Plan parenthood 1 republicans in Texas 0

[Skylar]

That's bullshit, in fact, that's a damn lie. They are not asking them to have the same standards as any other clinic. They are asking PP to meet the standards of hospital-like ambulatory surgical centers, even though the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist have said that the typical doctor's offices are fully able to perform medically safe abortions, and the ASC's do little to enhance the standard of care.

It was a proxy issue, and classic hypocrisy. The Bill was designed to shut down abortion clinics and limit a woman's ability to choose to have an abortion. That's what it was designed to do, and what it did.....cutting the number of abortion providers to less than half. With the repeal of the law, we saw this:

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Women in South Texas facing a 200-mile drive for access to legal abortions learned Wednesday that a local clinic shuttered by a sweeping anti-abortion law would reopen, marking the first tangible effect of a court ruling last week that blocked key parts of the state law.

Texas abortion clinic to reopen after court ruling - Yahoo News

 

[koshergrl]

Reasons for oversight:

"Planned Parenthood agreed to pay $4.3 million to settle a federal civil suit claiming that it fraudulently billed Medicaid for women's health services provided by some of its Texas clinics from 2003 to 2009."

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323455104579016951262314732

"The Pennsylvania Department of Health has records as far back as the 1980s documenting Gosnell’s dangerous practices," the grand jury found. "For decades, Gosnell did not staff his facility with licensed or qualified employees. He never properly monitored women under sedation. He botched surgeries and then failed to summon emergency help when it was needed."

"When the clinic was first inspected in 1979, it had a medical director on staff who was a certified obstetrician/gynecologist. The certificate for approval after that inspection expired in December 1980, but the next "documented site review was not conducted until August 1989."

"By then, Gosnell was the only doctor affiliated with the clinic. At that investigation, the state health department "noted several violations of Pennsylvania abortion regulations" but "based on mere promises to improve documentation and filing" granted the clinic approval for another 12 months. There was a similar investigation in 1993, with no result.

"There were no inspections of the clinic over the next 16 years. The health department received multiple complaints about the clinic, including one from a doctor who said that his patients "were becoming infected with sexually transmitted diseases at Gosnell’s clinic when they had abortions there."

The Gosnell case Here 8217 s what you need to know - The Washington Post

 

[koshergrl]

That's bullshit, in fact, that's a damn lie. They are not asking them to have the same standards as any other clinic. They are asking PP to meet the standards of hospital-like ambulatory surgical centers, even though the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist have said that the typical doctor's offices are fully able to perform medically safe abortions, and the ASC's do little to enhance the standard of care.

It was a proxy issue, and classic hypocrisy. The Bill was designed to shut down abortion clinics and limit a woman's ability to choose to have an abortion. That's what it was designed to do, and what it did.....cutting the number of abortion providers to less than half. With the repeal of the law, we saw this:

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Women in South Texas facing a 200-mile drive for access to legal abortions learned Wednesday that a local clinic shuttered by a sweeping anti-abortion law would reopen, marking the first tangible effect of a court ruling last week that blocked key parts of the state law.

Texas abortion clinic to reopen after court ruling - Yahoo News

We don't think women should be victimized in order to fund Planned Parenthood.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

That's bullshit, in fact, that's a damn lie. They are not asking them to have the same standards as any other clinic. They are asking PP to meet the standards of hospital-like ambulatory surgical centers, even though the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist have said that the typical doctor's offices are fully able to perform medically safe abortions, and the ASC's do little to enhance the standard of care.

It was a proxy issue, and classic hypocrisy. The Bill was designed to shut down abortion clinics and limit a woman's ability to choose to have an abortion. That's what it was designed to do, and what it did.....cutting the number of abortion providers to less than half. With the repeal of the law, we saw this:

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Women in South Texas facing a 200-mile drive for access to legal abortions learned Wednesday that a local clinic shuttered by a sweeping anti-abortion law would reopen, marking the first tangible effect of a court ruling last week that blocked key parts of the state law.

Texas abortion clinic to reopen after court ruling - Yahoo News

We don't think women should be victimized in order to fund Planned Parenthood.

Hey, they cry that they want abortions, they said nothing about wanting SAFE abortions don't you be violating their rights by insisting on safety regulations and shit.

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

And of course the real losers are the unborn children who will die. Or the women who will die in under regulated abortion mills.

heres the problem you have ....Plan parenhood is more then just abortions ... you nut cases can't get that through you heads... that they do many things for poor woman then abort fetuses... the fact that you don't like abortions, don't have one... but don't think you have the right to tell woman what to do ... thats why your republicans are losing among womam voter .... dem, independent, and republicans woman are sick of you nut case republicans telling them how to treat their bodies

Hey stupid. How come when you don't like guns, you want to ban all of them and that's okay? The 'don't like one, don't buy one' doesn't work when it's you arguing for gun control.

The hypocrisy of the left never fails to amaze me...

 

[koshergrl]

They don't want the clinics to be forced to a higher standard, because they don't want people to know what really goes on there, what the numbers really are, or how much the industry supports human trafficking, the sex industry, and other abusers.

 

[Skylar]

That's bullshit, in fact, that's a damn lie. They are not asking them to have the same standards as any other clinic. They are asking PP to meet the standards of hospital-like ambulatory surgical centers, even though the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist have said that the typical doctor's offices are fully able to perform medically safe abortions, and the ASC's do little to enhance the standard of care.

It was a proxy issue, and classic hypocrisy. The Bill was designed to shut down abortion clinics and limit a woman's ability to choose to have an abortion. That's what it was designed to do, and what it did.....cutting the number of abortion providers to less than half. With the repeal of the law, we saw this:

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Women in South Texas facing a 200-mile drive for access to legal abortions learned Wednesday that a local clinic shuttered by a sweeping anti-abortion law would reopen, marking the first tangible effect of a court ruling last week that blocked key parts of the state law.

Texas abortion clinic to reopen after court ruling - Yahoo News

We don't think women should be victimized in order to fund Planned Parenthood.

And which women were being 'victimized'? Was there a rash of complaints about women being harmed in abortion clinics that motivated the bill? If so, show us.

 

[Skylar]

They don't want the clinics to be forced to a higher standard, because they don't want people to know what really goes on there, what the numbers really are, or how much the industry supports human trafficking, the sex industry, and other abusers.

And what is going on there? Remember, the cases you've cited aren't in Texas.

You're alluding to quite a bit. You're insinuating. You're offering us innuendo.

Show me. Don't tell me.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

They don't want the clinics to be forced to a higher standard, because they don't want people to know what really goes on there, what the numbers really are, or how much the industry supports human trafficking, the sex industry, and other abusers.

I say let them have exactly what they want. Most of them using those shit holes we don't really want reproducing anyway.

I further suggest we start supporting late stage abortion, and by late state I mean any 30 year old who hasn't held at least one full time job in their life, or who has spent 10 years in prison, or has more kids than fingers or who can't spell cat without being spotted the c and t, or any combination of the above.

IE most black males.

 

[Skylar]

They don't want the clinics to be forced to a higher standard, because they don't want people to know what really goes on there, what the numbers really are, or how much the industry supports human trafficking, the sex industry, and other abusers.

I say let them have exactly what they want. Most of them using those shit holes we don't really want reproducing anyway.

I further suggest we start supporting late stage abortion, and by late state I mean any 30 year old who hasn't held at least one full time job in their life, or who has spent 10 years in prison, or has more kids than fingers or who can't spell cat without being spotted the c and t, or any combination of the above.

IE most black males.

Wow....that's spectacularly racist. And manages to fold in mass murder.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

They don't want the clinics to be forced to a higher standard, because they don't want people to know what really goes on there, what the numbers really are, or how much the industry supports human trafficking, the sex industry, and other abusers.

I say let them have exactly what they want. Most of them using those shit holes we don't really want reproducing anyway.

I further suggest we start supporting late stage abortion, and by late state I mean any 30 year old who hasn't held at least one full time job in their life, or who has spent 10 years in prison, or has more kids than fingers or who can't spell cat without being spotted the c and t, or any combination of the above.

IE most black males.

Wow....that's spectacularly racist. And manages to fold in mass murder.

worthless piece of trash isn't a race my dear

Plenty of worthless whites would qualify as well

Oh, and state sanctioned death isn't murder.

 

[Skylar]

They don't want the clinics to be forced to a higher standard, because they don't want people to know what really goes on there, what the numbers really are, or how much the industry supports human trafficking, the sex industry, and other abusers.

I say let them have exactly what they want. Most of them using those shit holes we don't really want reproducing anyway.

I further suggest we start supporting late stage abortion, and by late state I mean any 30 year old who hasn't held at least one full time job in their life, or who has spent 10 years in prison, or has more kids than fingers or who can't spell cat without being spotted the c and t, or any combination of the above.

IE most black males.

Wow....that's spectacularly racist. And manages to fold in mass murder.

worthless piece of trash isn't a race my dear

Plenty of worthless whites would qualify as well

Oh, and state sanctioned death isn't murder.

Yeah, but you're not talking about 'post birth abortions' for most whites. While you are calling for the death of most blacks males.

In its way, its almost refreshing when you get a healthy snoot full of good old fashion burning cross and white hood racism. The allusion and innuendo racists can get a bit tedious.

 

[Valerie]

...

Nope, I have no issue with the end result, what I have an issue with is Roe V Wade is horrible case law. My view is individual states have the right to restrict or allow abortion as they see fit, as it is not mentioned in the constitution, and thus devolves to the State Legislatures.

I live in New York State. Abortion here is protected, and is the right of the state. If Mississippi wants to ban it, they should be able to, with the limits of they can only ban its performance within their borders, not ban their citizens from having one.


I am a strict constructionist when it comes to the constitution, I am fairly libertarian when it comes to social issues, however I recognize the State Legislatures rights to create laws on those issues as long as not constitutionally prohibited.

educate yourself...

US CONSTITUTION
Article III
Section 1.
The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.

Section 2.
The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

Article III Constitution US Law LII Legal Information Institute

Roe v. Wade (1973) ruled unconstitutional a state law that banned abortions except to save the life of the mother. The Court ruled that the states were forbidden from outlawing or regulating any aspect of abortion performed during the first trimester of pregnancy...

In a 7-2 decision written by Justice Harry Blackmun (who was chosen because of his prior experience as counsel to the Mayo Clinic), the Court ruled that the Texas statute violated Jane Roe's constitutional right to privacy. The Court argued that the Constitution's First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's "zone of privacy" against state laws...

The Supreme Court . Expanding Civil Rights . Landmark Cases . Roe v. Wade 1973 PBS

 

[boedicca]

And of course the real losers are the unborn children who will die. Or the women who will die in under regulated abortion mills.

heres the problem you have ....Plan parenhood is more then just abortions ... you nut cases can't get that through you heads... that they do many things for poor woman then abort fetuses... the fact that you don't like abortions, don't have one... but don't think you have the right to tell woman what to do ... thats why your republicans are losing among womam voter .... dem, independent, and republicans woman are sick of you nut case republicans telling them how to treat their bodies

Jeebus. Get the name of the organization correct at least: it's PLANNED Parenthood.

 

[koshergrl]

Yes, a whole buncha "Plan Parenthood" clinics got their asses shut down when it was discovered that HEY! They weren't really providing the "services" they were charging Medicaid for at all! And they were still charging women top dolla for uterus scrapings/baby killings.

Take money from da gubmint, take money from poor wimmens...it's all good for PP!

 

[JoeB131]

[

Roe V Wade was horrible constitutional law, creating something out of nothing. The Militias are to be regulated by the states, but the right to bear arms remains the with PEOPLE, not the militia. commas mean something.

And nope, that's infringement.

Um, that's an interpretation. Other people have other interpretations.

Clearly, I don't think that the Founders ever meant for Adam Lanza to be armed like the Zombies were coming.

 

[JoeB131]

They don't want the clinics to be forced to a higher standard, because they don't want people to know what really goes on there, what the numbers really are, or how much the industry supports human trafficking, the sex industry, and other abusers.

If you have proof those things are going on, report them to the cops.

Otherwise, mind your own fucking business.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

[

Roe V Wade was horrible constitutional law, creating something out of nothing. The Militias are to be regulated by the states, but the right to bear arms remains the with PEOPLE, not the militia. commas mean something.

And nope, that's infringement.

Um, that's an interpretation. Other people have other interpretations.

Clearly, I don't think that the Founders ever meant for Adam Lanza to be armed like the Zombies were coming.

Actually sir, our Revolutiony War was fought primarily by PRIVATE Armies hired by the USG, and in fact until the CIvil War, the Pinkerton Detective Agency was better armed than the US military. Those are facts.

What's changed since then that's made it more dangerous to trust people with guns?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

again, shall not be infringed. I don't see that about abortion in the constitution. Besides, medical procedures can be regulated by the States, its within their powers to do it.

I have no issue with abortion, if put to a vote, i would vote against any restrictions save public funding restrictions, and minor's being able to get one without the consent of the parents OR a court order. What I am against is ignoring the constitution, and the document gives this to the state legislatures.

Scotus found that abortion rights ARE constituitonal under the 14th Amendment. In case you missed the Roe v. Wade thingee

Uh, guy that same amendment also says 'well regulated militias'. Nothing I suggested really falls outside the scope of that.

If you want to declare the only guns that are allowed to be sold are ones with biometric triggers, guess what, that's the "well-regulated" standard.

Roe V Wade was horrible constitutional law, creating something out of nothing. The Militias are to be regulated by the states, but the right to bear arms remains the with PEOPLE, not the militia. commas mean something.

And nope, that's infringement.

Incorrect.


Roe didn't 'create' anything, as it was the progeny of Griswold and Eisenstadt, where the right to privacy was consistently and appropriately applied to laws seeking to compel women to have children against their will, invalidating such laws as un-Constitutional pursuant to substantive due process:


“If the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child. See Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557 (1969). 10 See also Skinner v. Oklahoma, [405 U.S. 438, 454] 316 U.S. 535 (1942); Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 29 (1905).”
FindLaw Cases and Codes

Indeed, from a purely legal and Constitutional standpoint, Roe was not a 'landmark' decision, as it merely afforded lawmakers a more comprehensive understanding of the privacy right.


Consequently, in order to 'abandon' Roe, we must also 'abandon' Griswold and Eisenstadt in addition to the right to privacy, thus granting government greater control and authority over our personal, private lives at the expense of individual liberty.


You're free to be opposed to abortion and seek ways to end the practice; but you are not free to seek to end abortion by violating citizens' civil liberties and their Constitutional right to privacy and “to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters” both personal and intimate.


That you and others on the right fail to understand and support this fundamental and accepted jurisprudence placing limits on government authority while enhancing individual liberty is as bizarre as it is inconsistent and hypocritical.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

[

And considering any other outpatient facility can meet this requirements, why are you so keen on Abortion Clinics being treated as something else? How about meeting the standards? If it costs more, what is expense in the face not not allowing women their "freedom of choice"???

Can't all these Hollywood types raise money to let these doctors meet the new laws?

None of these requirements are really about making abortion clinics safer. They are about making life difficult for abortion providers and seekers because you don't like abortions.

If you want to go that route.

We should require all gun owners to carry 1 million dollars of insurance... with exorbitant premiums. Every gun should have biometric triggers so only the owner can fire it. It'll make guns prohibitively expensive.

and you guys should happily meet the standards. You can get the Koch Brothers to underwrite these things for you.

After all, 32,000 deaths and 78,000 injuries due to guns trump the whopping few dozen deaths due to botched abortions in this country.

again, shall not be infringed. I don't see that about abortion in the constitution. Besides, medical procedures can be regulated by the States, its within their powers to do it.

I have no issue with abortion, if put to a vote, i would vote against any restrictions save public funding restrictions, and minor's being able to get one without the consent of the parents OR a court order. What I am against is ignoring the constitution, and the document gives this to the state legislatures.

Also incorrect.


The United States is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy, whose citizens are subject solely to the rule of law, not men, as men are incapable of ruling justly. And the citizens who reside in the states are first and foremost citizens of the United States, where the states are subordinate to that – citizens' civil liberties are not subject to 'popular vote' or the 'will of the majority,' one does not forfeit his civil liberties merely as a consequence of his state of residence, nor may the states decide who will or will not have his civil liberties.


By advocating that the states have the 'authority' to decide who will or will not have his civil liberties is in fact to ignore the Constitution, where the Founding Document clearly states in Article VI that Federal laws, the rulings of Federal courts, and the Federal Constitution itself are the supreme law of the land, inviolate by the states, where the states may not interfere with the relationship between the people and their National government, nor violate the rights of the people enshrined in the Constitution, the Constitution the people themselves created, not the states.