wasn't drug abuse, it was unprotected homosexual contact. So while "alternative lifestyle" people are out fighting for their self percieved entitlement of rights, perhaps they should take a step back and see that they are also partially responsible for one of the worlds worst pandemics in history. Now how much of your taxpayer money has been spent to fight this? BILLIONS! Health Insurance premiums are soaring, the housing market is in shambles, and yet we pay BILLIONS of dollars towards research for a disease that could have reasonably been controlled or even possibly eradicated had we just not decided to give in as a whole society.



Don't you think that a little harsh on the homosexuals? + if you did you research you would know the the virus came from monkeys, so I think you should blame the monkeys not the homosexuals.


----------



## Chimpie (Oct 21, 2007)

medman123 said:


> Don't you think that a little harsh on the homosexuals? + if you did you research you would know the the virus came from monkeys, so I think you should blame the monkeys not the homosexuals.


 
As long as you don't blame the chimps of the world...


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 21, 2007)

This bill was passed for children that were being ridiculed and denied entrance into schools because they are different either by birth or by the lifestyle of the parents.  

So you are saying only the children who are born "right" and have the "right" parents are entitled to a good education?  

Some would just like to go to school and not be judged as imperfect or not worthy of an education because of the beliefs of others. 

Again, research the facts.  They are not taking away math and geography. I have strong opinions also on many things but I do not try to restrict one's lifestyle or access to an education.  



> yet we pay BILLIONS of dollars towards research for a disease that could have reasonably been controlled or even possibly eradicated had we just not decided to give in as a whole society. You can't have your cake and eat it too.



Had the Reagan Administration not initially ignored HIV or wrote if off as a lifestyle issue for "those kinds of people" we probably would not be in this mess.  

Blood transfusions, drug abuse and unprotected sex from all lifestyles put AIDS into the millions.  The history dating well into the 1960s offers another angle on the orgin of the HIV virus.

Given in as a society? So, what do you suggest?  Maybe a genocide to rid the earth of all of "them kind of people" that were a mistake to be put on this good earth?  Stop providing healthcare to the downtrodden, the junkies, the gays or the children that happen to be caught up in this?

I just hate to hear comments like this from healthcare workers. Any yes, even today in the year 2007 we have caregivers that don't want to work on patients who are different either in anatomy, lifestyle, religious beliefs or political association.  People still want to hang isolation signs on the doors of HIV patients and make assumptions of how and why they got it. 



> I have gay friends. I have gay co-workers. I have absolutely no issue socially with their decisions. Their personal life is their own. It is when they attempt to make their personal relations public or when they crusade with a sense of entitlement that they are owed something.



I would say that after reading your views, it is little wonder why your "gay friends" don't discuss their views with you.  There seems to be only one view in the friendship that matters, yours. 

Maybe because I grew up in an area and still work where different nationalities, lifestyles, religious (Santeria, Catholic, Baptist etc) and political beliefs were maybe not always understood, but respected, that I have a very different opinon from yours.  Any yet, there are still those in my city that insist their way is the best and only way.

Oh yeah, let's not forget those chimps


> As long as you don't blame the chimps of the world...


----------



## Ridryder911 (Oct 21, 2007)

VentMedic said:


> I thought healthcare institutions, regardless of religious affilitation, and providers were supposed to treat everyone regardless of their lifestyles.  That also includes recognizing life partners and privacy for those being treated that directly involves transgender or transexual conditions.



Actually no. If they are privately funded they can refuse to whom they want. Ever seen private clinics refuse to non-payers? Yes, I have and still do. 

It is not a matter of religious or Christian statement. Sorry, I added that slant rather based upon moral compass and the loss of good common sense. However; personally I believe what goes around.... does come back around.

The "banning of wording of wording of mother and father" .. as well as non-gender base restrooms. Please, now let us sue the school district for allowing such causing psychological trauma when there is related problems.. It will never end and only opening a can of worms. 

Sorry, I would not want my daughter in the next stall next to a group of guys. (yes, I remember what teenagers are like) As well, there is a mother and a father somewhere. Don't penalize those that chose to either have them naturally or by adopting. Why does everyone else have to cater to a very small minority group? This not bashing or even causing shame to anyone , rather because they "feel" sensitive that all others must change or wording be eliminiated. If they (gay couples) want to be called parents, let them do so, but do it without having to eliminate the wording of mother or father.  Do they really think the child or others will not notice the difference.. get real! 

Do we not see a continuous slippery slope..?

The same as in the case of Maine allowing birth control to children > 11 without parenteral permission (okay, yes they have to have permission to see the counselor, NOT the okay to receive the birth control). No, I am not naive that teens will not participate, does it increase the frequency? (remember when your significant other or yourself went on birth control?)  Now, I ask will the school accept the responsibility for ectopic pregnancies, P.E.'s or adverse affects side effects of the birth control? Again, this should be a family and parenteral responsibility and NOT the schools or the school board. 



medman123 said:


> Don't you think that a little harsh on the homosexuals? + if you did you research you would know the the virus came from monkeys, so I think you should blame the monkeys not the homosexuals.



Actually, it is an old virus that has mutated so much, hence the reason it is hard to kill.. (p.s. have you ever considered, where the mokeys received the virus from?) 

I am definitely not for hatred, biased in not offering care, or any harm to any race, group, religion, etc. I have several friends that are gay, and they know my personal opinion about their lifestyle. Again, as a individual and Christian, I do not hate them, but do not condone their lifestyle either, as other behavior and groups I feel is morally wrong. At the same time, please don't push their political agenda upon me, and attempt to MAKE me accept, just because it is now p.c.

I do think there is trouble is brewing. Many of the more liberal states, assume they are right and will attempt push the rest of the country into their beliefs, and presume the rest of the country will follow. I believe this is why there have been political upsets and will continue to do so..I know it may be hard to believe, but most of the country does not believe in these "ways" and are actually getting tired of having to "accept" them. 

Sorry, we are producing "mixed up" kids. They have no compass to go by. Don't believe me.. just look at the schools and children and what we are producing. The shame is it is no-body's fault but our own.  

R/r 911


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 21, 2007)

The bill clarifies wording which if the "and justice for *all*" was taken seriously would not be an issue to begin with. 
_"sex, ethnic group identification, race, national origin, religion, mental or
physical disability, or regardless of any actual or perceived"   _is changed to  disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any other  characteristic 

The other line changed is:
_"Sex" means the biological condition or quality of being a
male or female human being. _

This does not have to mean sexual deviance. Anyone who has been around a neonatal unit knows that nature gets it mixed up sometimes.  In the American language, we have ambiguous names for children until a discision is made on their sex chosen either by hopefully genetics or the family. Hispanic families have a more difficult time because their language and culture is based on male and female terms. These children are often abandoned as the devil's work. 

I can not find anywhere in this bill where mommy and daddy will be eliminated except for in other versions the terms parent and guardian or some other non sex indicating terminology are used. 

And yes, it does cause some situations in the hospital because those that have both male and female anatomy parts, either by nature or surgical, assigning rooms can be a challenge.  And on occasion we have to room a staunch Republican Bush loving Texas male with a Democratic male from the Beach with feminine characteristics because they have the same anatomy.  Usually the only arguements we have to break up are political and not due to sexual orientation.

As far as bathrooms, even in the gay bars they have 3 bathrooms, MEN, WOMEN and OTHER (by whatever term is appropriate).   I've worked my share of bar calls through the years both on the redneck and the gay side of town.  Tolerance and patience are two skills that I value as much as my intubation skills. 



> Originally Posted by VentMedic
> 
> I thought healthcare institutions, regardless of religious affilitation, and providers were supposed to treat everyone regardless of their lifestyles. That also includes recognizing life partners and privacy for those being treated that directly involves transgender or transexual conditions.





Ridryder911 said:


> Actually no. If they are privately funded they can refuse to whom they want. Ever seen private clinics refuse to non-payers? Yes, I have and still do.
> 
> R/r 911



Yes, private clinics have their own operating agenda.

However, for hospitals and ERs:
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA)1986 requires a hospital to provide an appropriate medical screening examination to *any **person* who comes to the hospital emergency department and requests treatment or an examination for a medical condition. If the examination reveals an emergency medical condition, the hospital must also provide either necessary stabilizing treatment or an appropriate transfer to another medical facility.

Of course, this act may not be specific enough to include race, lifestyle, gender issues or sexual orientation so the term "any person" would be interpreted differently in different courts in different states.  

U.S. Healthcare is lacking on the uninsured care options.  However, one is again stereotyping a person that is "different" as to not having insurance. 

Rid, I respect your opinions and enjoy a good intellectual debate. We are from the same generation with similar beliefs and values but differing opinions on issues involving those beliefs and values.  I would hope the next generations learn from our generation both values, including the fundamental family values, and tolerance. 

When it comes to education and healthcare I would surely hope some agreement can be met where there are equal opportunities for all.  As a healthcare professional, I would hope one's personal opinions and beliefs does not hinder them from giving the best possible care to an individual regardless of their genetics or chosen path.


----------



## DisasterMedTech (Oct 21, 2007)

:blink:

If there is one thing I cant stand, its monkies with liberal views.  Who do they think they are anyway?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 21, 2007)

VentMedic said:


> The bill clarifies wording which if the "and justice for *all*" was taken seriously would not be an issue to begin with.
> _"sex, ethnic group identification, race, national origin, religion, mental or
> physical disability, or regardless of any actual or perceived"   _is changed to  disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any other  characteristic
> 
> ...



I may be confused on this one, but I thought that EMTALA only applied to hospitals that received FEDERAL funding in any way, including grants.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## medman123 (Oct 21, 2007)

DisasterMedTech said:


> :blink:
> 
> If there is one thing I cant stand, its monkies with liberal views.  Who do they think they are anyway?



Can you explain a little more, I can't understand you; your sounding like the president.


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 21, 2007)

> I may be confused on this one, but I thought that EMTALA only applied to hospitals that received FEDERAL funding in any way, including grants. Please correct me if I'm wrong.



That would include Medicare and Medicaid Services , which pretty much includes the majority of the hosptials.

However, there were some limitations made to the hospitals' obligations in a revised EMTALA 2003.

http://www.ena.org/government/emtala/EMTALA-Revisions.pdf


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 21, 2007)

VentMedic said:


> That would include Medicare and Medicaid Services , which pretty much includes the majority of the hosptials.
> 
> However, there were some limitations made to the hospitals' obligations in a revised EMTALA 2003.
> 
> http://www.ena.org/government/emtala/EMTALA-Revisions.pdf



Yeah, I found that out when I went looking for more info on this subject.

Here's another site that provides summary information for those that can't read "Federalese"

http://www.emtala.com/faq.htm


----------



## Ridryder911 (Oct 21, 2007)

Actually we have at least two if not three large hospitals now, that does not participate in Government funding. These "speciality" hospitals are the new "fad" with those that want that "special" treatment. I had never seen such a plush setting in a hospital until I taught an ACLS class for one (which I have to admit, they generously paid me for). It is all insurance or cash.. with a neuro based emphasis and the others are ortho and heart related.  True, most are tied to federal funds, but as more "red tape" and lower reimbursement rates, I believe we will see more and more privatization for those that can afford it. 

R/r 911


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 22, 2007)

Rid,
Do these specialty hospitals have an ER? 
If so, how do they handle the drive or walk in emergencies?
Are ambulances allowed to bring in patient the the ER?

We have one hospital in central FL that wanted to be private but still part of a huge health care system.  That didn't go over well with the EMERGENCY sign outside.  So now it just treats enough to send the patients that don't "fit" into this luxurious palace to one of its many sister hospitals.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Oct 22, 2007)

Actually they do not have a Emergency Department per say, but have a "urgent center". Again, a speciality hospital that most public would not think of going to for emergencies ..i.e Spinal Hospital. 

I believe we will see more and more, as physicians get tired of the "may I" and lower reimbursement rates. So far, they have excelled financially. Part of the problem is that majority of the neuro's formed their own hospital and removed themselves from trauma call. (since trauma does not pay) Now, Level I, is always on neuro divert because again the neuro group became wise and is taking on speciality cases. 

I discussed with a neuro trauma physician from Chicago, that is the committee chairperson for ACS neuro representative for Level I accreditation and he described that this is occurring in record numbers. Truthfully, they do not know what to do. Only teaching hospitals are able to have a skeleton crew, at best. It is hard to keep a neuro surgeon to work for peanuts on trauma patients (again that usually are uninsured) to compare for those that are 100% covered. Difference of 1/2 mill or more a year. 

R/r 911


----------



## Flight-LP (Oct 22, 2007)

We also have one that just opened in Houston. It is more a "luxury urgent care center" than anything else. Cash and insurance talk. While they will not turn anyone away, an appropriate transfer to another hospital more appropriate to their financial needs is performed. They too are not subject to EMTALA as they will not be seeking federal or state reimbursements for services rendered. There are plans for several more here in Houston, I for one applaud them for their vision. These are a god send to over crowded ER's that are being consumed by people who flat out do not need to be there. Between these new centers and the ER's performing MSE's at triage, people are finally being held accountable for paying their bills and / or seeking treatment through either PCP or a local clinic when the have that stuffed up nose for a week..................................


----------



## BossyCow (Oct 25, 2007)

We are all entitled to choose for ourselves the orientation of our moral compasses.  

Saying that 'they' no matter who 'they' are, religious differences, political differences, gender differences or differences in sexual expression, are entitled to be marginalized from society and that 'they' and their children cannot be treated equally under the law is wrong.

I am embarrassed that in my country, supposedly the benchmark of civil liberties and personal freedom, we need laws to protect individual groups.  We should not have to mention each group by name, it should be understood that when we are talking simple human rights and dignity, it applies to all, not just free white heterosexual christian men of middle income or above.  

We treat the mentally ill, the physically disabled, the indigent, the chemically addicted the back of a rig should be free of any judgement and so should our healthcare. 

I am not surprised that some of these cadillac hospital/clinics are as well appointed as they are, what surprises me is that everyone in this country, regardless of political beliefs, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, skin color, geneology, marital status, household income, doesn't have access to the same level of service.  

Medicine is a business in this country and it shouldn't be.  Healthcare should be a basic right and not on a sliding scale based on our ability to pay. 

This radical, heretical political liberalism brought to you by a citizen of a Blue State!


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 25, 2007)

Flight-LP,
For a thread that really ruffled me in the beginning, this brought out some really excellent posts.

Don't know if you got the responses you were expecting, but it did have a good mix of opinions.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Oct 26, 2007)

BossyCow said:


> Medicine is a business in this country and it shouldn't be.  Healthcare should be a basic right and not on a sliding scale based on our ability to pay.
> 
> !



Why shouldn't medicine be a business? You like to get paid don't you? As well, where does it say in the Bill of Rights that healthcare is a basic right? 

Sorry, I agree no one should be turned away.. and of yet in my 30 years ever seen one turned away because they had no money, sexual orientation race, religion, etc. 

Now, in regards of procedures, surgical, medications, options; yes I have seen quite of bit in difference in care. 

Although I agree with you to a point let's look at healthcare like any other necessity. Food for example. No one expects to get free food. Go to any grocery store and if you do not have the cash; can you buy the luxury item? Do they have assistance.. yes, just like medicine. Is it enough on a fixed income.. no. 

Again, what everyone would like and what we are willing to pay, is another thing. Sure I believe everyone should get the best medical care. Then like everyone else, I don't want to have to fund it out of my paycheck. Yet, someone will have to. 

This the difference between liberalism and conservative. Nice ideas versus reality. What does not come in, cannot go out. 

Not many physicians is going to work for half their salaries as they are now. Sorry, realistically many are now not entering medicine because for the length of studies, costs of education, and litigation risks. It is much wiser for someone to enter another field that is just as profitable. It is happening now, just wait  for the future.

The same is happeninig in nursing. Yes, there are some entering solely based upon the pay. Yet, now look at attribution rate. They soon find out, it is not worth the time money and expectations of the job. Most are leaving within two years. The average age of a nurse is now 48.5 years old. Why would one want to spend at least 3-4 yrs in college, when one could definitely profit more in another position?  Sorry, money & benefits talks... the days of a job; being a calling is about over. Younger people much rather have the financial gains, than work in a profession that requires sacrafices, the reason there is a shortage. 

The same is true in EMS. The problem is we never had the education requirements and have already allowed short or abbreviated responsibility. Yet we still see the same problems. Why would anyone even consider EMS as a career, when it is not even perceived as one? Yet, we all know volunteerism will soon be a thing in the past. Increasing number of responses, responsibility, and required education, and potential litigation will change and has change those involved. 

So yes, it would be nice to provide "for all". Now again, I ask how and who are going to pay for it? 

R/r 911


----------



## BossyCow (Oct 26, 2007)

European countries manage to provide both education and healthcare to their citizens as a basic right and necessity.  It is the dreaded "Socialized Medicine".  While some countries have botched it, others are doing quite well, such as the Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium to name a few.  

Of course, this is paid for with an extremely high tax base which strikes fear into the hearts of Americans.  But, lets look at what we get for the money.  I have a friend from the UK who told me that if he was ever hurt or sick, not to take him to a US hospital but to buy him a plane ticket home for care, it would be cheaper.  

Part of the reason that Medical Professionals in the US need to be paid so much is because of the debts they incur learning their skills.  If those taxes we are so afraid to pay go towards education, awarded based on ability and aptitude rather than the financial wherewithal to pay for Med School, perhaps the pool of physicians would be a bit different.  Yes, there might be more physicians.. god forbid a glut on that market. 

I think the two are tied together, and I believe that we need to be going in that direction.  I am not all theory without the understanding of how the system works, contrary to what that does to your perception of liberal thinking.  Some of us merely look at the sitation and draw a different conclusion.  I think we have allowed businesses, especially the insurance industry to enter into areas where they have no business being.  

As for your food analogy, it breaks down as well.  I belong to a Food Co-op, I support local farmers, and raise much of my food myself.  I believe we have allowed business to enter into the production of our food to the point that most Americans no longer know where their food comes from or what is in it. 

The almighty profit motive has left the grasp of the middle american businessman struggling to make a living and has gone to support the stockholders of mega-corporations who manipulate the economics of our country and strive to destroy the small businesses that made this country what it was. 

We disagree on some very basic premises Rid.  I admire much of what you say and I respect your right to promote and espouse your own beliefs.  Please do not belittle mine with such comments as  "This the difference between liberalism and conservative. Nice ideas versus reality. " We can fund medicine and education.  Its done in other countries.


----------



## reaper (Oct 26, 2007)

This discussion has been done on other forums. No one yet has been able to convince me, That I would want government health care. Look to our neighbors to the north. There is no way I would want that system here. Yes, they get free health care for their taxes. But, they are also waiting long periods to get the health care they need. They are sending Pt's to the U.S. for the treatments and their tax payers are footing the bill.

I work hard every day. I pay for health insurance to cover my family. I am happy with my coverage and know that I will get the treatment I need, when I need it. I do not want to pay higher taxes to cover everyone Else's health care. We have medicaid for the poor and medicare for the elderly. That is enough of our taxes being spent. ( and abused).

This country was built on the idea that anyone can run a business and succeed. I feel sorry for the small business owners that have to compete with the giants. But, I am not gonna pay high prices for products, just to support small business. They need to learn to compete and market themselves better. How do you think the giants became that big? They started as small business owners and built it up. They learned how to play the game. This is a dog eat dog world and the strong will survive.


----------



## LIFEGUARDAVIDAS (Oct 26, 2007)

Haven't been around for a while but not too much has changed (except the Halloween version of the EMTlife's banner -nice!).

In my humble opinion, bathrooms and lockers should be devided in two BUT not according to sexual orientation but according to phisiology. If a person has a male looking like body then he/she should use the "men" facilities, and if a person has a female looking like body the he/she should use the "women" facilities. 

During a typical season I spend most of my visa coverage period in Alabama, Califronia and NY/NJ. -Though they could be considered as three different countries they all have different persons with different believes, costumes, sexual orientations, etc., etc. That is why I don't like the title of the original thread "Has California finally lost its FREAKIN' mind?!?!?!"

Here in Argentina, also a big country, you have many conservative sectors most of them influenced by the power of the Catholic Church. At the same time, in the City of Buenos Aires homosexual couples are allowed to get married. Other cities have growing homosexual communities as well. At a time, there was a project to modify public bathrooms and bathrooms in private buildings used by the general public in order to have a third division for homosexual users. HOWEVER, not all homosexual people have the same oriantation or body. Therefore, bathrooms devided in three sections are not enough. Actually, based on that, each person could demand a new section claiming his/her/its sexual orientation is different or unique... 

Therefore, once again, I believe bathrooms and lockers should keep its original format not because people should be "conservative" regarding their sexual orientation (even young people -children) but in order to have a practical facility devided according to the physical looks of its users. And for those would say what about when they are changing in the lockers... I believe that as long as a person's body is covered as if wearing a swim suit problems among persons with similar bodies but different sexual orientations would be minimal.

About the HIV/AIDS issue I believe that only a few persons should be blamed. Not homosexuals in general. I believe that in the first place the people who had participation in either the invention, discovery, development or primary distribution are to blame. In a second and far far place those that knowing they are infected or could be infected transmit it anyways either because they are angry or they just don't care. 

As I mentioned in other posts regarding 'typical' American polemic issues as school shootings, 9/11, gun control and NRA... No matter if a person is religious or not, which is his/her religion, how religious is he/she, no matter if a person is "conservative" or "liberal", etc.etc. we all have common enemies, common hazards, and no, they are not the communists, they are not the terrorists, not even the aliens (neither the illegal ones nor the extraterrestial ones  ) our common enemies/hazards are: IGNORANTS/IGNORANCE, FANATICS/FANATISM and TYRANS/TYRANNY. 

[[My opnions are mine only and neither represent the ones of my past, present or future employers, nor the ones of the agencies and organizations that trained and/or certified me, nor the ones of my clients.]]

All comments are welcome,

Guri


----------

