TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


KenDckey -> TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 8:11:14 AM)

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-274_p8k0.pdf




Lucylastic -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 8:13:19 AM)

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS




Lucylastic -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 8:49:49 AM)

“It is beyond rational belief that H.B. 2 could genuinely protect the health of women,”
Ruth Bader Ginsburg




Lucylastic -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 11:23:22 AM)

Wendy Davis Just Won: Supreme Court Vindicates Her Epic Filibuster
“I have to tell you, I was fighting back tears a moment ago.”

Wendy Davis, the woman whose 11-hour filibuster focused national attention on Texas’ efforts to restrict abortion access in 2013, celebrated Monday when the Supreme Court ruled that the state law was unconstitutional.

“I’m overjoyed,” Davis said in an interview with MSNBC. “I have to tell you, I was fighting back tears a moment ago, as I was reading the SCOTUSblog and the first line that came out saying that the 5th Circuit opinion or decision had been reversed. It’s incredible news for the women of Texas. It’s incredible news for women throughout this country.”

In a 5-3 decision Monday, the Supreme Court struck down two abortion restrictions in a Texas law, known as HB 2, that would have shut down dozens of clinics across the state. It mandated that abortions take place in ambulatory surgical centers, or mini hospitals, instead of regular clinics.

On June 25, 2013, Davis, then a state senator, took to the floor of the Texas Senate to protest the legislation. Davis’ filibuster successfully helped Democrats delay passage of the bill, although the Senate later passed it in another session.




Wayward5oul -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 11:29:59 AM)

Wowohwowohwowohwow!!!!!!!!!!!




Termyn8or -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 2:53:15 PM)

FR

I will have to agree. Abortion is murder but it is necessary. That law was a clear attempt to use a backdoor way to circumvent the ruling of the national supreme court. That's not nice under, I think, the 14th amendment.

Now support the 2nd amendment like the court says. No picking and choosing. If you want corporate personhood overturned, form an organization and hire a better lawyer who can make a better case against it. Either that or lobby for open disclosure, who is bribing whom and their voting record. (like the Monsanto protection act) Then find candidates from among yourselves to run against these crooks.

Either that or start thinking about blood filling the sewers.

T^T




DaddySatyr -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:06:27 PM)


The first time something goes wrong on an abortion table and the murderer dies, as a result of lack of proximity to emergency services, somehow, it will be blamed on the "religious right" for not doing enough to make abortion safe.

When that happens, I'll point my finger to this case and tell the PPLs to eat shit and live.

If people were familiar with the case that brought this law to fruition (lack of sterility {sometimes walls} in a Texas abortion "clinic" that more resembled a tenement house), they'd be a bit more outraged.



Michael




Wayward5oul -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:11:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


The first time something goes wrong on an abortion table and the murderer dies, as a result of lack of proximity to emergency services, somehow, it will be blamed on the "religious right" for not doing enough to make abortion safe.

When that happens, I'll point my finger to this case and tell the PPLs to eat shit and live.

If people were familiar with the case that brought this law to fruition (lack of sterility {sometimes walls} in a Texas abortion "clinic" that more resembled a tenement house), they'd be a bit more outraged.



Michael


What case was it? I would be interested in reading it.




Lucylastic -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:17:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul


What case was it? I would be interested in reading it.

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/whole-womans-health-v-cole/

THis is the PP vs Casey Info...lots of it!
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-744.ZS.html




bounty44 -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:18:36 PM)

I cant speak specific to texas but the Kermit Gosnell case resonates with what he is saying.




Lucylastic -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:23:08 PM)

Kermit Gosnell was in Pennsylvania, not Texas.




Wayward5oul -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:23:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul


What case was it? I would be interested in reading it.

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/whole-womans-health-v-cole/

That's the case where the decision was handed down today, right? But in that the Court asked for specific cases where the law would help women, and Texas couldn't produce one. Unless I read it wrong?

I'm interested in the case that DS says prompted the restrictions in the first place.

ETA-now I see other replies.less confused now. When I googled I came up with the PA case, but nothing for Texas.




bounty44 -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:26:01 PM)

um, you missed where I said "I cant speak specific to texas?"





Lucylastic -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:27:24 PM)

“What is the benefit of having an ambulatory surgical center to take two pills when there’s no surgical procedure at all involved?” asked Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Keller insisted that the requirement protected against “drug-induced complications,” for which an abortion may be required as a follow-up procedure, but Ginsburg wasn’t having it.

“That complication is likely to arise near the women’s home,” she said — a scenario that wouldn’t square with the law’s requirement that doctors at abortion clinics have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic.

“Thirty miles of the surgical center, when the woman lives at a much greater distance? And if she’s going to go to any hospital, it will be in her local community, not near the surgical center,” Ginsburg said.

The liberal wing of the court wouldn’t let up. Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Breyer and Ginsburg spent the better part of 10 minutes probing Texas’ rationale for regulating abortion more heavily than other surgical procedures that are more statistically dangerous.

Relying on data that advocates had submitted to the court, Breyer noted that abortions are 28 times less risky than colonoscopies, which don’t require ambulatory surgical centers. Not even dentists’ offices are held to such high standards, he said.

What is the benefit to Texas law “when the risk is minuscule compared to common procedures that women run every day in other areas without ambulatory surgical centers?” Breyer asked.

Keller responded that Texas should be allowed to treat abortion differently from other medical procedures, and that under the Constitution, the legislature only needs “a legitimate purpose in acting.”

“According to you, the slightest health improvement ... is enough to burden the lives of a million women,” Sotomayor said.



edited to add link
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/supreme-court-abortion-rights_us_56d6f857e4b0871f60ed48e6




Lucylastic -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:30:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

um, you missed where I said "I cant speak specific to texas?"

and wayward is asking about "the case" Michael mentioned that brought the texas law into existence that the court was debating, not the actual supreme court case itself.


And that is why I posted links to Casey AND Hellerstadt.
It was a simple comment...nothing more.




Lucylastic -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:32:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

That's the case where the decision was handed down today, right? But in that the Court asked for specific cases where the law would help women, and Texas couldn't produce one. Unless I read it wrong?

I'm interested in the case that DS says prompted the restrictions in the first place.

ETA-now I see other replies.less confused now. When I googled I came up with the PA case, but nothing for Texas.

Yes todays decison, but it was my bad.
I leave that to DS to back up.[;)]




dcnovice -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:41:38 PM)

FR

Now it’s over to Breyer: “There are two laws. I am focusing on the first law. The first law says that a doctor at the abortion clinic must have admitting privileges in a hospital … nearby, right?” Yes, says Keller. “Where in the record will I find evidence of women who had complications, who could not get to a hospital, even though there was a working transfer arrangement … because the doctor himself has to have admitting privileges? Which were the women? On what page does it tell me their names, what the complications were, and why that happened?”

Keller replies that this isn’t in the record. Breyer continues, "So Judge Posner then seems to be correct where he says he could find in the entire nation, in his opinion, only one arguable example of such a thing, and he’s not certain that even that one is correct.” Breyer leans in, “What is the benefit to the woman of a procedure that is going to cure a problem of which there is not one single instance in the nation, though perhaps there is one, but not in Texas.” People laugh.


Emphasis mine.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/supreme_court_dispatches/2016/03/in_oral_arguments_for_the_texas_abortion_case_the_three_female_justices.html




Wayward5oul -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:43:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

um, you missed where I said "I cant speak specific to texas?"

and wayward is asking about "the case" Michael mentioned that brought the texas law into existence that the court was debating, not the actual supreme court case itself.


And that is why I posted links to Casey AND Hellerstadt.
It was a simple comment...nothing more.


Thanks to both of you. I am familiar with those but am now looking at them more closely. Still looking for the case DS mentioned as well.




Termyn8or -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:43:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr




If people were familiar with the case that brought this law to fruition (lack of sterility {sometimes walls} in a Texas abortion "clinic" that more resembled a tenement house), they'd be a bit more outraged.



Michael



The state has the right to require standards at restaurants, why not abortion clinics ?

You can be against abortion but I want to know how many kids you want to adopt. If every person against abortion would adopt ten kids and provide well for them, as well as education so they become prroductive members of society, that would be great. But you won't.

Instead, Women who need abortions are generally the poor. Rich kids get a D&C, which is to clean out the uterus of whatever is in there. Guess what is in there.. Same thing. So these Women who fucked the wrong guy are stuck raising the kids alone, if they work the kids go to daycare which I hear is a nightmare and even if not, they don't even have time to teacch the kids how to read which I consider one of their highest responsibilities. And with no help if they work, and now have to do it on 28 hours a week and pay for Obamacare, no male influence which is important, and if they don't work then the taxpayers support these kids. As a taxpayer I would rather pay the $200 than the six fucking figures it will cost to bring that kid up. And what's more, sluts with no skills raise criminals, or ore sluts with no skills, or both. We have to start thinking about what kind of people we want in our society. It really possibly too late already. We got generations of welfare Mothers. And they're getting pregnant at what, 14 ? How the fuck are they going to teach the kid what they do not know. I knew how to read before even going to school, but teachers now bitch that these kids don't even know their basic colors and shapes. Try teaching someone trigonometry to a kid who doesn't know what a triangle is. Try teaching how to figure square inches to a kid who doesn't know what a square is. All of these kids' Mothers should have had abortions.

Abortion is murder, but the government should not only pay for it, they should pay the Woman to have it. People are not going to stop fucking and they won't use rubbers or Norplant or whatever. And it is the stupid ones getting knocked up. Straight A students are not a big contingent of the teenage pregnant population. Even if they do whore around they make the boys use rubbers, or they go on the pill.

But still, I am against states using backdoor ways to thwart the Constitution. And also, since an abortion is a medical procedure, those facilities should be required to be just as clean as hospitals. And what else ? Have oxygen on hand, someone who knows CPR ?

However, the Texas legislature should not be allowed to make the standards any harder than they would be at a private doctor office, or even a dentist office. I know private doctors are damnear a thing of the past but I remember. We used to be able to walk to the doctors office without crossing a major street, not one traffic light but a bunch of stop signs. That was it. The office was in his house, and it was clean. For major operations of course he booked time at the local hospital because they simply had facilities he did not, he knew his limitations. But an abortion is not open heart surgery. I do not know if he would perform a D&C because alot of people were against abortion at the time. But somebody would.

So all you do by outlawing or restricting access to abortion is to either make it cost a couple thousand for a D&C or they start getting out the coathangers again.

Your call.

T^T




Lucylastic -> RE: TX abortion dr hosp privilege fails (6/27/2016 3:45:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

FR

Now it’s over to Breyer: “There are two laws. I am focusing on the first law. The first law says that a doctor at the abortion clinic must have admitting privileges in a hospital … nearby, right?” Yes, says Keller. “Where in the record will I find evidence of women who had complications, who could not get to a hospital, even though there was a working transfer arrangement … because the doctor himself has to have admitting privileges? Which were the women? On what page does it tell me their names, what the complications were, and why that happened?”

Keller replies that this isn’t in the record. Breyer continues, "So Judge Posner then seems to be correct where he says he could find in the entire nation, in his opinion, only one arguable example of such a thing, and he’s not certain that even that one is correct.” Breyer leans in, “What is the benefit to the woman of a procedure that is going to cure a problem of which there is not one single instance in the nation, though perhaps there is one, but not in Texas.” People laugh.


Emphasis mine.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/supreme_court_dispatches/2016/03/in_oral_arguments_for_the_texas_abortion_case_the_three_female_justices.html

THanks DC




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.492188E-02