←back to thread

I'm the Canadian who was detained by ICE for two weeks

(www.theguardian.com)
1009 points n1b0m | 3 comments | 19 Mar 25 11:21 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
sebstefan ◴[19 Mar 25 12:49 UTC] No.43411166[source]▶
>I was taken to the nurse’s office for a medical check. She asked what had happened to me. She had never seen a Canadian there before. When I told her my story, she grabbed my hand and said: “Do you believe in God?”

>“I believe God brought you here for a reason,” she said. “I know it feels like your life is in a million pieces, but you will be OK. Through this, I think you are going to find a way to help others.”

You've got to be fucked in the head to think this is an appropriate thing to do as an agent that's part of a federal process. Keep your god out of work!

replies(10): >>43411323 #>>43411430 #>>43411465 #>>43411477 #>>43411648 #>>43411677 #>>43413041 #>>43413095 #>>43413171 #>>43413175 #
queuebert ◴[19 Mar 25 13:12 UTC] No.43411465[source]▶
Technically, that's not what the separation clause is about. That was not, however, professional behavior for a nurse, but I see extremely religious nurses on the reg. Much less so with doctors, but then again religiosity is inversely proportional to education.
replies(1): >>43411612 #
1. mdp2021 ◴[19 Mar 25 13:23 UTC] No.43411612[source]▶
Superstition can be inversely proportional to education. Cultivation should be proportional to education.

That term you used is very slippery (actually, you used it as the opposite of a "superstition" - you gave it only the interpretation typical of later uses).

replies(1): >>43413708 #
2. queuebert ◴[19 Mar 25 15:58 UTC] No.43413708[source]▶
No, I meant religiosity:

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/04/26/in-america-d...

replies(1): >>43416107 #
3. mdp2021 ◴[19 Mar 25 19:07 UTC] No.43416107[source]▶
Yes, sorry, of course you meant that aspect. But the term remains too slippery, too far away from its real content - as can be apparent already in the stats you mention: first of all they are about a public expression, which are reasonably lower in some demographics for more reasons, and secondly they conflate very different phenomena (such as a very ambiguous idea of attributed "importance" vs the subscription to some dogmatic details).

There are also other reasons why you see different behaviours in doctors and nurses: already linguistically, the "nurse" "nourishes", the "doctor" remains the "learned" - one has a direct rapport, the other detached, out of the basic role construed. It just follows that the nurse more probably consoles and the doctor more probably communicates flatly.