Anonymous #1 13w

Yes which is fucking stupid and inhumane

12

Anonymous #2 13w

You are against doctors having more autonomy?

-7

Anonymous #1 13w

“It doesn’t prohibit doctors from treating patients, it just gives them greater agency over if they should Literally Fucking Die from not receiving care”

12

Anonymous #1 13w

Yes. I am against doctors having more autonomy. If a doctor refuses to treat a patient for personal reasons they should LOSE. THEIR. LICENSE.

13

Anonymous OP 13w

Doctors are going to die from not receiving care? You may want to rewrite your inane comment.

-7

Anonymous #1 13w

Many rural places have few doctors. If the only doctor in town won’t treat you for your politics, that’s a problem. Don’t go into medicine if you’re not in it to help people.

8

Anonymous #1 13w

When "autonomy" means the right to discriminate against people you don't like yes God some of y'all are so fucking dense

11

Anonymous #1 13w

“Doctors are going to die from not receiving care” Oh! My apologies number one. You are clearly functionally illiterate - no other rational way for you to have read my reply and walked away with that conclusion - and that’s not your fault. You probably are a victim of a red-state education system intentionally designed to keep you stupid enough to vote for republicans. You are a victim. I’ll back off.

10

Anonymous #1 13w

if you're gonna deny medical care to a patient because of your personal religious or political views you should never have wasted ur life becoming a doctor. and you should have your medical license taken immediately and in jail. i'm saying that as someone who's planning on taking the mcat sometime this year. that is truly the worst thing i've read today

9

Anonymous OP 13w

You wrote: It doesn’t prohibit doctors from treating parents, it just gives them greater agency over if they should Literally Fucking Die from not receiving care. The “them” refers to doctors as does the “they.” Let’s rewrite your sentence so you can follow it. “It doesn’t prohibit doctors from treating parents, it just gives doctors greater agency over if doctors should Literally Fucking Die from not receiving care.” You would do really poorly on the LSAT.

-7

Anonymous #1 13w

Focusing on sentence structure because your opinion is fucking stupid

10

Anonymous #1 13w

dude your first comment was defending doctors not giving medical care to people with differing political views. the last person someone should be taking educational advice from is you. i hate trump supporters but will i work to save someone's life if they have stage 4 bone cancer? of course because its my fucking job. being a doctor is not pick and choose. being a doctor is having the privilege to save people's lives. if you can't distinguish that you have a disgusting disdain for people

12

Anonymous #2 13w

It is more intelligent than that logically deficient sentence. OP should get out their sentence diagramming workbook.

-6

Anonymous #1 13w

Oh honey… we are not enemies anymore. Take some time off politics and see if you can read some classics. I like “Flowers for Algernon”

9

Anonymous #1 13w

I mean this with no malice - you are currently providing broken-down proof of the fact I was right about your literacy. Please, please, please take some time away from this hellscape and bolster your brain back up

7

Anonymous OP 13w

I read it years ago.

-5

Anonymous #1 13w

Yes, we can tell it was years ago.

5

Anonymous OP 13w

I’m not the one who struggles to write a coherent sentence. You are projecting.

-4

Anonymous #1 13w

#1, again, with no malice - you are the only one here struggling with coherency.

7

Anonymous #1 13w

Not a single other commenter has had trouble with comprehending my replies. That’s just you.

9

Anonymous OP 13w

I’m the only one reading what you literally write.

-4

Anonymous #1 13w

Yes! We know! An inability to pick up on subtext, common figures of speech, or anything BEYOND literal meaning is textbook functional illiteracy.

7

Anonymous OP 13w

Incorrect, it is reading precisely what you wrote.

-5

Anonymous #1 13w

oh honey….

8

Anonymous #1 13w

this is…supremely pedantic and stupid. if you’re truly that committed to going in the weeds about it, linguistic principles would hold OP’s wording to still be correct, if ambiguous. YOUR lack of comprehension of context doesn’t change that.

11

Anonymous #1 13w

This literally goes against the Hippocratic oath. I have had to help treat racists, white supremacists, and people who quite frankly I don’t agree with on their political views. But at the end of the day, they are a patient and they deserve treatment. If you’re unable to hold those same beliefs, then medicine is not the field for you.

9

Anonymous #3 13w

The “them” and the “they” both refer to doctors, so I don’t see how “linguistic principles would hold OP’s wording to … be correct.”

-4

Anonymous #1 13w

well, you’re not a linguist and I am, so I’m not surprised your depth of knowledge isn’t to the same standard as mine. It’s okay to not be an expert :)

4

Anonymous #3 13w

Do linguists often engage in the appeal to authority fallacy? You conspicuously failed to directly address my argument.

-2

Anonymous #1 13w

considering your obstinacy in this thread so far, I can tell explaining this to you in a way that won’t spur like ten million annoying follow-up questions would require more of my effort than you’re worth. links, diagrams, the whole shebang. that’s not fallacious, it’s pragmatic.

3

Anonymous #1 13w

in brief - ambiguous =/= incorrect. what is considered “correct” from a linguistic standpoint is pretty much entirely determined by whether native speakers popularly believe it to be understandable and correct. the upvote ratios here pretty clearly support OP.

3

Anonymous #3 13w

A court of law would never use the “native speakers” standard.

-2

Anonymous #1 13w

If you’d like to learn more about it, Google “linguistic descriptivism vs prescriptivism” or “structural syntactic ambiguity”

3

Anonymous #1 13w

that’s great, but this isn’t a court of law. this is yikyak.

-1

Anonymous #1 13w

anyway, keep proving that my effort to explain this to you isn’t worth my time. it makes you look so good and smart

2