8th Circuit Court of Appeals rules against Planned Parenthood
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:24:05 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  8th Circuit Court of Appeals rules against Planned Parenthood
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: 8th Circuit Court of Appeals rules against Planned Parenthood  (Read 2408 times)
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,578
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 16, 2017, 10:13:48 PM »

Planned Parenthood will no longer receive funding from state taxes in AR! Praise the Lord!

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/16/planned-parenthood-medicaid-funding-arkansas-241706
Logged
Green Line
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,577
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 16, 2017, 10:19:22 PM »

Good.  Fair and balanced ruling.
Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,230
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 16, 2017, 10:21:08 PM »

Yes, let us cheer for reduced funding for cancer screenings and STD treatment. Huzzah indeed.  
Logged
BudgieForce
superbudgie1582
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,298


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 16, 2017, 10:28:07 PM »

If I remember correctly, Planned Parenthood gets next to nothing from Arkansas anyway so it hopefully doesn't effect them too much.
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 16, 2017, 10:34:20 PM »

Abortion rates will go up in Arkansas, congrats.
Logged
Confused Democrat
reidmill
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,055
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 16, 2017, 10:43:35 PM »

You know this is just going to lead to more back alley abortions, right?
Logged
Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself
omegascarlet
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,969


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 16, 2017, 10:53:55 PM »

Yes, let us cheer for reduced funding for cancer screenings and STD treatment. Huzzah indeed.  
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: August 16, 2017, 10:56:04 PM »

You know this is just going to lead to more back alley abortions, right?

Some people want go back to those dark days where some women would die in those back alleys or have serious medical complications...
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,578
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: August 16, 2017, 11:23:13 PM »

You know this is just going to lead to more back alley abortions, right?

Some people want go back to those dark days where some women would die in those back alleys or have serious medical complications...

The whole "back alley" line is like saying we should legalize rape because then it would occur out in the open where the public would eventually intervene, rather than making it illegal so it is done in more concealed places. The problem with this line of argument is that it assumes that the action performed (abortion, rape, etc.) is inherently good or at least unavoidable. I don't believe that abortion is good or unavoidable (in a situation where it is illegal, I believe that everyone is capable of following the law), and the harder it is to get an abortion, the less abortions occur. While I get those who are really adamant will go to the back alley, those who are on the fence, or those who want an abortion but don't feel they want it enough to go through walls of steel (so to speak) to get it, will likely forgo the abortion if their local abortion center closes, and that is where unborn lives are saved.

Yes, let us cheer for reduced funding for cancer screenings and STD treatment. Huzzah indeed. 

Community Health Centers do far more of those than Planned Parenthood, and if funding that once went to PP is instead redirected to them (as these defunding bills generally do), they can definitely pick up the extra "labor" from the closing of the local PP. Also, with its recent surge in donations, PP can probably mostly survive w/out government funds anyways. Furthermore, I have no reason to believe PP actually abides by the hyde amendment, and even if it does, receiving funding to help pay for its other services frees up money from private donations to help pay for abortion, thus allowing PP to lower the cost of an abortion and thus make the murderous procedure more avaliable.


Logged
JGibson
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,992
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.00, S: -6.50

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2017, 12:25:35 AM »
« Edited: August 17, 2017, 12:29:06 AM by JGibson »

This is a disgraceful ruling from the right-wing activist 8th Circuit Court. #StandWithPP
Logged
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2017, 12:54:30 AM »

You know this is just going to lead to more back alley abortions, right?

Some people want go back to those dark days where some women would die in those back alleys or have serious medical complications...

The whole "back alley" line is like saying we should legalize rape because then it would occur out in the open where the public would eventually intervene, rather than making it illegal so it is done in more concealed places. The problem with this line of argument is that it assumes that the action performed (abortion, rape, etc.) is inherently good or at least unavoidable. I don't believe that abortion is good or unavoidable (in a situation where it is illegal, I believe that everyone is capable of following the law), and the harder it is to get an abortion, the less abortions occur. While I get those who are really adamant will go to the back alley, those who are on the fence, or those who want an abortion but don't feel they want it enough to go through walls of steel (so to speak) to get it, will likely forgo the abortion if their local abortion center closes, and that is where unborn lives are saved.

Yes, let us cheer for reduced funding for cancer screenings and STD treatment. Huzzah indeed. 

Community Health Centers do far more of those than Planned Parenthood, and if funding that once went to PP is instead redirected to them (as these defunding bills generally do), they can definitely pick up the extra "labor" from the closing of the local PP. Also, with its recent surge in donations, PP can probably mostly survive w/out government funds anyways. Furthermore, I have no reason to believe PP actually abides by the hyde amendment, and even if it does, receiving funding to help pay for its other services frees up money from private donations to help pay for abortion, thus allowing PP to lower the cost of an abortion and thus make the murderous procedure more avaliable.




It is a very backward & an extremist position to take - To ask for a ban. Most civilized countries in the world have moved beyond abortion & women have the right to decide what to do with their own bodies.

The honest thing would be is that Evangelical abortion dogmatic people should admit that they like Christian Sharia law & only oppose the right of a woman what to do with her body because it goes against their religious beliefs. It is a radical extremist position to take in 2017 compared to global standards & people should stop pretending to be moderates.

These hypocrites support endless wars, they support a dysfunctional healthcare system where millions die but then they suddenly pretend to care about a freaking fetus inside a woman's womb !
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,578
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 17, 2017, 12:58:51 AM »

You know this is just going to lead to more back alley abortions, right?

Some people want go back to those dark days where some women would die in those back alleys or have serious medical complications...

The whole "back alley" line is like saying we should legalize rape because then it would occur out in the open where the public would eventually intervene, rather than making it illegal so it is done in more concealed places. The problem with this line of argument is that it assumes that the action performed (abortion, rape, etc.) is inherently good or at least unavoidable. I don't believe that abortion is good or unavoidable (in a situation where it is illegal, I believe that everyone is capable of following the law), and the harder it is to get an abortion, the less abortions occur. While I get those who are really adamant will go to the back alley, those who are on the fence, or those who want an abortion but don't feel they want it enough to go through walls of steel (so to speak) to get it, will likely forgo the abortion if their local abortion center closes, and that is where unborn lives are saved.

Yes, let us cheer for reduced funding for cancer screenings and STD treatment. Huzzah indeed. 

Community Health Centers do far more of those than Planned Parenthood, and if funding that once went to PP is instead redirected to them (as these defunding bills generally do), they can definitely pick up the extra "labor" from the closing of the local PP. Also, with its recent surge in donations, PP can probably mostly survive w/out government funds anyways. Furthermore, I have no reason to believe PP actually abides by the hyde amendment, and even if it does, receiving funding to help pay for its other services frees up money from private donations to help pay for abortion, thus allowing PP to lower the cost of an abortion and thus make the murderous procedure more avaliable.




It is a very backward & an extremist position to take - To ask for a ban. Most civilized countries in the world have moved beyond abortion & women have the right to decide what to do with their own bodies.

The honest thing would be is that Evangelical abortion dogmatic people should admit that they like Christian Sharia law & only oppose the right of a woman what to do with her body because it goes against their religious beliefs. It is a radical extremist position to take in 2017 compared to global standards & people should stop pretending to be moderates.

These hypocrites support endless wars, they support a dysfunctional healthcare system where millions die but then they suddenly pretend to care about a freaking fetus inside a woman's womb !

I can't speak for pro lifers as a whole, but I support ObamaCare and my opposition to Abortion would remain intact even if I stopped believing in God.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: August 17, 2017, 03:02:46 AM »

The 8th Circuit decision was a narrow technical one, that Medicare patients had no standing to sue over the barring of the their favored medical provider not being approved. This differs considerably from the Texas case where Planned Parenthood itself is the plaintiff.
Logged
AN63093
63093
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 871


Political Matrix
E: 0.06, S: 2.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: August 17, 2017, 03:22:14 AM »

What TF said.  The decision is quite a bit narrower than the Politico article would seem to suggest.  A little bit sloppy on Politico's part.

The actual decision is in the first sentence of the article (click on the hyperlink).
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: August 17, 2017, 06:53:50 PM »

You know this is just going to lead to more back alley abortions, right?

Some people want go back to those dark days where some women would die in those back alleys or have serious medical complications...

The whole "back alley" line is like saying we should legalize rape because then it would occur out in the open where the public would eventually intervene, rather than making it illegal so it is done in more concealed places. The problem with this line of argument is that it assumes that the action performed (abortion, rape, etc.) is inherently good or at least unavoidable. I don't believe that abortion is good or unavoidable (in a situation where it is illegal, I believe that everyone is capable of following the law), and the harder it is to get an abortion, the less abortions occur. While I get those who are really adamant will go to the back alley, those who are on the fence, or those who want an abortion but don't feel they want it enough to go through walls of steel (so to speak) to get it, will likely forgo the abortion if their local abortion center closes, and that is where unborn lives are saved.

The actual statistics are against you.  When you make PP and safe abortions less available,  unwanted pregnancies and thus abortions go up, not down.   

You're living in a fantasy land if you think you can ever completely get rid of abortion altogether, it's not ever ever ever ever happening.   

And making a parallel from rape to abortion is completely disgusting.
Logged
SNJ1985
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,274
United States
Political Matrix
E: 0.19, S: 7.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: August 17, 2017, 07:02:11 PM »

Yes, let us cheer for reduced funding for cancer screenings and STD treatment.

PP performs less than 2% of the nation's cancer screenings for women.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,578
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: August 17, 2017, 07:07:19 PM »

You know this is just going to lead to more back alley abortions, right?

Some people want go back to those dark days where some women would die in those back alleys or have serious medical complications...

The whole "back alley" line is like saying we should legalize rape because then it would occur out in the open where the public would eventually intervene, rather than making it illegal so it is done in more concealed places. The problem with this line of argument is that it assumes that the action performed (abortion, rape, etc.) is inherently good or at least unavoidable. I don't believe that abortion is good or unavoidable (in a situation where it is illegal, I believe that everyone is capable of following the law), and the harder it is to get an abortion, the less abortions occur. While I get those who are really adamant will go to the back alley, those who are on the fence, or those who want an abortion but don't feel they want it enough to go through walls of steel (so to speak) to get it, will likely forgo the abortion if their local abortion center closes, and that is where unborn lives are saved.

The actual statistics are against you.  When you make PP and safe abortions less available,  unwanted pregnancies and thus abortions go up, not down.   

You're living in a fantasy land if you think you can ever completely get rid of abortion altogether, it's not ever ever ever ever happening.   

And making a parallel from rape to abortion is completely disgusting.

Unwanted pregnancies do not automatically lead to abortions, and you are assuming that abortion for convenience reasons is unavoidable, which again, I do not believe. I believe we can create a society where no one gets an abortion, aside from the usual exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother, and I believe legislation is an effective vehicle to achieve that. I will also point out that the stats you refer to don't perfectly apply because we have not operated under a "total ban with exceptions" system in any state since 1973.  Furthermore, you are assuming that someone will find a way to get an abortion regardless of its legality, and I honestly think this shtick that the democrats have cooked up that all women with unwanted pregnancies are so adamant about terminating them that they are incapable of following the law is honestly pretty insulting to women, as it suggests they have no regard for the basic framework of society.

And it's only disgusting to draw the parallel I did if you see abortion as a moral action, which I obviously don't.

Logged
#gravelgang #lessiglad
Serious_Username
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,615
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: August 17, 2017, 07:59:22 PM »

What TF said.  The decision is quite a bit narrower than the Politico article would seem to suggest.  A little bit sloppy on Politico's part.

The actual decision is in the first sentence of the article (click on the hyperlink).

Very few media outlets understand standing.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: August 17, 2017, 08:27:20 PM »

You know this is just going to lead to more back alley abortions, right?

Some people want go back to those dark days where some women would die in those back alleys or have serious medical complications...

The whole "back alley" line is like saying we should legalize rape because then it would occur out in the open where the public would eventually intervene, rather than making it illegal so it is done in more concealed places. The problem with this line of argument is that it assumes that the action performed (abortion, rape, etc.) is inherently good or at least unavoidable. I don't believe that abortion is good or unavoidable (in a situation where it is illegal, I believe that everyone is capable of following the law), and the harder it is to get an abortion, the less abortions occur. While I get those who are really adamant will go to the back alley, those who are on the fence, or those who want an abortion but don't feel they want it enough to go through walls of steel (so to speak) to get it, will likely forgo the abortion if their local abortion center closes, and that is where unborn lives are saved.

The actual statistics are against you.  When you make PP and safe abortions less available,  unwanted pregnancies and thus abortions go up, not down.   

You're living in a fantasy land if you think you can ever completely get rid of abortion altogether, it's not ever ever ever ever happening.   

And making a parallel from rape to abortion is completely disgusting.

Unwanted pregnancies do not automatically lead to abortions, and you are assuming that abortion for convenience reasons is unavoidable, which again, I do not believe. I believe we can create a society where no one gets an abortion, aside from the usual exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother, and I believe legislation is an effective vehicle to achieve that. I will also point out that the stats you refer to don't perfectly apply because we have not operated under a "total ban with exceptions" system in any state since 1973.  Furthermore, you are assuming that someone will find a way to get an abortion regardless of its legality, and I honestly think this shtick that the democrats have cooked up that all women with unwanted pregnancies are so adamant about terminating them that they are incapable of following the law is honestly pretty insulting to women, as it suggests they have no regard for the basic framework of society.

And it's only disgusting to draw the parallel I did if you see abortion as a moral action, which I obviously don't.



Has anyone actually done any research to whether most people will be like "What! That's Illegal!" when it comes to this sort of thing? And with you suggesting that you are OK with abortion after rape, people will just think its a law like banning Meth or Heroin and not some law that goes without saying.

I get it. You really care about social justice but whose solutiin is just to put everyone in jail? And ok. Instead of insisting it won't work, can you prove it can?
Logged
Young Conservative
youngconservative
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: August 17, 2017, 09:18:00 PM »

Thank goodness. My taxes shouldn't fund any organization as politically active as Planned Parenthood, be it a left or right group. They literally have their own Pac and never say anything positive about Republicans or support any Republicans.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: August 17, 2017, 09:30:02 PM »

We have dozens of laws on the books that are as hard, if not harder, to enforce than an abortion ban would be. There are other first world countries with such bans.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: August 18, 2017, 11:02:29 AM »

We have dozens of laws on the books that are as hard, if not harder, to enforce than an abortion ban would be. There are other first world countries with such bans.

Name one.
Logged
Daniel909012
Rookie
**
Posts: 165
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: August 18, 2017, 11:08:57 AM »

We have dozens of laws on the books that are as hard, if not harder, to enforce than an abortion ban would be. There are other first world countries with such bans.

Name one.

South Korea, Japan, Chile, Finland, United Kingdom, Poland and Parts of Australia
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: August 18, 2017, 11:14:55 AM »
« Edited: August 18, 2017, 11:22:53 AM by Power to the Pe p e! »

We have dozens of laws on the books that are as hard, if not harder, to enforce than an abortion ban would be. There are other first world countries with such bans.

Name one.

South Korea, Japan, Chile, Finland, United Kingdom, Poland and Parts of Australia
IThat is a broad definition of "illegal". In almost all those examples, its an administrative issue, not a criminal one. "Pro-Voice" than pro life or choice. I think in Poland you have to prove a particular dire need and there are no abortions in Chile (I heard almost every girl in jail is on jail for that there), but in the rest you just have to prove a substantial or demonstrable need to a second doctor or hospital that you need one. I think that would be a good post-Roe compromise.

I mean a law. Name one law that causes more problems.
Logged
SNJ1985
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,274
United States
Political Matrix
E: 0.19, S: 7.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: August 18, 2017, 02:09:04 PM »

We have dozens of laws on the books that are as hard, if not harder, to enforce than an abortion ban would be. There are other first world countries with such bans.

Name one.

Malta
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.061 seconds with 12 queries.