Page 4 of 48 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 478

Thread: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional [W:167:202:330]

  1. #31
    Sage
    opendebate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 01:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    7,315

    Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by johndylan1 View Post
    I would understand your decision, however I would rather punish the guilty, save the innocent, and have compassion upon the victim.
    That is not as clean cut as it sounds. How a person might define who is guilty, who is innocent, who is the victim, who deserves punishment and what defines something as punishment is not necessarily as you see it and is at the heart of the conflict over this issue.
    "Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers" - Voltaire
    "There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow men. True nobility lies in being superior to your former self" -Hemingway

  2. #32
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by johndylan1 View Post
    At this point with regard to ACA, I'd prefer mass civil disobedience, refusing to fill medical lines on IRS forms. Can we have an AMEN!?
    No, but I hope an "I don't give a crap about your preferences" will be sufficient
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  3. #33
    Pragmatic Idealist
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,105

    Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    My belief and my God tell me that life begins at conception which means the killing of a human fetus and to me and by all definition that is murder. Because the law doesn't say that doesn't mean that it isn't murder. Nobody can claim that it isn't murder to take the life of a human fetus except the Federal Govt.
    I agree something can be morally wrong, but not legally wrong. Something can be murder from a Biblical perspective, but not a legal perspective. Divorce, for example, is morally wrong (and, could be considered a form of murder), but not legally wrong.

    I do want to point out that God may have told you in prayer that life begins at conception; but he did not tell everyone that in his Word (the Bible). To rephrase, the idea that life begins at conception is a biblical interpretation not a biblical proclamation. No where in the Bible does it say life begins at conception.

    To bring full circle to my divorce / abortion illustration, divorce is actually explicitly forbidden (as is abortion) in the Bible; but the Bible does not explicitly define life as beginning at conception (though the inception of marriage is quite clear...and, Jesus unique way, extends beyond legal and social convention... but that is another discussion).

    I use divorce and abortion in common as I believe they are fundamentally the same thing: man putting asunder what the Lord has brought together. Each are complicated; each are legal, yet morally wrong; therefore each are matters between man and God rahter than man and government; and each are forgivable sins.
    Last edited by upsideguy; 10-30-13 at 01:28 AM.

  4. #34
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by upsideguy View Post
    I agree something can be morally wrong, but not legally wrong. Something can be murder from a Biblical perspective, but not a legal perspective. Divorce, for example, is morally wrong (and, could be considered a form of murder), but not legally wrong.

    I do want to point out that God may have told you in prayer that life begins at conception; but he did not tell everyone that in his Word (the Bible). To rephrase, the idea that life begins at conception is a biblical interpretation not a biblical proclamation. No where in the Bible does it say life begins at conception.

    To bring full circle to my divorce / abortion illustration, divorce is actually explicitly forbidden (as is abortion) in the Bible; but the Bible does not explicitly define life as beginning at conception (though the inception of marriage is quite clear...and, Jesus unique way, extends beyond legal and social convention... but that is another discussion).

    I use divorce and abortion in common as I believe they are fundamentally the same thing: man putting asunder what the Lord has brought together. Each are complicated; each are legal, yet morally wrong; therefore each are matters between man and God rahter than man and government; and each are forgivable sins.
    Point taken which is why I have normally stayed away from the topic as I do believe both have to be reconciled someday in the future between the individual and God. It is up to God to forgive, not me. I do believe life begins at conception and although you are right there is nothing in the Bible that I am aware of stating that, I do believe a living being has been created. Maybe I am wrong but that is what I believe.

  5. #35
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,806

    Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    What exactly ARE the new restrictions Texas was putting in?

    I mean, I heard one side saying "the bastards are trying to underhandedly prevent some abortions by making it difficult to get them".
    And the other side saying "We're trying to protect people from dangerous abortion procedures" (or something along those lines).

    But I didn't pay much attention at the time...
    well the cliff notes are, the regulations they wanted to legislate were going to be based on feelings and morals, not medical requirements, procedures or protocols which are ALREADY in place. They want to use a nearly 20 year old regulation that isnt NOT followed by the medical community.

    Basically it would effect the majority of women who get medical abortions and it has the potential to shut down 30% of those clinics.

    The other restriction they want is no abortions after 20 weeks which im personally OK with if its a soft ban. Meaning unlimited abortion until 20 weeks then after case by case. but typically this loses in court because its lower than RvW.

    ALso they want all clinics to be surgically facilities which again is not a requirement by the medical community but those last two things arent even in the lawsuit from my understanding.

    The bill is clearly about restricting medical care based on opinions, subjective morals and feelings since the medical community doesnt require it.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  6. #36
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

    For those who are interested, the ruling can be found at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/r/2010..._PPvAbbott.pdf

    The ruling articulates the court's narrow purpose (to determine whether the State law's provisions "are consistent with the Constitution of the United States under existing Supreme Court precedent"), the three relevant established principles that govern the court's decision (1. woman's right to terminate pregnancy prior to fetal viability; 2. a law that "imposes an undue burden on a woman's decision before fetal viability" is not constitutional; and, 3. After fetal viability, a state can regulate abortion except when it comes to the preservation of the life and health of the mother), and the undue burden test (whether a state has a rational basis for enacting a provision of law and, if that requirement is met, evaluation of the state's purpose in enacting the law).

    The Court found that the admitting privileges language had no rational basis. Moreover, it concluded that even if there were a rational basis, the effect of the law (by which the state's purpose is judged) would have resulted in 24 counties lacking an abortion provider "because those providers do not have admitting privileges and are unlikely to get them." In short, the court found that the provision presented the kind of obstacle that runs counter to existing constitutional law.

    IMO, unless Texas can demonstrate that the Court's judgment is erroneous and/or offer a framework to assure that the 24 counties can offer abortion services, the decision will likely stand following completion of all the legal appeals, whether or not the case makes it to the Supreme Court.

  7. #37
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,887

    Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

    A federal appeals court, of 3 women no less, threw out the ruling.

    Federal appeals court reinstates key restriction in Texas abortion law - CBS News

    A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled that most of Texas' tough new abortion restrictions can take effect immediately - a decision that means as least 12 clinics won't be able to perform the procedure starting as soon as Friday.

    A panel of judges at the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans said the law requiring doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital can take effect while a lawsuit challenging the restrictions moves forward. The panel issued the ruling three days after District Judge Lee Yeakel said the provision serves no medical purpose.

  8. #38
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    A federal appeals court, of 3 women no less, threw out the ruling.

    Federal appeals court reinstates key restriction in Texas abortion law - CBS News
    Obviously these "judges" are winger-bagger fringe nut cases that are activist make policy from the bench and this should be ignored as they hate women.

    ;P
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  9. #39
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Once more, extremist ideology has been defeated in the courts. This will most likely move up to the Supreme Court, where I expect 2 things will happen.

    1) SCOTUS will uphold the ruling, saying the Texas law places an undue burden on women.

    2) Some here will call Justice Roberts a RINO. Never mind that he will have upheld the Constitution, and left ideology out of his decision.

    Of course, for some of the "smaller government crowd, they really do want big government when it suits their own desires to force their own religious beliefs on others.

    Article is here.
    The three-judge panel for the 5th Circuit disagreed with both the rational basis and undue burden findings of Yeakel.

    “The State offered more than a ‘conceivable state of facts that could provide a rational basis’ for requiring abortion physicians to have hospital admission privileges,” Judge Priscilla Owen wrote on behalf of the panel. “The district court’s conclusion that a State has no rational basis for requiring physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital is but one step removed from repudiating the longstanding recognition by the Supreme Court that a State may constitutionally require that only a physician may perform an abortion.”
    Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Bulk of New Texas Abortion Law

    Ahh... I'll just let that sink in for ya, there's more judicial smack down on Yeakel's fail if you have the honest desire to understand why this happened.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    2) Some here will call Justice Roberts a RINO. Never mind that he will have upheld the Constitution, and left ideology out of his decision.
    Nope. Worthless sack of ****, but not RINO.

Page 4 of 48 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •