• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge blocks Texas' burial rule for abortions

Removable Mind said:
The hard right Christiban legislatures in Texas are as fascist as they come. Fundamentalists citizens who keep filling the election collection plates of authoritarians...aren't disappointed. The wildest, most sexist laws pop out of the these legislators' darkest, creepiest corners of their twisted minds.

Texas would be a theocracy/police state if these radical politicians had their way.
Click to expand...

Hell, wasn't it in Texas that a husband was forced to keep his dead wife on artificial support because she was 4 months pregnant? They tortured the father for weeks while it went through the court system.

Good Lord.
 
Scrabaholic said:
AUSTIN -- A federal judge on Thursday blocked a new state rule that requires fetal remains resulting from an abortion or miscarriage be buried or cremated regardless of the length of gestation or the woman's wishes.

The temporary restraining order by U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks will prevent the Texas Department of State Health Services from imposing the requirement that abortion rights advocates labeled an unconstitutional barrier to abortion and an unnecessary burden on women who choose to have one.

Judge blocks Texas' burial rule for abortions - Houston Chronicle

================================================================================================

Another case of reason and sanity prevailing. When are these legislators going to stop wasting tax dollars?
Click to expand...

Another stupid rule that is counter productive to the prolife fight. Once again just another example of a dishonest rule that does more harm than good to honest discussions and gains. It's crap like this that really gets to me because it makes the battle field so much harder.
 
year2late said:
Hell, wasn't it in Texas that a husband was forced to keep his dead wife on artificial support because she was 4 months pregnant? They tortured the father for weeks while it went through the court system.

Good Lord.
Click to expand...

What? Did that really happen in this country? Please tell me it didn't, even as a pro-lifer I find that completely repulsive and unacceptable.
 
year2late said:
She was dead on organ support for almost 2 months. He was trying to mourn her loss and dragged through the mud,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Marlise_Muñoz

It was not a pretty debate on the boards.
Click to expand...

You know what, I think I do sort of remember that now, I think it came up with one of my groups. I think my mind tried to forget about it because of how repulsive it really is. Just reading that makes me disgusted.
Thanks for the link . . . . I think . . (Its my fault, I asked haha)
 
year2late said:
Hell, wasn't it in Texas that a husband was forced to keep his dead wife on artificial support because she was 4 months pregnant? They tortured the father for weeks while it went through the court system.

Good Lord.
Click to expand...

Yes, in Fort Worth. Absolutely an insane law, but the husband/family finally won after horrible emotional suffering. The hospital said that it was only following the State Law based on the situation. Texas legislators sitting around dreaming up ways to control people's lives rather than running our state's essential business.

More bible belt wacknuttery...
 
year2late said:
Hell, wasn't it in Texas that a husband was forced to keep his dead wife on artificial support because she was 4 months pregnant? They tortured the father for weeks while it went through the court system.

Good Lord.
Click to expand...

Yes, it was absolutely despicable how that piece of **** didn't provide medical care for his own kid and just let her die.

And the court just let him.

But hey, pro-aborts don't care about parental responsibility.

Seriously between that case, the general disdain, and here you folks are even being dismissive of treating the remains like they used to be a living human, which they objectively were, none of you have any business doing anything but owning up to your ugly, ugly hatred.



Preemptive reminder, Godwin's Law does not refer to a fallacy, it does not mean the discussion is over, it means the longer a discussion is, the probability of invoking Hitler approaches one. Well this isn't a very long discussion, but between Sanger's eugenicist nature and just the utter contempt you all have for your social undesirables, a comparison to the final solution is inevitable and appropriate... with the exception that the number of dead from the Holocaust is utterly dwarfed by this mass slaughter.

Pity's sake, this law is just talking about respecting the dead. You already get your way that they can be needlessly killed.
 
Last edited:
Removable Mind said:
Yes, in Fort Worth. Absolutely an insane law, but the husband/family finally won after horrible emotional suffering. The hospital said that it was only following the State Law based on the situation. Texas legislators sitting around dreaming up ways to control people's lives rather than running our state's essential business.

More bible belt wacknuttery...
Click to expand...

Can you imagine the husband's torment? Being a public spectacle and not allowed to go through proper stages of grief...and in fact he was called a "murderer" as well. Can you imagine?
 
year2late said:
Can you imagine the husband's torment? Being a public spectacle and not allowed to go through proper stages of grief
Click to expand...

For his kid... who wasn't dead and he just let die needlessly? :roll:
 
JayDubya said:
Pity's sake, this law is just talking about respecting the dead. You already get your way that they can be needlessly killed.
Click to expand...

The baby in the womb isn't willing to pay for said service (I'm assuming you don't believe in Universal Funeral Coverage), said service should not take place.

That's your standard. :shrug:
 
JayDubya said:
Parents. Have. Obligations.
Click to expand...

But let's say we go back to poor old Lucy, that your social policies caused to die in the gutter because she couldn't pay for medical treatment, who's going to pay to bury her and her baby in the womb?

Or, in your usual statist fashion, you are asking the government to mandate a service, in this case a burial, where is that in the constitution?
 
Jetboogieman said:
Or, in your usual statist fashion, you are asking the government to mandate a service, in this case a burial, where is that in the constitution?
Click to expand...

Burial or cremation. You know, the respectful way we normally get rid of human corpses.


I'm so not surprised you don't understand the Constitution at all, and I'm so not even going to try with you.
 
JayDubya said:
Burial or cremation.
Click to expand...

Who pays for all this, it is a service and once again we have the alleged "libertarian" asking government to mandate people purchase a service.

So... If the baby in the womb isn't going to get off their backside, GET A JOB! and pay for this service, then it should not occur and they can be dumped in the nearest biohazard receptacle, after all, you said that if Lucy doesn't have the money to pay for medical services she should die in the gutter, I fail to see why this is any different :shrug:
 
year2late said:
Can you imagine the husband's torment? Being a public spectacle and not allowed to go through proper stages of grief...and in fact he was called a "murderer" as well. Can you imagine?
Click to expand...

No I can't, it would be horrible. I mean under normal conditions you would just ignore people with such moronic and imbeclic views, there's no reason to take them seriously. But to have to deal with that under that situation would test anybody's limit. I just can't believe the wives wish/rights and the husbands rights were so violated like that. IF she passed while already in the hospital and under care and the law kept her alive to simply induce and deliver the same day that would be one thing but this was completely insane to do it for how long they planned like the woman was no more than an incubator and with these facts about the baby in place "The fetus' lower extremities were deformed to the extent that the sex couldn't be determined. The fetus also had fluid building up inside the skull (hydrocephalus) and possibly had a heart problem." . . . .sigh . . this almost makes me sad and angry all over again. If I was that guy/family (if my nerves could handle and it wasnt like reliving it over and over again) I would spend my life making sure that never happened to anybody and suing all those responsible.
 
This law is NOT about doing "the right thing" (and what constitutes the "right thing" is debatable) for the unborn. If it were, it would apply to miscarriages as well. It's solely meant to deter women from aborting by making it too expensive to do so.
 
JayDubya said:
Burial or cremation. You know, the respectful way we normally get rid of human corpses.


I'm so not surprised you don't understand the Constitution at all, and I'm so not even going to try with you.
Click to expand...
Not going to happen.

What is it that is most important? It is people, it is people!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom