Reply #83: I don't see where anyone suggested that the "evil librul doctor was going to take her guns" [View All]

[Orrex]

Perhaps you could post that part again for me.

If he'd asked her what religion she was and she'd refused to answer would people still insist she was a teabagger?

Well, that's just a dumb question, and I hope that you realize it. It seems that the kneejerk outrage contingent has decided that the doctor's sole motivation for asking about the guns was to violate her privacy, and for some reason that same contingent refuses to consider that maybe just maybe the doctor was actually following established guidelines in compiling a patient history. After all, why in the world would the doctor want to ask about basic home safety while examining a child? The next thing you know, the doctor will ask if the child has normal bowel movements. Outrageous!

You and your ilk can howl about the intrusiveness of the question if you want, but the fact is that doctors are in the business of asking questions that--in other contexts--would be a violation of privacy. I mean, if a guy on a subway asked about your prostate, you'd probably find that a bit untoward. But if your physician asks that question in a medical context, then presumably you can suppress your paranoia long enough to realize that he's assessing a patient's history.

It's the same here. The doctor is asking a reasonable question in a reasonable context, and the patient for some reason chose to run to the media to spread the word. That choice alone makes me wonder what's going on here.

What about if he'd asked if she'd like to quarter troops in her home?

Wow. And I thought that the first question was dumb.