Should homosexual people be allowed to visit their partners in hospital when it's 'family only'?

[Zoe_Brain]

There is nothing made up here. There is the Natural Law, which incorporates the design of the body and its intended function and the just recognition of relationships proper to this function. It is an argument based on objective criteria that you have yet to engage.

Eric - you do know that I’m a protandrous pseudohermaphrodite? Like the protogynous pseudohermaphrodites in this clip:
edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/12/17/gaza.gender.id/

Yes, some people change sex naturally. The chromosomes don’t change though. Except they’re as reliable a guide to someone’s sex as height is.

A 46,XY mother who developed as a normal woman underwent spontaneous puberty, reached menarche, menstruated regularly, experienced two unassisted pregnancies, and gave birth to a 46,XY daughter with complete gonadal dysgenesis. – J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Jan;93(1):182-9.

This kind of thing is rare. But it happens. And such exceptions show that a simplistic notion of Natural Law does not accord with Reality. You have to make stuff up, and ignore many, many inconvenient facts to make it work.

We’ve been through all this in the field of Astronomy. The Copernican Theory hasn’t been regarded as Against Natural Law for some time now. But in biology, we’re still working on it - how many people still don’t accept Evolutionary theory for example?

Natural Law exists. But if your concept of it conflicts with reality, it’s not reality that’s the problem, it’s your flawed conception of it.

People like those with same-sex attractions expect to be treated as serious-minded adults and out of a genuine sense of Christian charity, that is exactly what I am doing.

Look at the bottom line: you’re preventing partners from seeing their loved ones. And you claim to be doing this out of Charity

Yeah, Right.

It’s pretty darned clear. Matthew 22:35-40 lays it out explicitly. The two basic laws that you need to follow, that all the detailed rules and regulations are based on If in implementing them, you break either of these two basic laws, you’re doing it wrong.

 

[Pug]

If I were a hospital trying to heal people, I’d let a patient choose their visitors. If they refuse a visitor, fine. If they want the visitor, fine. How does keeping away those with whom they have a cordial relationship and wish to see assist healing? Of course, I think it is reasonable of a hospital to have rules for visitors so that the other patients in the institution are not disturbed.

If you think it will be a problem for you, survey your local hospitals to find out their silly or not so silly policies *before *you are stuck going to one.

 

[Other_Eric]

Eric - you do know that I’m a protandrous pseudohermaphrodite? Like the protogynous pseudohermaphrodites in this clip:
edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/12/17/gaza.gender.id/

Yes, some people change sex naturally. The chromosomes don’t change though. Except they’re as reliable a guide to someone’s sex as height is.
This kind of thing is rare. But it happens. And such exceptions show that a simplistic notion of Natural Law does not accord with Reality. You have to make stuff up, and ignore many, many inconvenient facts to make it work.

We’ve been through all this in the field of Astronomy. The Copernican Theory hasn’t been regarded as Against Natural Law for some time now. But in biology, we’re still working on it - how many people still don’t accept Evolutionary theory for example?

Natural Law exists. But if your concept of it conflicts with reality, it’s not reality that’s the problem, it’s your flawed conception of it.

Look at the bottom line: you’re preventing partners from seeing their loved ones. And you claim to be doing this out of Charity

Yeah, Right.

It’s pretty darned clear. Matthew 22:35-40 lays it out explicitly. The two basic laws that you need to follow, that all the detailed rules and regulations are based on If in implementing them, you break either of these two basic laws, you’re doing it wrong.

Even birth defects, like the one you are pointing out here, cannot change the reality that these individuals are either male or female. They are not some combination of the two or a third gender. I can accept that there may arise cases where science is unable to determine the gender of an individual but this does nothing to change the fact that the intrinsic identity of the individual will either be one or the other. Therefore, there is no conflict with Natural Law.

In any event, even if we were to concede the existence of a “third gender,” or some other such freakish variation of human identity, it would not have any application to the current question. Same-sex relationships generally operate on the premise that everyone involved knows exactly what the genders of the individuals in question are. That is the point of a “same-sex” relationship.
Further, it must be understood that I am not merely preventing partners from seeing their “loved” ones. I am preventing two individuals who use each other’s bodies for hedonistic and intrinsically evil ends from coming together to perpetuate the fantasy that there is anything more to their relationship.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Voiced quite well in this : youtube.com/watch?v=GoWNnt4Fdh4

(Hear it through, if it offends you it’ll be over soon enough anyway… The point that hits home with me is that someone could be refused to see their partner of years and years because theyre not married, though they would happily be married if they could)

Lethe
The legal world has many options available. Marriage is recognized as a legal state and has many downsides!! Yet some simply say I should be able to receive the legal status of marriage without marrying. :whacky: Rather than make YouTube videos may be that lady could go to a lawyer and have her “partner” empowered for such issues and have her family’s default authority explicitly blocked? Yet, that would accomplish her stated goals rather than her real goals.

 

[pathia]

Lethe
The legal world has many options available. Marriage is recognized as a legal state and has many downsides!! Yet some simply say I should be able to receive the legal status of marriage without marrying. :whacky: Rather than make YouTube videos may be that lady could go to a lawyer and have her “partner” empowered for such issues and have her family’s default authority explicitly blocked? Yet, that would accomplish her stated goals rather than her real goals.

Hospitals are known to ignore Power of Attorney. It’s happened to me, it happened in Florida, it seems to happen pretty frequently too, though only time to time does it get reported. My partner and I have power of attorney for each other, but my partner’s been kicked out of the hospital by my relatives more than once.

 

[Pug]

Hospitals are known to ignore Power of Attorney. It’s happened to me, it happened in Florida, it seems to happen pretty frequently too, though only time to time does it get reported. My partner and I have power of attorney for each other, but my partner’s been kicked out of the hospital by my relatives more than once.

I’m sorry this happened to you.

Myself, since I have power of attorney for someone, I have wondered if a hospital or the workers in it would always honor such things. I’ve had so many bad experiences in hospitals, I have doubts. I haven’t had them concerning power of attorney, though. I can’t help but suspect the attitudes in hospitals are through and through. Maybe they are all too overworked to do any better, which is a crime in itself.

 

[pathia]

I’m sorry this happened to you.

Myself, since I have power of attorney for someone, I have wondered if a hospital or the workers in it would always honor such things. I’ve had so many bad experiences in hospitals, I have doubts. I haven’t had them concerning power of attorney, though. I can’t help but suspect the attitudes in hospitals are through and through. Maybe they are all too overworked to do any better, which is a crime in itself.

I think it’s natural for most people to assume the family is the closest to the individual and thus the best bet at offering care. What’s unfortunate is when offered evidence to the contrary, they continue to insist that this is the best way.

 

[redrosetea]

I think we need to treat people with kindness even if we are not in agreement with their choices…yes I think they should be able to visit…It is important to let them see people that will cheer them up

You are never going to bring anyone to Christ by being mean and hateful…Being kind to someone isn’t the same thing as giving them a green light to commit sin

 

[mark_a]

Voiced quite well in this : youtube.com/watch?v=GoWNnt4Fdh4

(Hear it through, if it offends you it’ll be over soon enough anyway… The point that hits home with me is that someone could be refused to see their partner of years and years because theyre not married, though they would happily be married if they could)

In all my years, I’ve never been asked while visiting a hospitalized person, family or otherwise, if I were a homosexual or even a family member at all.

 

[pathia]

In all my years, I’ve never been asked while visiting a hospitalized person, family or otherwise, if I were a homosexual or even a family member at all.

If they are very hurt, or need medical decisions done at the moment, they will. Usually what happens is the family of the person in the hospital, evicts the person’s partner because they do not approve of their child’s lifestyle. They tend to say they are ‘saving’ their child by preventing the partner from being at their side while they die.

 

[Pug]

In all my years, I’ve never been asked while visiting a hospitalized person, family or otherwise, if I were a homosexual or even a family member at all.

Maybe this is a function of age? I still haven’t gotten used to the modern hospital concept that anyone may wander in at will and visit whomever, whenever. I still feel like I am skulking about in violation of a zillion “rules” when I visit a hospital in the evening, etc.

Like the Soup Nazi. “No soup for you.” “No Visitors.” “Only one visitor.” “Only visit 20 minutes.” “Even though your child is five, you must not stay long. Parents are bad for their children.” “You are a man. You may not be in the room.” Whatever.

Do you know, parents can actually remain with children the whole time now?

 

[mark_a]

If they are very hurt, or need medical decisions done at the moment, they will. Usually what happens is the family of the person in the hospital, evicts the person’s partner because they do not approve of their child’s lifestyle. They tend to say they are ‘saving’ their child by preventing the partner from being at their side while they die.

Ok, I can be sympathetic to this the situation you describe.

But the whole “gay marriage” debate seems to hinge on these rare circumstances, much as the whole abortion question hinges on abortion rights for rape victims.

 

[mark_a]

Maybe this is a function of age? I still haven’t gotten used to the modern hospital concept that anyone may wander in at will and visit whomever, whenever. I still feel like I am skulking about in violation of a zillion “rules” when I visit a hospital in the evening, etc.

Like the Soup Nazi. “No soup for you.” “No Visitors.” “Only one visitor.” “Only visit 20 minutes.” “Even though your child is five, you must not stay long. Parents are bad for their children.” “You are a man. You may not be in the room.” Whatever.

Do you know, parents can actually remain with children the whole time now?

So I guess I agree with you that we need to exclude “visiting rights” for everyone including homosexuals.

Those were the days, my friend.

 

[pathia]

Ok, I can be sympathetic to this the situation you describe.

But the whole “gay marriage” debate seems to hinge on these rare circumstances, much as the whole abortion question hinges on abortion rights for rape victims.

I am in the hospital a lot, it is not a very rare situation for me. My partner has been removed several times while I’m in the hospital. Part of the reason why I moved to the other side of the country was to make it as difficult as possible for anyone but my partner to come visit me. Legal options completely failed, so it was easier to make time and money barriers.

 

[Middleman]

any one who enters the hospital is invited to specify what visitors he will accept, and which he does not. even the chaplain cannot visit without his permission. If he wishes to state his next door neighbor, boss or any other person is the one he wishes to visit and to make medical decisions when he cannot, he can do so with the proper documentation. This entire discussion is a non-issue.

This post is more concerning a patient who is not cognizant enough to make his/her wishes be known. It would mainly apply to an ICU situation. It also would apply to unmarried heterosexuals.

 

[gamewell45]

No. Repeatedly sodomising somebody does not make one a family member.

How do you know that they sodomize each other repeatedly? Or is that just an assumption on your part?

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Hospitals are known to ignore Power of Attorney. It’s happened to me, it happened in Florida, it seems to happen pretty frequently too, though only time to time does it get reported. My partner and I have power of attorney for each other, but my partner’s been kicked out of the hospital by my relatives more than once.

I would doubt hospitals ignore proper authority as hospitals are sued constantly. Maybe you should revisit the attorney and either determine if the wrong legal papers were drawn (as limited power of attorney) or if another lawsuit is in order. Additionally the attorney might advise on the proper method to inform the hospital of proper authority, when the patient is not using the common default of authority to the family. Far to many people have family issues unrelated to SSA, and they use alternate systems. That is the biggest problems I have with these SSA issues, they are not marriage issues. I truly believe the SSA crowd misrepresents issues.

Could you explain a little more about why “Legal options completely failed,” who made your decisions? why did the decision maker deny your partners authority? etc.

 

[Doc_Keele]

I’m not sure that Power of Attorney actually grants you rights to visit, as nothing grants you the right to visit as far as I’m aware. But I may be wrong.

 

[Lethe]

Natural Law permits no one to recognize a same-sex “relationship” even if only by implication. Since allowing a visit to a patient by his or her same-sex partner would constitute implicit affirmation, this sort of thing should never be permitted. Additionally, Natural Law further directs us to ignore any sort of power of attorney or other legal fictions created in an attempt by such a couple to replicate the goods of a marriage.

Parents, siblings and children have relationships with you, they’re just not marriage relationships… They are allowed to visit.

And so it is more important to you to not be seen as affirming same-sex relationships than it is to let a dying person see who they love most on the earth? Interesting priorities you have.

 

[pathia]

I would doubt hospitals ignore proper authority as hospitals are sued constantly. Maybe you should revisit the attorney and either determine if the wrong legal papers were drawn (as limited power of attorney) or if another lawsuit is in order. Additionally the attorney might advise on the proper method to inform the hospital of proper authority, when the patient is not using the common default of authority to the family. Far to many people have family issues unrelated to SSA, and they use alternate systems. That is the biggest problems I have with these SSA issues, they are not marriage issues. I truly believe the SSA crowd misrepresents issues.

Could you explain a little more about why “Legal options completely failed,” who made your decisions? why did the decision maker deny your partners authority? etc.

We had the strongest power of attorney possible in the state we were living in. The hospital wanted a ‘real’ copy of the document instead of the copies my partner had. Of course it being Saturday at 1am, the lawyers were not available to give us ‘real’ copies until Monday. Also the ban on same sex marriage and civil unions was cited, they were saying it banned ‘anything designed to simulate marriage’. They said our power of attorney did so and thus might have made it void, again requiring our lawyer’s presence for verification.

sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-flrxgaysuit0626sbjun26,0,3396801.story

Here is a story of it happening in Florida. I believe the case was already ruled against the surviving partner, that she had no rights, even with power of attorney and no right to claim anything was done wrong or any harm was done to her, or their children.

So suing does even do any good.