comment: >
  
  The surgeon was put in a difficult position. He was willing to do the surgery, but that specific hospital had a policy that prohibited gender confirmation surgery. When offered to perform the surgery at a different campus, the patient refused and instead sought litigation. Another example of a large hospital system using the provider as a scapegoat of their capitalist/religious driven intention.
context: Six Supreme Court justices are sliding down poles as we speak, Bibles in hand, to protect doctors' right not to treat patients. >
  
  I was gonna say they're drafting their opinion right now so as not to waste any time. >
  
  its weird how much people hate people that have literally zero impact on their lives. >
  
  And it’s beyond infuriating that largely the same crowd believe that an evil snake, a cursed apple, a magic boat, and a talking shrubbery have a huge impact on their lives. >
  
  I dont think that demographic is as large as you think it is compared to the other demographics that feel the same >
  
  It's at least 30% and that's just enough to sway a vote. Hopefully it continues to drop. >
  
  United States Conference of Catholic Bishops shouldn’t have any access to or any regulatory authority of any kind over any medical facility. >
  
  I’ve lived with end stage kidney failure for 20 years and all I have to say is thank God for the Affordable Care Act >
  
  I hope you are doing better and are not in too much discomfort. I am glad that you had access to the ACA too. >
  
  Thanks! I’m doing well as long as this transplant holds out. Dialysis was horrible. It’s been the majority of my life now, and frankly I have a pretty decent life. Not perfect but very decent. >
  
  How does a healthcare provider deny healthcare to anyone in need. Why did they even join the profession? I work at ford, should I start only working on red 4x4 superdutys? Wt actual fuck is wrong with these people. >
  
  Also, lack of funds. Good luck getting care in the US if you can't pay for it. You can be seen in the ER sure, but if they find a serious issue, you can't follow up on it unless you can afford the doctors and the treatment. >
  
  Very right, but that’s not the doctors purposefully denying service to someone because the doctor is a bigot, which is the main issue here. >
  
  Im pretty sure it had nothing to do with the doctor and everything to do with the policy of the hospital. The article said that the doctor mistakenly scheduled the procedure there. That means the doctor agreed to do the procedure. They later declined to do it at that location bc of the policy not allowing the gender affirming care, and from what it seems, offered to do it elsewhere.