RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion here?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion here?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion here?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/20/2011 3:52:18 PM

housesub4you

Posts: 1879
Joined: 4/2/2008
Status: offline

has filed an anti-choice amendment to an appropriations bill related to agriculture, transportation, housing, and other programs.

How is it BS that he did not attach it to an agriculture bill? The bill was introduced under Agriculture....

(in reply to mastrcmmdr)

Post #: 21

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/20/2011 3:58:10 PM

mastrcmmdr

Posts: 66
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: housesub4you

has filed an anti-choice amendment to an appropriations bill related to agriculture, transportation, housing, and other programs.

How is it BS that he did not attach it to an agriculture bill? The bill was introduced under Agriculture....

I gave you the title. It is not an "agriculture bill" its an appropriations bill for several agencies/departments. Its irrelevant that Agriculture happens to be listed first, it includes FDA appropriations.

(in reply to housesub4you)

Post #: 22

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/20/2011 5:19:42 PM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

H.R. 2112: Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations...

U.S. Rep. Steve King (R-Kiron) successfully introduced an amendment to the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2012, HR 2112, to prevent any appropriations made possible by the bill to be used for mifepristone, for any purpose.

Interesting... I thought the one we were speaking about was Demint's amendment.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to mastrcmmdr)

Post #: 23

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/20/2011 5:23:10 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mastrcmmdr

quote:

ORIGINAL: housesub4you

has filed an anti-choice amendment to an appropriations bill related to agriculture, transportation, housing, and other programs.

How is it BS that he did not attach it to an agriculture bill? The bill was introduced under Agriculture....

I gave you the title. It is not an "agriculture bill" its an appropriations bill for several agencies/departments. Its irrelevant that Agriculture happens to be listed first, it includes FDA appropriations.

And here is the shit you gave: Amd. 768 to that bill, proposed by DeMint, has nothing to do with the OP:

Insert:

Sec ___ None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for mifepristone, commonly known as RU-486

Thats it. And of course the claim that its "buried in an unrelated agriculture bill" is bullshit. Its an appropriations bill that includes the FDA.

....

Of course wilbur that is your S.Amdt Horseshit. This is 768, old shit same as you are running out here.

http://democrats.senate.gov/2011/10/20/roll-call-vote-on-vitter-stabenow-bingaman-amendment/

His amendment would be indexed as S.amdt 768 if he had such a fuckin thing.
I dont give a fuck if its a house bill and amendment to the appropriations (and farm bills are appropriations, nobody has yet put forward a bill calling for more or less teats on a cow......)hes in the senate and all appropriations bills really origiate in the house, and since hes in the senate they are senate amendments and if voted, which it wont be it would go back for resolutions.

In any case whatever you are quoting might be out of the allow more ratpoison bill or something forwarded by republicans, but you are not known for credible quasi-virtual citations, and this is the reason why.

Because you simply make shit up and pull it from your ass, and extremely sorry shit it is.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 10/20/2011 5:31:54 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to mastrcmmdr)

Post #: 24

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/20/2011 5:37:23 PM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

Ok.. here is the skinny....

The bill itself...

http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/bills/112/hr2112

The section 753

The words are exactly as willbe posted them.

Now, here is the issue. The right to life group has virtually closed down most rural access to abortions. Unless a woman drives for hours, she wont get one. Here comes the internet part. Physicians have been offering scripts for RU-486 over the internet to these women, via teleconferences.

This starting to make sense now?

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to mnottertail)

Post #: 25

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 12:51:16 AM

CyrusKell

Posts: 26
Joined: 4/7/2011
Status: offline

quote:

For the women of South Dakota

I lived in SD for a bit over 10 years and about the only thing I miss is working at Myrl & Roys
Seeing people up and down 41st St for a few miles with kids as little as 3-4years holding anti-abortion signs cost me quite a bit of my faith in humanity.
Those kids probably had no clue what childbirth/conception involved, let alone knew much about abortion itself. All they knew is mommy and daddy wanted them to stand there and look cute while holding a sign about the evils of abortion

If someone wants to protest something, fine, just leave the kids with a babysitter as they most likely won't know wtf the protest is about

(in reply to farglebargle)

Post #: 26

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 10:09:52 AM

kalikshama

Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

Ok.. here is the skinny.... The bill itself... http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/bills/112/hr2112 The section 753 The words are exactly as willbe posted them. Now, here is the issue. The right to life group has virtually closed down most rural access to abortions. Unless a woman drives for hours, she wont get one. Here comes the internet part. Physicians have been offering scripts for RU-486 over the internet to these women, via teleconferences. This starting to make sense now?

Thanks...but where is the internet part in the bill?

quote:

Anti-choice Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) just filed an anti-choice amendment to a bill related to agriculture, transportation, housing, and other programs. The DeMint amendment could bar discussion of abortion over the Internet and through videoconferencing...

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 27

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 10:10:50 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

could <<<<<<<<<<<<< right there.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to kalikshama)

Post #: 28

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 10:56:40 AM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

quote:

Ok.. here is the skinny.... The bill itself... http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/bills/112/hr2112 The section 753 The words are exactly as willbe posted them. Now, here is the issue. The right to life group has virtually closed down most rural access to abortions. Unless a woman drives for hours, she wont get one. Here comes the internet part. Physicians have been offering scripts for RU-486 over the internet to these women, via teleconferences. This starting to make sense now?

Thanks...but where is the internet part in the bill?

quote:

Anti-choice Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) just filed an anti-choice amendment to a bill related to agriculture, transportation, housing, and other programs. The DeMint amendment could bar discussion of abortion over the Internet and through videoconferencing...

In introducing his amendment, King made clear that the purpose was to prevent Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers from accessing a $ 15 million line item contained in the bill for development of telemedicine services; however, the language of the amendment is extremely broad. It states that “none of the funds made available by this Act may be used for mifepristone, commonly known as RU-486, for any purpose,” which does not specifically target the telemedicine line item, but applies to any and all appropriations within the bill.

The Bill itself...

~pg 42~

RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The principal amount of direct and guaranteed loans

16 as authorized by sections 305 and 306 of the Rural Elec17 trification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 935 and 936) shall be 18 made as follows: 5 percent rural electrification loans, 19 $100,000,000; loans made pursuant to section 306 of that 20 Act, rural electric, $6,500,000,000; 5 percent rural tele21 communications loans, $145,000,000; cost of money rural 22 telecommunications loans, $250,000,000; and for loans 23 made pursuant to section 306 of that Act, rural tele24 communications loans, $295,000,000.

and

DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE, AND BROADBAND PROGRAM (INCLUDING CANCELLATION OF FUNDS)

For grants for telemedicine and distance learning

9 services in rural areas, as authorized by 7 U.S.C. 950aaa 10 et seq., $15,000,000, to remain available until expended. 11 12 13 14 15 TITLE IV DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS OFFICE

pg 43 of the bill

http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/bills/112/hr2112

But they are denying the use of those funds for the purpose of Drs giving RU-486. So, if the internet access these potential patients use is based upon those funds, it can be illegal for Physicians and patients to discuss such treatment.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to kalikshama)

Post #: 29

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 10:57:24 AM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

quote:

Ok.. here is the skinny.... The bill itself... http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/bills/112/hr2112 The section 753 The words are exactly as willbe posted them. Now, here is the issue. The right to life group has virtually closed down most rural access to abortions. Unless a woman drives for hours, she wont get one. Here comes the internet part. Physicians have been offering scripts for RU-486 over the internet to these women, via teleconferences. This starting to make sense now?

Thanks...but where is the internet part in the bill?

quote:

Anti-choice Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) just filed an anti-choice amendment to a bill related to agriculture, transportation, housing, and other programs. The DeMint amendment could bar discussion of abortion over the Internet and through videoconferencing...

It doesnt exist. The teleconferencing is a strawman for the anti-GOP crowd to whine about. There is no ban on teleconferencing for other drugs. the fact is RU-486 is a dangerous drug that has been blamed for dozen of deaths and thousands of complications worldwide. Prescription and administration without a physical presence not only should be banned it should constitute gross negligence.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to kalikshama)

Post #: 30

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 11:03:04 AM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

It does exist.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 31

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 1:17:41 PM

kalikshama

Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline

Lawyers, lawyers!

I'm in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with Wilbeur that Tazzy's analysis is a stretch; please chime in.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 32

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 1:26:22 PM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

Im wiling to discuss. Why do you consider it a "stretch"? Considering willbe posted 50 seconds after me, he didnt have enough time to read my post before making his own.

< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 10/21/2011 1:27:28 PM >

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to kalikshama)

Post #: 33

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 1:28:03 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
the fact is RU-486 is a dangerous drug that has been blamed for dozen of deaths and thousands of complications worldwide. Prescription and administration without a physical presence not only should be banned it should constitute gross negligence.

____________________________________________________________

The July 1998 issue of The American Journal of Medicine explains it as follows:

"Conservative calculations estimate that approximately 107,000 patients are hospitalized annually for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-related gastrointestinal (GI) complications and at least 16,500 NSAID-related deaths occur each year among arthritis patients alone."

___________________________________________________________
Not nearly the death merchant that aspirin is, though. So yeah, we gotta get this RU-486 ban in the ag bill, fuck everything else. How could we have been so blind as to leave this RU-486 out of the ag bill? If people want to kill themselves, for fucks sake, take an aspirin.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 34

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 1:47:57 PM

kalikshama

Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline

While I personally find the connection tenuous, I'm not versed enough in the legislative process to rule out your theory.

I think Wilbe had adequate background before your post for his position.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 35

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 2:07:21 PM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

My basis is the fact that the Kansas Planned Parenthood site shows three abortion clinics in the state...Overland Park, Hays and Wichita. Most women requiring their services are among the poorest who would need financial assistance. A day drive, a night in a hotel, then a drive back.... I cant afford that... many cant.

So they are turning to the interet. These are women who live in rural areas. As I have read the bill, if money from the bill is used for internet access to these rural areas, then contact between Physician and patient in discussing the treatment of RU-486 isnt allowed.

I would love to believe its not the case.

Members of Congress Question Sebelius on Telemed Abortions

Seventy-one members of Congress have signed their names to a letter sponsored by pro-life Rep. Steve King of Iowa questioning Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius about federal funding of telemed abortions.

The telemed or webcam abortion process involves the distribution of the dangerous abortion pill, RU 486 over the Internet, but denies women access to physical examinations or emergency care by licensed physicians.

“RU-486 is a dangerous drug that has been associated with at least 11 deaths and thousands of cases of excessive bleeding and infection,” said King in the letter. “Evading FDA guidelines by dispensing RU-486 through telemedicine has the potential to increase complications and fatalities associated with its use. We cannot allow taxpayer dollars to be used to support ‘telemed abortions.’”

The practice is very real.

Currently, this experimental abortion pill distribution scheme is only employed in Iowa but Planned Parenthood has indicated publicly that it intends to expand the practice nationwide and promote the abortion drug further to women without giving them a chance to visit a physician in person. They would be denied the in-person consultation even though the abortion drug is responsible for killing dozens of women worldwide and injuring more than 1,100 in the United States alone as of FDA figures from 2006.

The key concern for King and the other members of Congress is that Congress allocated $11.6 million in FY 2012 for HHS telemedicine programs, which are intended for the development of services in rural areas.

.................

“A common misconception is that telemed abortion is for women in rural areas. However, Planned Parenthood’s Iowa telemed sites are located in major population centers, including the county with the highest population in the state,” said Newman. “Telemed abortions are Planned Parenthood’s solution to a shortage of abortionists. It helps them access customers in otherwise abortion-free population centers in order to increase revenue while disregarding the health and safety of women.”

“We support Rep. King and the other members of Congress in their effort to get to the bottom of where our tax money is going. If it is funding this telemed abortion scheme, the people have a right to know, and a right to demand that the funding be stopped,” he concluded.

http://www.lifenews.com/2011/02/04/members-of-congress-question-sebelius-on-telemed-abortions/

Im not going to post the whole article. Merely pointing out that practice is real... and its being targeted through this bill.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to kalikshama)

Post #: 36

RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion... - 10/21/2011 2:11:08 PM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

It doesnt exist. The teleconferencing is a strawman for the anti-GOP crowd to whine about. There is no ban on teleconferencing for other drugs. the fact is RU-486 is a dangerous drug that has been blamed for dozen of deaths and thousands of complications worldwide. Prescription and administration without a physical presence not only should be banned it should constitute gross negligence.

14 isnt dozens willbe.

WASHINGTON, D.C., September 28, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Fourteen U.S. women have died after taking RU-486 and a total of 2,207 reported adverse effects after using the drug, according to a report from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration released this summer. The FDA report, released in mid-July, shows a significant rise in women who have been subjected to “adverse effects” resulting from taking RU-486 since the previous report in 2006 noted 1,100 women.

Approximately 1.52 million women have used the abortion drug through the end of April 2011.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/ru-486-abortions-lead-to-14-maternal-deaths-2207-adverse-effects-fda-report

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 37

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Could we face jail time if we argued about abortion here?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.141