• 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!

Federal Judge Halts Key Part of Texas Abortion Law...

Can you show a trend in severe complications necessitating such restrictive laws?

I mean we can have laws that say all surgery needs to take place in a full service hospital with inpatient and ER facilities.....can you tell me the effect of such laws?

Makes the procedures with excellent safety profiles VERY expensive and less accessible to those in rural areas. Hey....sounds familiar!

Like it or not, abortion IS a surgical procedure. ANY other type of clinic doing surgical procedures have to follow the same standards including having admitting privileges at a local hospital. There doesn't need to be a trend, a trend doesn't say crap when we're dealing with individual surgeries. What you're saying is that outliers don't matter, they can just go ahead and die if their surgery goes wrong because they don't fit the trend.
 
I hope all laws limiting access to abortion are able to stand, if we can't outright make it illegal then it needs to be impossible to obtain by any means. One of the greatest evils in our society needs to be stopped.

I know that is not the reasoning of the Texas Legislature, Governor Rick Perry, or Attorney General Greg Abbott when they cooked up this scheme...at least that is what they told Texans.

They are all about safety, not blocking a woman's constitutional right to have an abortion. You do believe the Governor don't you?
 
I know that is not the reasoning of the Texas Legislature, Governor Rick Perry, or Attorney General Greg Abbott when they cooked up this scheme...at least that is what they told Texans.

They are all about safety, not blocking a woman's constitutional right to have an abortion. You do believe the Governor don't you?

The goal may be safety, and it appears the issue addresses that. But honestly I'd have no problem if they said "we did it to close down clinics and make abortion harder to obtain." I would be totally fine with that and support them on that. Abortion is like slavery and it must be stopped, it's the national evil of our time and it's very unfortunate that the law and so many people in our nation support such a thing. If it can't be banned outright then regulate it out of existence.
 
Like it or not, abortion IS a surgical procedure. ANY other type of clinic doing surgical procedures have to follow the same standards including having admitting privileges at a local hospital. There doesn't need to be a trend, a trend doesn't say crap when we're dealing with individual surgeries. What you're saying is that outliers don't matter, they can just go ahead and die if their surgery goes wrong because they don't fit the trend.

That is not correct... and no one has shown the Texas state statute or regulation in which a medical procedure has to be done by a physician with admitting privileges to a hospital.

If this were true...why the need to incorporate it into law?


Any patient of either a doctor or dentist will be seen at a hospital on a emergency case regardless if the clinic physician has HP or not.

If it is determined that the patient needs further hospital stay...that order can come from the patients regular doctor or the ER doctor.
 
The goal may be safety, and it appears the issue addresses that. But honestly I'd have no problem if they said "we did it to close down clinics and make abortion harder to obtain." I would be totally fine with that and support them on that. Abortion is like slavery and it must be stopped, it's the national evil of our time and it's very unfortunate that the law and so many people in our nation support such a thing. If it can't be banned outright then regulate it out of existence.

Your beliefs are fine...and you can work to over-turn Roe v Wade...but in this country, No government... local, state , or federal can write laws restricting a right. Even if you don't like the right.
 
Your beliefs are fine...and you can work to over-turn Roe v Wade...but in this country, No government... local, state , or federal can write laws restricting a right. Even if you don't like the right.

It's a procedure, you have no right to force anyone to provide you with an abortion and as a medical procedure it is subject to regulations and safety parameters. You have a right to access an abortion, meaning no one can say you legally cannot get one so long as it is within term limits but the abortion itself may be regulated and hopefully made to be impossible or extremely expensive to deter abortion and make it virtually impossible to access.
 
Like it or not, abortion IS a surgical procedure. ANY other type of clinic doing surgical procedures have to follow the same standards including having admitting privileges at a local hospital. There doesn't need to be a trend, a trend doesn't say crap when we're dealing with individual surgeries. What you're saying is that outliers don't matter, they can just go ahead and die if their surgery goes wrong because they don't fit the trend.

Minor surgeries and procedures are done outside of the hospital and without a hospital admitting privileges all the time. Try living in a very rural area. What is important is if the patient acknowledges the risks and benefits and understands what path to take should a complication arise. Clinics and doctors offices are obliges to maintain certain standards of practice and environment. Any office or clinic that does not meet these standards would be shut down.

You are not living in the real world on this one. For minor procedures performed outside of a hospital, there clearly would have to be some reason to make it a hospital procedure or a procedure that requires being within a certain distance of a full service hospital. The fact that abortions are singled out when abortion has an excellent safety profile is just proof of it just being a douche move to limit access to abortion.
 
It's a procedure, you have no right to force anyone to provide you with an abortion and as a medical procedure it is subject to regulations and safety parameters. You have a right to access an abortion, meaning no one can say you legally cannot get one so long as it is within term limits but the abortion itself may be regulated and hopefully made to be impossible or extremely expensive to deter abortion and make it virtually impossible to access.
You do not seem to understand the fact that this was not an attempt to regulate but to hinder and to state otherwise only confirms the dishonesty brought to the issue by those who would deny women their freedom.
 
You do not seem to understand the fact that this was not an attempt to regulate but to hinder and to state otherwise only confirms the dishonesty brought to the issue by those who would deny women their freedom.

How am I being dishonest if I'm upfront about saying that we should do anything to prevent and make abortions hard to obtain? I don't care if it's a bogus law with the guise of "safety." If it shuts down clinics and makes abortion harder to obtain then it serves it's purpose as a good law.
 
If not for the hatchet job on the superbly qualified Judge Robert Bork, led by the likes of Ted "Chappaquiddick" Kennedy and Arlen "Einstein" Spector, we probably would have had Bork on the Court. Instead, we got Anthony Kennedy.

And because of Kennedy, the Court could not quite pull the trigger in Casey in 1992, and put Roe v. Wade out of its misery as many had expected it to do. Instead, the Court settled for the awkward, unprincipled compromise that's in force today. It is Casey's vague, neither-fish-nor-fowl "undue burden" test that applies to state laws like this one. It shouldn't surprise anyone that with such a poor standard in place there are all these suits over state abortion laws.
 
How am I being dishonest if I'm upfront about saying that we should do anything to prevent and make abortions hard to obtain? I don't care if it's a bogus law with the guise of "safety." If it shuts down clinics and makes abortion harder to obtain then it serves it's purpose as a good law.
Ok my bad. So you are ok with trampling the law, I mean the real law, in order to satisfy your self righteous desires. Honesty and integrity are meaningless when you want to achieve YOUR goals.
 
Ok my bad. So you are ok with trampling the law, I mean the real law, in order to satisfy your self righteous desires. Honesty and integrity are meaningless when you want to achieve YOUR goals.

Maybe it's because I'm honest about the issue that abortion is the legalized killing of innocent human lives that I'm okay with going to whatever lengths necessary to put an end to it. What would you do if slavery was the law of the land and states were trying to regulate it out of existence because the SCOTUS said blacks aren't "people" and therefore whites have the right to own, kill or do whatever they want to them? Legalized elective abortion is the slavery of our day. You can spin my character however you want, but the fact remains that abortion is wrong, period. And because it's wrong it must be stopped. Call it self righteous, but when the issue is regarding innocent human lives being killed that should be stopped.
 
Maybe it's because I'm honest about the issue that abortion is the legalized killing of innocent human lives that I'm okay with going to whatever lengths necessary to put an end to it. What would you do if slavery was the law of the land and states were trying to regulate it out of existence because the SCOTUS said blacks aren't "people" and therefore whites have the right to own, kill or do whatever they want to them? Legalized elective abortion is the slavery of our day. You can spin my character however you want, but the fact remains that abortion is wrong, period. And because it's wrong it must be stopped. Call it self righteous, but when the issue is regarding innocent human lives being killed that should be stopped.
When you forsake integrity and honesty for a cause, any cause you in essence forsake the cause, because any victory achieved based on deception will fall as a result of it. The fact that you are wiling to deceive and rely on hysteria and emotional appeal for your self gratification only underscores the lack of rational and reality based arguments to support it, hence the need for the dishonesty.
 
Not really, it will happen eventually but probably not until after SSM is nationally legal.

Early legal abortions will not go away in the US.
In the US we enjoy religious liberty and access to reproductive choice including contraception and legal elective abortion is a part of our religious liberty.

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY



The freedom of religion is indeed our first freedom and a universally treasured American value dating back to the founding of our nation.
As a diverse coalition of religious denominations and religiously-affiliated organizations, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice has an intimate understanding of the important role faith plays in one’s personal and public life. For many people of faith, our world view is informed by our religious values and upbringing. Naturally, many of us put our faith into action to advance our own understanding of mutual uplifting and common good. RCRC certainly relies on the religious values of our member organizations to advance health, dignity and justice for women.

However, the First Amendment makes clear that public policy is not to be based on faith alone – in a religiously diverse, pluralistic society, favoring any one religious worldview is wrong and inherently biased. Good policy is policy that allows for all people – regardless of their religious identity – to follow their own faith and conscience when directing the course of their life.

When it comes to matters of reproductive health, RCRC believes that real religious liberty protects the right of a woman to make thoughtful decisions in private consultation with her doctor, her family, and her own faith. Politicians and the religious dogma of another faith should never interfere with religious liberty of an individual.

Read more:

Religious Liberty | Religious Coalition For Reproductive Choice
 
Maybe it's because I'm honest about the issue that abortion is the legalized killing of innocent human lives that I'm okay with going to whatever lengths necessary to put an end to it. What would you do if slavery was the law of the land and states were trying to regulate it out of existence because the SCOTUS said blacks aren't "people" and therefore whites have the right to own, kill or do whatever they want to them? Legalized elective abortion is the slavery of our day. You can spin my character however you want, but the fact remains that abortion is wrong, period. And because it's wrong it must be stopped. Call it self righteous, but when the issue is regarding innocent human lives being killed that should be stopped.

We have known all along that the law was never about safety of the women. It is about limiting access to abortions.

It is rather refreshing that someone is actually honest about it.
 
It's a procedure, you have no right to force anyone to provide you with an abortion and as a medical procedure it is subject to regulations and safety parameters. You have a right to access an abortion, meaning no one can say you legally cannot get one so long as it is within term limits but the abortion itself may be regulated and hopefully made to be impossible or extremely expensive to deter abortion and make it virtually impossible to access.

Swap out abortion with gun and tell me you still think this is a good sentiment.

if there was a medical basis for this regulation, I'd support it. But this regulation is purely what you describe: just trying to make it harder to get abortions. Well, I don't want to ban guns. I just want to make them virtually impossible to get to deter their purchase.
 
How am I being dishonest if I'm upfront about saying that we should do anything to prevent and make abortions hard to obtain? I don't care if it's a bogus law with the guise of "safety." If it shuts down clinics and makes abortion harder to obtain then it serves it's purpose as a good law.

Your comments sound EXACTLY how some hard-core liberals view guns. Guess you have something in common with those hard-core liberals. BOTH of you don't really care about the law, you only care if you get your way.
 
I find the comments comparing abortion control to gun control meaningfully amusing. We have a regular random corner protest group, and I recently saw one of them holding up a sign that says "guns kill" standing right next to another sign that advocated for a woman's "right to choose." I would be tempted to engage them in conversation about this, but I have the vague impression that they are insane. I mean, what sane person wastes a couple hours every saturday morning standing on the same corner holding signs displaying the flavor of the week in politics?
 
Back
Top Bottom