Judge rules against Trump administration in teen pregnancy prevention case

The fed gov doesnt have the power to do that program in the first place.
I dont understand why so many "honorable" judges ignore that fact with so many verdicts..
While i dont have a problem with the program, it should come from the states.
I also cant find his reasoning in the link.
So my thought is, that judge is a loser.
 
HHS did not follow the procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and it did not follow the requirement for reasoned decision-making. trump staffed HHS with a bunch of fundie loonies who have tried to shit on the American public and waste our money. The loonies even asserted that birth control doesn't work, in spite of copious evidence to the contrary provided by medical professionals and researchers, instead of merely saying that she doesn't like birth control for religious reasons.

There is no reason to limit sex education to exhorting abstinence. This is a purely religious viewpoint among only some religions, and not all Americans are members of these religions or members of any religion at all. The aim of this program is to prevent teenage pregnancies and STDs, and the mission of HHS is to promote public health, not to force religious dogma on Americans. Yet the current budget gives $277 million to these abstinence shenanigans. Consider this a gift from the taxpayers to the religious right to underwrite their indoctrination efforts.

Thank you, Judge!
 
Trump wants the funds diverted to his teen dating service so he can get a new pin number and start right in.
 
The fed gov doesnt have the power to do that program in the first place.
I dont understand why so many "honorable" judges ignore that fact with so many verdicts..
While i dont have a problem with the program, it should come from the states.
I also cant find his reasoning in the link.
So my thought is, that judge is a loser.

Just ask anyone, they will tell you it falls under the "General Welfare" clause, which is the reason for 99% of what the Govt does.
 
Thoughts?

Judge rules against Trump administration in teen pregnancy prevention case

A federal judge in D.C. ruled Thursday that the Trump administration's cuts to the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program were unlawful.

Last summer, the administration notified 81 organizations that their five-year grants through the program would end in 2018, rather than in 2020, prompting multiple lawsuits.

I find it funny that they call it "teen pregnancy prevention" when they don't provide birth control or educate them. it's the radical religious right's whole "abstinence" thing.... which is intended to control women but guys can do whatever they want.....

and then disappear.
 
The fed gov doesnt have the power to do that program in the first place.
I dont understand why so many "honorable" judges ignore that fact with so many verdicts..
While i dont have a problem with the program, it should come from the states.
I also cant find his reasoning in the link.
So my thought is, that judge is a loser.

your idea of what the government can and can't do is retareded
 
Organizations who accept federal grants have to be aware that the grants are not permanent and are subject to review by the federal agencies who authorize the grants. It's incredible that a federal judge could determine that the government doesn't have the power to terminate taxpayer funded grant money. The world is upside down and ass backwards in the liberal mind . Drain the freaking swamp.
 
Organizations who accept federal grants have to be aware that the grants are not permanent and are subject to review by the federal agencies who authorize the grants. It's incredible that a federal judge could determine that the government doesn't have the power to terminate taxpayer funded grant money. The world is upside down and ass backwards in the liberal mind . Drain the freaking swamp.
That wasn’t why the judge PROPERLY ruled on the case.

Perhaps you should look at the decision. No doubt your google finger works
 
Does anybody recall an administration trying so hard to violate the constitution, that court after court after court ends up shutting them down? Thank goodness we have the Judicial branch, since the GOP-led congress has completely abandoned its duty to serve as a check and balance to the executive branch.
 
Does anybody recall an administration trying so hard to violate the constitution, that court after court after court ends up shutting them down? Thank goodness we have the Judicial branch, since the GOP-led congress has completely abandoned its duty to serve as a check and balance to the executive branch.

Actually Donald has appointed more judges than Obama and bush together. He’s polluted our judiciary for a generation, maybe more
 
The Trump administration should use this grant etc to push the abstinence agenda which I agree with.

We had the “abstinence agenda” when I was growing up in the 1950’s when there was no reliable contraception. We were taught that no decent man would want to marry a girl who wasn’t a virgin.

If a girl opted to raise her child on her own, she was considered a “fallen woman” - not fit for polite society. She was frequently shunned. Her child was labelled a “bastard” - it was even noted on his or her birth certificate. Very stigmatizing.

Despite these dire warnings, 30 to 40% of women were pregnant when they married. My mother used to say that after a couple got married, the first child could come any time, the second one takes nine months.

Teenage girls who got pregnant were expelled from high school and shamed as sluts. If the father was also a high school student and the couple got married, the boy was also expelled. As a teenager I wondered how these kids would have any chance in life with neither one of them having a high school diploma.

We also had “homes for unwed mothers” usually run by churches or women's charities. The offspring of unwed mothers who were waiting for adoption were placed in orphanages. Some children grew up in them, never knowing a real family. Most of these unwed mothers homes were packed and had waiting lists. The church run homes worked hard to get these wanton girls to mend their ways, requiring residents to attend prayer meetings and Bible classes daily.

The rich parents of girls who got pregnant took them to Sweden or Japan where abortion was legal. Poor parents sent their daughters to a “home” or a relative until the baby was born. There were back alley abortionists but you literally risked your life going one.

As a millennial, you have no idea of the days of “abstinence only” contraception or what a spectacular failure it was. Any money spent on “abstinence only” education is money wasted.

It didn’t work before the Pill, and it sure as hell won’t work now.
 
HHS did not follow the procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and it did not follow the requirement for reasoned decision-making. trump staffed HHS with a bunch of fundie loonies who have tried to shit on the American public and waste our money. The loonies even asserted that birth control doesn't work, in spite of copious evidence to the contrary provided by medical professionals and researchers, instead of merely saying that she doesn't like birth control for religious reasons.

There is no reason to limit sex education to exhorting abstinence. This is a purely religious viewpoint among only some religions, and not all Americans are members of these religions or members of any religion at all. The aim of this program is to prevent teenage pregnancies and STDs, and the mission of HHS is to promote public health, not to force religious dogma on Americans. Yet the current budget gives $277 million to these abstinence shenanigans. Consider this a gift from the taxpayers to the religious right to underwrite their indoctrination efforts.

Thank you, Judge!
According to the study done by HHS (Under Obama's watch) these programs showed no significant effect, and some made things worse. Also, all but one of these programs were deemed by the Obama administration as "evidence-based" solely on one single study done by the program's own developer, a conflict of interest. According to Dr. Stan Weed, an expert in the field of sex ed research, "comprehensive sex ed programs show far more evidence of failure than success."
 
The Trump administration should use this grant etc to push the abstinence agenda which I agree with.

We had the “abstinence agenda” when I was growing up in the 1950’s when there was no reliable contraception. We were taught that no decent man would want to marry a girl who wasn’t a virgin.

If a girl opted to raise her child on her own, she was considered a “fallen woman” - not fit for polite society. She was frequently shunned. Her child was labelled a “bastard” - it was even noted on his or her birth certificate. Very stigmatizing.

Despite these dire warnings, 30 to 40% of women were pregnant when they married. My mother used to say that after a couple got married, the first child could come any time, the second one takes nine months.

Teenage girls who got pregnant were expelled from high school and shamed as sluts. If the father was also a high school student and the couple got married, the boy was also expelled. As a teenager I wondered how these kids would have any chance in life with neither one of them having a high school diploma.

We also had “homes for unwed mothers” usually run by churches or women's charities. The offspring of unwed mothers who were waiting for adoption were placed in orphanages. Some children grew up in them, never knowing a real family. Most of these unwed mothers homes were packed and had waiting lists. The church run homes worked hard to get these wanton girls to mend their ways, requiring residents to attend prayer meetings and Bible classes daily.

The rich parents of girls who got pregnant took them to Sweden or Japan where abortion was legal. Poor parents sent their daughters to a “home” or a relative until the baby was born. There were back alley abortionists but you literally risked your life going one.

As a millennial, you have no idea of the days of “abstinence only” contraception or what a spectacular failure it was. Any money spent on “abstinence only” education is money wasted.

It didn’t work before the Pill, and it sure as hell won’t work now.
Abstinence programs didn't start getting funding until the Clinton administration. According to the CDC, more teens are abstaining now than in the last 25 years. Yet the STD epidemic continues to get worse, because the condom cannot fully protect against ANY STD.
 
The Trump administration should use this grant etc to push the abstinence agenda which I agree with.

We had the “abstinence agenda” when I was growing up in the 1950’s when there was no reliable contraception. We were taught that no decent man would want to marry a girl who wasn’t a virgin.

If a girl opted to raise her child on her own, she was considered a “fallen woman” - not fit for polite society. She was frequently shunned. Her child was labelled a “bastard” - it was even noted on his or her birth certificate. Very stigmatizing.

Despite these dire warnings, 30 to 40% of women were pregnant when they married. My mother used to say that after a couple got married, the first child could come any time, the second one takes nine months.

Teenage girls who got pregnant were expelled from high school and shamed as sluts. If the father was also a high school student and the couple got married, the boy was also expelled. As a teenager I wondered how these kids would have any chance in life with neither one of them having a high school diploma.

We also had “homes for unwed mothers” usually run by churches or women's charities. The offspring of unwed mothers who were waiting for adoption were placed in orphanages. Some children grew up in them, never knowing a real family. Most of these unwed mothers homes were packed and had waiting lists. The church run homes worked hard to get these wanton girls to mend their ways, requiring residents to attend prayer meetings and Bible classes daily.

The rich parents of girls who got pregnant took them to Sweden or Japan where abortion was legal. Poor parents sent their daughters to a “home” or a relative until the baby was born. There were back alley abortionists but you literally risked your life going one.

As a millennial, you have no idea of the days of “abstinence only” contraception or what a spectacular failure it was. Any money spent on “abstinence only” education is money wasted.

It didn’t work before the Pill, and it sure as hell won’t work now.
Nobody said that pregnancy was fair to the ladies back in the day. Your entire post is still all about how the women got treated but the man got off scott free. The only thing abortion does is let the men get off with no repercussions at all and saddle the woman with killing a child. How is that better? How is single mom better? How are having no church charities better?

Everything you're complaining about is because it's all thrown on the girl. Giving her executional powers doesn't solve the problem. Cheering on the single mom doesn't solve the problem. Abortion doesn't solve the problem.
 
HHS did not follow the procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and it did not follow the requirement for reasoned decision-making. trump staffed HHS with a bunch of fundie loonies who have tried to shit on the American public and waste our money. The loonies even asserted that birth control doesn't work, in spite of copious evidence to the contrary provided by medical professionals and researchers, instead of merely saying that she doesn't like birth control for religious reasons.

There is no reason to limit sex education to exhorting abstinence. This is a purely religious viewpoint among only some religions, and not all Americans are members of these religions or members of any religion at all. The aim of this program is to prevent teenage pregnancies and STDs, and the mission of HHS is to promote public health, not to force religious dogma on Americans. Yet the current budget gives $277 million to these abstinence shenanigans. Consider this a gift from the taxpayers to the religious right to underwrite their indoctrination efforts.

Thank you, Judge!
According to the study done by HHS (Under Obama's watch) these programs showed no significant effect, and some made things worse. Also, all but one of these programs were deemed by the Obama administration as "evidence-based" solely on one single study done by the program's own developer, a conflict of interest. According to Dr. Stan Weed, an expert in the field of sex ed research, "comprehensive sex ed programs show far more evidence of failure than success."
HHS did not follow the procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and it did not follow the requirement for reasoned decision-making. trump staffed HHS with a bunch of fundie loonies who have tried to shit on the American public and waste our money. The loonies even asserted that birth control doesn't work, in spite of copious evidence to the contrary provided by medical professionals and researchers, instead of merely saying that she doesn't like birth control for religious reasons.

There is no reason to limit sex education to exhorting abstinence. This is a purely religious viewpoint among only some religions, and not all Americans are members of these religions or members of any religion at all. The aim of this program is to prevent teenage pregnancies and STDs, and the mission of HHS is to promote public health, not to force religious dogma on Americans. Yet the current budget gives $277 million to these abstinence shenanigans. Consider this a gift from the taxpayers to the religious right to underwrite their indoctrination efforts.

Thank you, Judge!
According to the study done by HHS (Under Obama's watch) these programs showed no significant effect, and some made things worse. Also, all but one of these programs were deemed by the Obama administration as "evidence-based" solely on one single study done by the program's own developer, a conflict of interest. According to Dr. Stan Weed, an expert in the field of sex ed research, "comprehensive sex ed programs show far more evidence of failure than success."

Who is this Stan Weed and why does a quick internet search only bring up his connection with some organization going by the name "Institute for Research and Evaluation"?

Please provide links to Weed, and to the HHS study you mentioned.

Please also explain why abstinence has to be taught by itself, rather than as part of a comprehensive sex-ed program. Planned Parenthood characterizes abstinence as a birth-control method, one of several. Why can't all be taught together?

Interesting article by an ex-student of the Tennessee schools' "abstinence only" education program:

As a girl, I went through abstinence ed. As a woman, I’m trying to understand the damage done.

Please note in the article the author's experience with "dirty" scotch tape. I have not done a study, but it seems that all of the "abstinence only" programs include an element of teaching children that sex is dirty. I certainly would never characterize it as such.

My impression of the American people, including those who make constant references to sex on USMB ("banging," "fucking," "poontang," and so forth), is that only a small percentage ever follow abstinence-until-marriage idea in their own lives, even those who now want to dish it to others.

I do not understand why anti-abortion zealots don't want to prevent abortions by telling people how not to get pregnant in the first place. It makes no sense.

We humans have a long history of inventing and using tools to achieve our purposes and solve our problems. Birth control is just another one of our tools. Why is anyone adamant about not using the technology available to solve, or at least lessen the occurrence of unwanted pregnancies? I really don't understand the ideology. It appears that the idea of sex just simply bothers some people; more so if the participant in sexual activity is female. Back in my day, lots of nice Catholic girls and boys at my nice Catholic college reached graduation day due to the intervention of non-school-approved technology. They today are nice parents and grandparents.
 
HHS did not follow the procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and it did not follow the requirement for reasoned decision-making. trump staffed HHS with a bunch of fundie loonies who have tried to shit on the American public and waste our money. The loonies even asserted that birth control doesn't work, in spite of copious evidence to the contrary provided by medical professionals and researchers, instead of merely saying that she doesn't like birth control for religious reasons.

There is no reason to limit sex education to exhorting abstinence. This is a purely religious viewpoint among only some religions, and not all Americans are members of these religions or members of any religion at all. The aim of this program is to prevent teenage pregnancies and STDs, and the mission of HHS is to promote public health, not to force religious dogma on Americans. Yet the current budget gives $277 million to these abstinence shenanigans. Consider this a gift from the taxpayers to the religious right to underwrite their indoctrination efforts.

Thank you, Judge!
According to the study done by HHS (Under Obama's watch) these programs showed no significant effect, and some made things worse. Also, all but one of these programs were deemed by the Obama administration as "evidence-based" solely on one single study done by the program's own developer, a conflict of interest. According to Dr. Stan Weed, an expert in the field of sex ed research, "comprehensive sex ed programs show far more evidence of failure than success."
Red herring fallacy.

The issue isn’t the efficacy of the program, but the fact the Trump ‘administration’ failed to follow the law.
 

Forum List

Back
Top