Despicable is the best term I have for this person.
I'm Jewish. I'm an emergency physician. I've never considered asking my patients (some of whom have been Nazi sympathizers, mohammedan terrorist supporters, rednecks - you know, morons) and I've always given them excellent medical care.
Just wanted to make a quick comment that her IG has not been deleted or removed, she just changed her username and removed her face from the profile pic to avoid being identified. Her username is careforjustice, although she is on private now. I still follow her so lmk if you want more receipts
When she can appeal to the far more popular/tolerated/prevalent Woke because of their anti-semitism, why would she need to appeal to the Woke's forebearers?
The Bee's spot on take down of the Woke as blatant racists is still priceless:
She should be encouraged to work in an Arab country like Saudi Arabia or the UAE... preferably by removing her ability to practice nursing in this country. I was sent a violent and disturbed defense of her by Red4Cap, whom I have blocked.
>>"by removing her ability to practice nursing in this country"
If you are talking about having the State FORCIBLY forbid her and all Americans who wish to freely associate and freely trade with her from doing so, that is a grotesque VIOLATION of *everyone's* rights.
If you wish to convince everyone that they should not associate with her, that is your *absolute* right. And if you wish to shun her - and anyone who associates with her - that is also your *absolute* right.
But, contrary to the belief of the Saudis et al - whose EVIL philosophy YOU are preaching and demanding be practiced here - you *absolutely* do NOT have a 'right' to put a GUN to *anyone's* head to PREVENT them from engaging in consensual interactions.
Put simply, despite your WISH to the contrary here, neither she nor any other American is your PROPERTY, to be disposed of as YOU see fit, to satisfy YOUR desire. NO one requires your 'permission' in order to EXERCISE their rights to their OWN life and their OWN effort.
SHUN her into oblivion if you like. That is your right. But put your jambiya back in its asib where it belongs. Keep your hands to yourself.
She gave up that right when she refused to treat ALL patients fairly and equally. Medical professionals in the United States do not get to pick and choose who they will or won’t treat. It’s in their oath. Frankly, I wouldn’t want her treating my dogs much less a human being. Actions have consequences. Enough said.
it's hospital as part of the University of Oregon. This nurse has created risk, every time there is an adverse event in that hospital. The state is on the hook directly or indirectly for those lawsuits.
'Yes' because those are examples of each individual EXERCISING their right to dispose of their own life and their own effort. No one is treating anyone else as their PROPERTY, to be disposed of as THEY see fit, to satisfy THEIR desires. In other words, everyone is freely deciding whom they will or will not associate with as they each see fit.
'No' because those are examples of the State VIOLATING everyone's right to dispose of their own life and their own effort. The State is treating everyone as its PROPERTY, to be disposed of as IT sees fit, to satisfy ITS desires. In other words, the State is putting a gun to everyone's heads and forcibly forbidding them from freely deciding whom they will or will not associate in accord with their OWN judgement.
Just plain English - asking how a person with this kind of hate could be allowed to be a nurse. They are supposed to care about "human" life!! She isn't talking about Isis - or MS-13 - she is talking about a human being that did nothing but get sick and needs help. Had nothing to do with my view or her view on things. To be a nurse she better forget her views when she is doing her job. I think she had to take an oath. She needs to be fired and never allowed to work as a nurse ever again. That is what I meant!!
>>"She is talking about a human being that did nothing but get sick and needs help."
That is indeed the evil of tribalism - or, more accurately, of Collectivism as a whole (which includes tribalism, sexism, racism, fascism, Nazism, Communism, etc etc ad nauseam). Collectivism treats any and all members of a group as if they were one and the same thing. So, to a tribalist like her, she IS "talking about Isis - or MS-13".
>>"Had nothing to do with my view or her view on things. To be a nurse she better forget her views"
Of course, that is precisely 'your [non-bigoted] view on things'. Just as the opposite is "her [bigoted] view on things". So the claim that this "had nothing to do with" anyone's "view" on things" is completely false.
>>"She needs to be fired and never allowed to work as a nurse ever again."
It is certainly the right of those who hired her to fire her. And it is certainly each and every human being's right NEVER to hire her in the future.
Of course, it is *also* the right of any and all human beings to hire her in the future if *they* so wish. As I noted, bigots don't LOSE their rights because you don't like their bigotry. Bigots (be they racist, sexist, or whatever) have every right to freely associate with *themselves*. And bigots have every right NOT to associate with you or anyone else, just as you (and the hospital etc) have every right NOT to associate with them.
You BOTH possess *all* those SAME rights.
But what neither you NOR the bigots have ANY right to do is FORCIBLY FORBID each other from exercising your rights of free association and free trade. In other words, as she has NO right to have the GUN of government used to prevent you from nursing unless you REFUSE to treat Jews (or blacks or trans or whatever), so too you have NO right to have the GUN of government used to prevent her from nursing unless she DOES treat Jews (or blacks or trans or whatever).
So if *other* bigots (be they hospitals, doctors, patients, etc) voluntarily wish to hire her as a nurse, they have *right* to do so - ie NO one has the right to 'never allow her to work for them'; NO one has the right to FORCIBLY FORBID *any* of them from exercising their rights - including their rights of free association and free trade.
The belief that one DOES have the 'right' to FORCIBLY FORBID an individual from exercising his rights - the belief that one has the 'right' to VIOLATE the individual's rights - is the EVIL philosophy of the Gazans.
__
NOTE: Since many here have made the same mistake about what I am *actually* arguing, please understand that I am NOT disputing the fact that laws exist which violate the individual's rights, any more than the Abolitionist was disputing the fact that slavery laws existed. Like the Abolitionist, I am perfectly aware of the existence of such laws etc. Instead, like the Abolitionist, what I am doing is pointing out that such laws - and thus any demand they be put into practice - are a grotesque EVIL because they VIOLATE the individual's right to his own life and his own effort.
As such laws were a violation of the rights of blacks pre-Civil War, so too such laws are a violation of the rights of bigots today.
And, yes, bigots DO have the exact SAME rights as everyone else. As I noted before, the fact that they are bigots does NOT magically make their rights vanish in a puff of WISHES - ie the fact that they are bigots does NOT make them the PROPERTY of others, to be disposed of as THEY see fit, to satisfy THEIR desires.
To use an analogy, the fact that you don't LIKE who a person does or does not CHOOSE to have sex with in NO way gives you the right to put a GUN to that person's head and "never allow them to have sex ever again" unless they DO have sex with those *you* demand they have sex with.
The principle here is clear and straightforward: the fact that you don't LIKE how a person EXERCISES their rights in NO way gives you the right to VIOLATE their rights. PERIOD.
Bullshit. just a bunch of philosophy, bullshit. She chose a profession which required her to treat all. If she is not willing to treat all that she should not be allowed to practice the profession. She took an oath and she violated it. Therefore, she deserves to lose her license and her career.
No - just a bunch of philosophy gibberish. She took an oath & she broke it. She then is NOT fit to continue being a nurse there or anywhere else. I follow the law of God - I follow the Bible. I don't follow the liberal teachings- that tries to make sense out of nonsense!! In fact we do have the right to stop insanity and corruption. Has nothing to do with "their right to do as they wish". People don't have the right to do as they wish which is why there are laws and orders. Which is why there are rules and laws in the Bible.
Don't care to hear philosophy crap. 💩
People are accountable for what they do. And needs to be held accountable!! Period!!!
I am sorry you *feel* the individual's right to his own life and his own effort is "gibberish". In other words, I am sorry you *feel* the principles which the Founding Fathers fought and died for in order to establish them as THE principle of the US is just "nonsense!!"
>>"People don't have the right to do as they wish"
With their own lives and their own effort (and ONLY with their own lives and their own effort), they most certainly do.
>>"People are accountable for what they do. And needs to be held accountable!! Period!!!!"
Quite true. Contrary to your FALSE premise here, this is NOT a point of contention between us.
In other words, given the fact that I have EXPLICITLY argued that you, the hospital, and any and all other individuals are FREE to hold this nurse "accountable" - ie to exercise YOUR rights and 'shun her into oblivion' - you are attacking a Straw Man here.
The ONLY thing *I* have stated here is that you can NOT hold her "accountable" by assaulting her, stealing from her, raping her, enslaving her, or murdering her.
I am sorry you *feel* that idea is "crap 💩".
I am sorry you - like the Gazans - WANT to assault her, steal from her, and enslave her (aka treat her as your PROPERTY, to be disposed of as YOU see fit, to satisfy YOUR desires) as your *means* of making her "accountable" for her words and actions.
In other words, I am sorry that the only difference between your philosophy here and the philosophy of the Gazans is that you *feel* it is too *distasteful* to rape or murder this woman.
You are a communist - just like the insane democrats. To try and talk to insanity is worthless - just like the deranged democrats showed at President Trump's speech. You are destroying yourselves by opening your mouths. And some by just sitting there holding signs. By the way - no one said anything about raping this nurse. Obviously that was on your mind.
After this - I will find it in "my right" to block you. So no need to respond back - because I will block you. Don't want your seed of nonsense anymore going into my head. I use common sense and don't want to waste my time with anyone that doesn't have common sense!!
LOL. You *do* understand that communism doesn't defend the individual's rights FROM the Collective (as I am doing here), but REJECTS the individual's rights and SUBJUGATES the individual TO the Collective (as YOU demand be done here), right?
Or do you actually NOT understand that fact? That *would* certainly explain your 'arguments' here - including why you are substituting the "laws and order" of the 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat' for the "laws and order" of the individual's rights.
>>"To try and talk to insanity..."
Again, thanks for confessing the fact you *feel* the individual's rights to his OWN life and his OWN effort (rather than being the PROPERTY of others to dispose of as THEY see fit, to satisfy THEIR desires) - ie the idea the Founding Fathers fought and died for to establish as THE principle of this country - is your DEFINITION of "insane".
As Trump said to those democrats you referenced, that's "Very sad!'
>>"no one said anything about raping this nurse"
Which is why I stated that is the ONLY difference between you and the Gazans (who DO consider rape to be a valid means of "accountability" - or did you already FORGET about Oct 7?!). So thanks for confessing the fact you can't grasp the idea of COMPARING and CONTRASTING similarities and differences between people.
Oh, and it is QUITE telling that you did NOT say 'no one said anything about murdering this nurse'. "Obviously THAT was on YOUR mind" (since *you* were NOT doing an comparing and contrasting between yourself and the Gazans).
Talk about both PROJECTION *and* PROVING my point for me. Thanks for that! ;)
>>"I will... block you. So no need to respond back"
Because my comments could ONLY be for you. NO one else reads the comments here. :eyeroll:
Ah, the arrogance of those who FEEL that other human beings are nothing but their meat puppets.
>>"How did a person such as this become a nurse???"
Are you asking: 'How does someone who irrationally hates an *entire* race of people still wish to help anyone and everyone else?'
That's easy: Tribalism. Hatred of another tribe doesn't prevent love of one's own tribe.
Or are you asking: 'How is someone who has ideas *you* hate 'allowed' by the State to become a nurse?'
That's also easy: Rights. Being a bigot doesn't magically strip a person of his ownership of his own life and his own effort. In other words, being a horrible human being doesn't make that person the property of others, to be disposed of as they see fit, to satisfy their desires.
As to the unasked question of: 'How such a person is hired by others *as* a nurse?' I'd say the answer is *either* those others are also tribalists *or* they have been ignorant of the person's ideas.
Of course, in this case, those others can no longer claim to be ignorant of this creature's ideas. So we shall see now if ignorance was the problem or if they are indeed tribalists.
The nursing board may well terminate her license. The Ohio Board of Medicine revoked permanently the license of one Lara Kollab DO when it was discovered she had made multiple antisemitic posts, stating among other things that she couldn’t wait to give Jews the wrong medicine. She was also terminated from her residency position at the Cleveland Clinic.
>>"stating among other things that she couldn't wait to give Jews the wrong medicine."
That, of course is a grotesque violation of the individual's right to his own life and his own effort. As the Agent of the individual's right of self-defense, it is most certainly the job of the State to step in and prevent that doctor from committing that heinous act against Jews (or anyone else).
Of course, thus far at least, the nurse in question here has not said or done anything to violate the rights of anyone else. She has simply exercised *her* right of free association (ie like any bigot, she has declared she will not interact with anyone who from the 'wrong' group). And, while who she chooses not to associate with - and why - is disgusting, free association IS her right - ie she is NO one's PROPERTY. No one may dispose of her life and her effort as they see fit, to satisfy their ends. So, as it stands, the State would be violating *her* rights if it revoked her license. Not only that, but they would be violating everyone else's rights as well. For instance, if other vile bigots wish to hire her as their nurse, that is the exercise of *their* right of free association.
Put simply, bigots (real or imagined) all have the same rights as every other human being. Bigots do not magically lose their rights to their OWN life and their OWN effort *because* they are bigots.
But note that this works BOTH ways. Just as this creature has the right NOT to associate Jews (or blacks or trans or anyone else), so TOO does anyone and everyone else have the right NOT to associate with her and her ilk. This means the hospital has the right to fire her. And it means everyone has the right to refuse to hire her (to be a nurse or anything else).
In other words, just as SHE has the right to shun Jews, so too everyone ELSE has the right to shun *her* (if that is their desire).
So go to it everyone! EXERCISE your right of free association and free trade and shun her into oblivion!
Beyond horrifying that people like her work in “health care.” Hospitals with their artificial, self-aggrandizing “patients first” drivel can just stop it until they take monsters like her off the payroll.
>>"Her not treating a patient that could lead to death which in effect is murder"
Congratulations! You just declared your refusal to provide the necessities of life to any and all human beings on the planet is "murder".
Of course, your claim a grotesque falsehood. Contrary to your premise here, NO one has a 'right' to the life and effort of others. No one's 'need' *magically* grants them OWNERSHIP of *any* other human being.
Put simply, NO 'right' of yours has been violated if a person does NOT associate with you - be that person a nurse, a baker, or a candlestick maker.
Are you OK man? It seems like you're taking a lot of people's comments out of context. I've gotten two DMs already from people saying you've messaged them to argue about what I wrote on this post.
>>"I've gotten two DMs ...from people saying you've messaged them..."
I don't know the people you are talking about, but I have not "messaged" ANYONE here except in the NORMAL way - ie by posting replies like *everyone* else. (In fact, in my entire history on Substack, I have only ever DMed [aka used "Chat"] to speak with one person - and that was almost a year ago). So either those two are misspeaking (ie they *mean* 'posting replies' but are *saying* "messaging") OR they are outright lying (IF the latter, then they are likely trying to fraudulently get you to block me so NO one can see ideas *they* don't LIKE. Talk about *them* trying to treat you as *their* PROPERTY - ie talk about them trying to VIOLATE your rights!).
--
>>"It seems like you're taking a lot of people's comments out of context."
Given your other post to me here - where you *misunderstood* my argument and assumed I was *ignorant* of the EXISTENCE of government laws/regulations, when in fact I was disputing the VALIDITY of those very government laws/regulations (BIG difference!) - may I politely suggest it is not *I* who is failing to *accurately* present the principles others are preaching here.
As it stands, I have explicitly *agreed* with everyone here who wants to, as I put it, 'shun this creature into oblivion'.
The *only* people I have argued with here are those who have declared the State should forcibly prevent this creature from practicing nursing (and thus forcibly prevent anyone and everyone else from employing her *as* a nurse). Are you saying I have been mistaken in those instances and they were NOT demanding the State take away her license? If so, do you have an example of such a error on my part? Because if I *have* made a mistake in that regard - if someone was NOT demanding this nurse be forbidden by the State from practicing medicine - I would certainly like to apologize to that person.
Absent such an example, I see no "context" which has been dropped, as you claimed here. Perhaps you would be so kind as to point to one of these "lot of...out of context" arguments you have accused me of making and identify what "context" you are *specifically* claiming has supposedly been dropped.
One thanks Robin Fritz for confessing the fact she *feels* that rights are nothing but "bull".
*"If she is not willing to treat all that [sic] she should not be allowed..."*
One thanks Robin for confessing the fact that she *feels* other human beings are her PROPERTY, whom she "allows" or "prohibits" from acting as SHE sees fit, to satisfy HER desires.
That says pretty much all one need say about the *eviI* of Robin's philosophy here.
The only OTHER thing one need say about her is her DlS HONESTY. Out of the blue, she posted two comments AT me here - obviously upset with my ideas. But then she immediately blocked me, so it would appear to everyone else that I was unable to refute her objections.
Such is the 'morality' of those demanding the State VIOLATE this woman.
Toni, I admire you for getting people on the inside to talk, even if off the record. Institutional types are ingrained with a closed-mouth attitude toward personnel matters; it takes real skill to break through.
Despicable is the best term I have for this person.
I'm Jewish. I'm an emergency physician. I've never considered asking my patients (some of whom have been Nazi sympathizers, mohammedan terrorist supporters, rednecks - you know, morons) and I've always given them excellent medical care.
Wow, thanks for reading, Doc!
You are a marvelous human being. God bless.
Just wanted to make a quick comment that her IG has not been deleted or removed, she just changed her username and removed her face from the profile pic to avoid being identified. Her username is careforjustice, although she is on private now. I still follow her so lmk if you want more receipts
As a one-off, she could appeal to the KKK for support.
That's wild. But she does deserve a fair trial and a proper investigation, so I hope she has access to that.
>>"she could appeal to the KKK for support"
When she can appeal to the far more popular/tolerated/prevalent Woke because of their anti-semitism, why would she need to appeal to the Woke's forebearers?
The Bee's spot on take down of the Woke as blatant racists is still priceless:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev373c7wSRg
She should be encouraged to work in an Arab country like Saudi Arabia or the UAE... preferably by removing her ability to practice nursing in this country. I was sent a violent and disturbed defense of her by Red4Cap, whom I have blocked.
Did RedCap DM you or is what they said in this comments section?
I honestly don't remember. Since I have blocked RedCap, I can't see anything they did, including DMs.
>>"by removing her ability to practice nursing in this country"
If you are talking about having the State FORCIBLY forbid her and all Americans who wish to freely associate and freely trade with her from doing so, that is a grotesque VIOLATION of *everyone's* rights.
If you wish to convince everyone that they should not associate with her, that is your *absolute* right. And if you wish to shun her - and anyone who associates with her - that is also your *absolute* right.
But, contrary to the belief of the Saudis et al - whose EVIL philosophy YOU are preaching and demanding be practiced here - you *absolutely* do NOT have a 'right' to put a GUN to *anyone's* head to PREVENT them from engaging in consensual interactions.
Put simply, despite your WISH to the contrary here, neither she nor any other American is your PROPERTY, to be disposed of as YOU see fit, to satisfy YOUR desire. NO one requires your 'permission' in order to EXERCISE their rights to their OWN life and their OWN effort.
SHUN her into oblivion if you like. That is your right. But put your jambiya back in its asib where it belongs. Keep your hands to yourself.
She gave up that right when she refused to treat ALL patients fairly and equally. Medical professionals in the United States do not get to pick and choose who they will or won’t treat. It’s in their oath. Frankly, I wouldn’t want her treating my dogs much less a human being. Actions have consequences. Enough said.
the third and 4th pressure points are:
- the legislature
- the malpractice carrier or the UHSU Risk Dept and the BOD
https://www.ohsu.edu/about/ohsu-leadership#:~:text=OHSU%20is%20governed%20by%20a%20nine-member%20board%20of,holds%20a%20seat%20throughout%20his%20or%20her%20tenure.
Where does the legislature come in here?
Also, what's the link for? I just see a list of college faculty/admin
it's hospital as part of the University of Oregon. This nurse has created risk, every time there is an adverse event in that hospital. The state is on the hook directly or indirectly for those lawsuits.
the list is the Hospital Board
- the employer
Yes.
- the state nursing board
No.
- the legislature
No.
- the malpractice carrier...
Yes.
'Yes' because those are examples of each individual EXERCISING their right to dispose of their own life and their own effort. No one is treating anyone else as their PROPERTY, to be disposed of as THEY see fit, to satisfy THEIR desires. In other words, everyone is freely deciding whom they will or will not associate with as they each see fit.
'No' because those are examples of the State VIOLATING everyone's right to dispose of their own life and their own effort. The State is treating everyone as its PROPERTY, to be disposed of as IT sees fit, to satisfy ITS desires. In other words, the State is putting a gun to everyone's heads and forcibly forbidding them from freely deciding whom they will or will not associate in accord with their OWN judgement.
How did a person such as this become a nurse???
Just plain English - asking how a person with this kind of hate could be allowed to be a nurse. They are supposed to care about "human" life!! She isn't talking about Isis - or MS-13 - she is talking about a human being that did nothing but get sick and needs help. Had nothing to do with my view or her view on things. To be a nurse she better forget her views when she is doing her job. I think she had to take an oath. She needs to be fired and never allowed to work as a nurse ever again. That is what I meant!!
>>"She is talking about a human being that did nothing but get sick and needs help."
That is indeed the evil of tribalism - or, more accurately, of Collectivism as a whole (which includes tribalism, sexism, racism, fascism, Nazism, Communism, etc etc ad nauseam). Collectivism treats any and all members of a group as if they were one and the same thing. So, to a tribalist like her, she IS "talking about Isis - or MS-13".
>>"Had nothing to do with my view or her view on things. To be a nurse she better forget her views"
Of course, that is precisely 'your [non-bigoted] view on things'. Just as the opposite is "her [bigoted] view on things". So the claim that this "had nothing to do with" anyone's "view" on things" is completely false.
>>"She needs to be fired and never allowed to work as a nurse ever again."
It is certainly the right of those who hired her to fire her. And it is certainly each and every human being's right NEVER to hire her in the future.
Of course, it is *also* the right of any and all human beings to hire her in the future if *they* so wish. As I noted, bigots don't LOSE their rights because you don't like their bigotry. Bigots (be they racist, sexist, or whatever) have every right to freely associate with *themselves*. And bigots have every right NOT to associate with you or anyone else, just as you (and the hospital etc) have every right NOT to associate with them.
You BOTH possess *all* those SAME rights.
But what neither you NOR the bigots have ANY right to do is FORCIBLY FORBID each other from exercising your rights of free association and free trade. In other words, as she has NO right to have the GUN of government used to prevent you from nursing unless you REFUSE to treat Jews (or blacks or trans or whatever), so too you have NO right to have the GUN of government used to prevent her from nursing unless she DOES treat Jews (or blacks or trans or whatever).
So if *other* bigots (be they hospitals, doctors, patients, etc) voluntarily wish to hire her as a nurse, they have *right* to do so - ie NO one has the right to 'never allow her to work for them'; NO one has the right to FORCIBLY FORBID *any* of them from exercising their rights - including their rights of free association and free trade.
The belief that one DOES have the 'right' to FORCIBLY FORBID an individual from exercising his rights - the belief that one has the 'right' to VIOLATE the individual's rights - is the EVIL philosophy of the Gazans.
__
NOTE: Since many here have made the same mistake about what I am *actually* arguing, please understand that I am NOT disputing the fact that laws exist which violate the individual's rights, any more than the Abolitionist was disputing the fact that slavery laws existed. Like the Abolitionist, I am perfectly aware of the existence of such laws etc. Instead, like the Abolitionist, what I am doing is pointing out that such laws - and thus any demand they be put into practice - are a grotesque EVIL because they VIOLATE the individual's right to his own life and his own effort.
As such laws were a violation of the rights of blacks pre-Civil War, so too such laws are a violation of the rights of bigots today.
And, yes, bigots DO have the exact SAME rights as everyone else. As I noted before, the fact that they are bigots does NOT magically make their rights vanish in a puff of WISHES - ie the fact that they are bigots does NOT make them the PROPERTY of others, to be disposed of as THEY see fit, to satisfy THEIR desires.
To use an analogy, the fact that you don't LIKE who a person does or does not CHOOSE to have sex with in NO way gives you the right to put a GUN to that person's head and "never allow them to have sex ever again" unless they DO have sex with those *you* demand they have sex with.
The principle here is clear and straightforward: the fact that you don't LIKE how a person EXERCISES their rights in NO way gives you the right to VIOLATE their rights. PERIOD.
Get it?
Bullshit. just a bunch of philosophy, bullshit. She chose a profession which required her to treat all. If she is not willing to treat all that she should not be allowed to practice the profession. She took an oath and she violated it. Therefore, she deserves to lose her license and her career.
No - just a bunch of philosophy gibberish. She took an oath & she broke it. She then is NOT fit to continue being a nurse there or anywhere else. I follow the law of God - I follow the Bible. I don't follow the liberal teachings- that tries to make sense out of nonsense!! In fact we do have the right to stop insanity and corruption. Has nothing to do with "their right to do as they wish". People don't have the right to do as they wish which is why there are laws and orders. Which is why there are rules and laws in the Bible.
Don't care to hear philosophy crap. 💩
People are accountable for what they do. And needs to be held accountable!! Period!!!
>>"just a bunch of philosophy gibberish."
I am sorry you *feel* the individual's right to his own life and his own effort is "gibberish". In other words, I am sorry you *feel* the principles which the Founding Fathers fought and died for in order to establish them as THE principle of the US is just "nonsense!!"
>>"People don't have the right to do as they wish"
With their own lives and their own effort (and ONLY with their own lives and their own effort), they most certainly do.
>>"People are accountable for what they do. And needs to be held accountable!! Period!!!!"
Quite true. Contrary to your FALSE premise here, this is NOT a point of contention between us.
In other words, given the fact that I have EXPLICITLY argued that you, the hospital, and any and all other individuals are FREE to hold this nurse "accountable" - ie to exercise YOUR rights and 'shun her into oblivion' - you are attacking a Straw Man here.
The ONLY thing *I* have stated here is that you can NOT hold her "accountable" by assaulting her, stealing from her, raping her, enslaving her, or murdering her.
I am sorry you *feel* that idea is "crap 💩".
I am sorry you - like the Gazans - WANT to assault her, steal from her, and enslave her (aka treat her as your PROPERTY, to be disposed of as YOU see fit, to satisfy YOUR desires) as your *means* of making her "accountable" for her words and actions.
In other words, I am sorry that the only difference between your philosophy here and the philosophy of the Gazans is that you *feel* it is too *distasteful* to rape or murder this woman.
Sorry indeed!
You are a communist - just like the insane democrats. To try and talk to insanity is worthless - just like the deranged democrats showed at President Trump's speech. You are destroying yourselves by opening your mouths. And some by just sitting there holding signs. By the way - no one said anything about raping this nurse. Obviously that was on your mind.
After this - I will find it in "my right" to block you. So no need to respond back - because I will block you. Don't want your seed of nonsense anymore going into my head. I use common sense and don't want to waste my time with anyone that doesn't have common sense!!
>>"You are a communist"
LOL. You *do* understand that communism doesn't defend the individual's rights FROM the Collective (as I am doing here), but REJECTS the individual's rights and SUBJUGATES the individual TO the Collective (as YOU demand be done here), right?
Or do you actually NOT understand that fact? That *would* certainly explain your 'arguments' here - including why you are substituting the "laws and order" of the 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat' for the "laws and order" of the individual's rights.
>>"To try and talk to insanity..."
Again, thanks for confessing the fact you *feel* the individual's rights to his OWN life and his OWN effort (rather than being the PROPERTY of others to dispose of as THEY see fit, to satisfy THEIR desires) - ie the idea the Founding Fathers fought and died for to establish as THE principle of this country - is your DEFINITION of "insane".
As Trump said to those democrats you referenced, that's "Very sad!'
>>"no one said anything about raping this nurse"
Which is why I stated that is the ONLY difference between you and the Gazans (who DO consider rape to be a valid means of "accountability" - or did you already FORGET about Oct 7?!). So thanks for confessing the fact you can't grasp the idea of COMPARING and CONTRASTING similarities and differences between people.
Oh, and it is QUITE telling that you did NOT say 'no one said anything about murdering this nurse'. "Obviously THAT was on YOUR mind" (since *you* were NOT doing an comparing and contrasting between yourself and the Gazans).
Talk about both PROJECTION *and* PROVING my point for me. Thanks for that! ;)
>>"I will... block you. So no need to respond back"
Because my comments could ONLY be for you. NO one else reads the comments here. :eyeroll:
Ah, the arrogance of those who FEEL that other human beings are nothing but their meat puppets.
Thanks for PROVING that point as well!
>>"How did a person such as this become a nurse???"
Are you asking: 'How does someone who irrationally hates an *entire* race of people still wish to help anyone and everyone else?'
That's easy: Tribalism. Hatred of another tribe doesn't prevent love of one's own tribe.
Or are you asking: 'How is someone who has ideas *you* hate 'allowed' by the State to become a nurse?'
That's also easy: Rights. Being a bigot doesn't magically strip a person of his ownership of his own life and his own effort. In other words, being a horrible human being doesn't make that person the property of others, to be disposed of as they see fit, to satisfy their desires.
As to the unasked question of: 'How such a person is hired by others *as* a nurse?' I'd say the answer is *either* those others are also tribalists *or* they have been ignorant of the person's ideas.
Of course, in this case, those others can no longer claim to be ignorant of this creature's ideas. So we shall see now if ignorance was the problem or if they are indeed tribalists.
“I would refuse to treat you. I’m not a vet. I don’t treat dogs”
Bitch, in this world some people are sheep, some are sheep dogs, some are wolves, some are ameba causing dysentery like you.
Me? I AM the vet: I'll treat you all if you need it. But then, I am a human. I am a professional.
The nursing board may well terminate her license. The Ohio Board of Medicine revoked permanently the license of one Lara Kollab DO when it was discovered she had made multiple antisemitic posts, stating among other things that she couldn’t wait to give Jews the wrong medicine. She was also terminated from her residency position at the Cleveland Clinic.
>>"stating among other things that she couldn't wait to give Jews the wrong medicine."
That, of course is a grotesque violation of the individual's right to his own life and his own effort. As the Agent of the individual's right of self-defense, it is most certainly the job of the State to step in and prevent that doctor from committing that heinous act against Jews (or anyone else).
Of course, thus far at least, the nurse in question here has not said or done anything to violate the rights of anyone else. She has simply exercised *her* right of free association (ie like any bigot, she has declared she will not interact with anyone who from the 'wrong' group). And, while who she chooses not to associate with - and why - is disgusting, free association IS her right - ie she is NO one's PROPERTY. No one may dispose of her life and her effort as they see fit, to satisfy their ends. So, as it stands, the State would be violating *her* rights if it revoked her license. Not only that, but they would be violating everyone else's rights as well. For instance, if other vile bigots wish to hire her as their nurse, that is the exercise of *their* right of free association.
Put simply, bigots (real or imagined) all have the same rights as every other human being. Bigots do not magically lose their rights to their OWN life and their OWN effort *because* they are bigots.
But note that this works BOTH ways. Just as this creature has the right NOT to associate Jews (or blacks or trans or anyone else), so TOO does anyone and everyone else have the right NOT to associate with her and her ilk. This means the hospital has the right to fire her. And it means everyone has the right to refuse to hire her (to be a nurse or anything else).
In other words, just as SHE has the right to shun Jews, so too everyone ELSE has the right to shun *her* (if that is their desire).
So go to it everyone! EXERCISE your right of free association and free trade and shun her into oblivion!
She can "learn to code". /s
Golden
>>"Golden"
Not familiar with that programming language. Is that anything like "Python"? ;)
Beyond horrifying that people like her work in “health care.” Hospitals with their artificial, self-aggrandizing “patients first” drivel can just stop it until they take monsters like her off the payroll.
Her not treating a patient that could lead to death which in effect is murder as it would have been preplanned not to treat the patient
>>"Her not treating a patient that could lead to death which in effect is murder"
Congratulations! You just declared your refusal to provide the necessities of life to any and all human beings on the planet is "murder".
Of course, your claim a grotesque falsehood. Contrary to your premise here, NO one has a 'right' to the life and effort of others. No one's 'need' *magically* grants them OWNERSHIP of *any* other human being.
Put simply, NO 'right' of yours has been violated if a person does NOT associate with you - be that person a nurse, a baker, or a candlestick maker.
Are you OK man? It seems like you're taking a lot of people's comments out of context. I've gotten two DMs already from people saying you've messaged them to argue about what I wrote on this post.
>>"I've gotten two DMs ...from people saying you've messaged them..."
I don't know the people you are talking about, but I have not "messaged" ANYONE here except in the NORMAL way - ie by posting replies like *everyone* else. (In fact, in my entire history on Substack, I have only ever DMed [aka used "Chat"] to speak with one person - and that was almost a year ago). So either those two are misspeaking (ie they *mean* 'posting replies' but are *saying* "messaging") OR they are outright lying (IF the latter, then they are likely trying to fraudulently get you to block me so NO one can see ideas *they* don't LIKE. Talk about *them* trying to treat you as *their* PROPERTY - ie talk about them trying to VIOLATE your rights!).
--
>>"It seems like you're taking a lot of people's comments out of context."
Given your other post to me here - where you *misunderstood* my argument and assumed I was *ignorant* of the EXISTENCE of government laws/regulations, when in fact I was disputing the VALIDITY of those very government laws/regulations (BIG difference!) - may I politely suggest it is not *I* who is failing to *accurately* present the principles others are preaching here.
As it stands, I have explicitly *agreed* with everyone here who wants to, as I put it, 'shun this creature into oblivion'.
The *only* people I have argued with here are those who have declared the State should forcibly prevent this creature from practicing nursing (and thus forcibly prevent anyone and everyone else from employing her *as* a nurse). Are you saying I have been mistaken in those instances and they were NOT demanding the State take away her license? If so, do you have an example of such a error on my part? Because if I *have* made a mistake in that regard - if someone was NOT demanding this nurse be forbidden by the State from practicing medicine - I would certainly like to apologize to that person.
Absent such an example, I see no "context" which has been dropped, as you claimed here. Perhaps you would be so kind as to point to one of these "lot of...out of context" arguments you have accused me of making and identify what "context" you are *specifically* claiming has supposedly been dropped.
*"just a bunch of philosophy, bull"*
One thanks Robin Fritz for confessing the fact she *feels* that rights are nothing but "bull".
*"If she is not willing to treat all that [sic] she should not be allowed..."*
One thanks Robin for confessing the fact that she *feels* other human beings are her PROPERTY, whom she "allows" or "prohibits" from acting as SHE sees fit, to satisfy HER desires.
That says pretty much all one need say about the *eviI* of Robin's philosophy here.
The only OTHER thing one need say about her is her DlS HONESTY. Out of the blue, she posted two comments AT me here - obviously upset with my ideas. But then she immediately blocked me, so it would appear to everyone else that I was unable to refute her objections.
Such is the 'morality' of those demanding the State VIOLATE this woman.
Jail
Toni, I admire you for getting people on the inside to talk, even if off the record. Institutional types are ingrained with a closed-mouth attitude toward personnel matters; it takes real skill to break through.
Similar case in Australia, except the two nurses involved actually said what they did in the hospital.
I blocked some loser. Claims to be a Chiropractor.
I, only, see loser.
Said I was a Jew lover and he’d have his spies following me.
I left the platform.
Nasty and bitter and I can't help but think of his lousy parenting.
This is good, but the damage is done. She has inspired medical students all over the country.