Texas abortion restrictions ruled un-Constitutional - Social Anxiety Forum
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 09:47 AM Thread Starter
SAS's Chief Meteorologist
 
Maslow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Denver
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,542

Texas abortion restrictions ruled un-Constitutional


Once again, Republicans stomped all over our Constitution just to promote their radical, un-American agenda. They pretended that the laws were necessary to protect women's health, just like they pretend to value our Constitution. Republicans are nothing but con-artists.

Quote:
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court struck as unconstitutional part of a restrictive Texas statute that threatened to shutter half of the state’s remaining abortion clinics and deny millions of women the right to a safe abortion.

The ruling in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt represents the most significant victory for abortion rights at the high court since the turn of the century, as states have scrambled to pass and defend similar laws across the country, seeking to chip away at the landmark Roe v. Wade.

That 1973 decision, refined by a conservative compromise in a 1992 case, established that the Constitution protects a woman’s right to end her pregnancy, but later rulings and conservative lobbying have given states leeway to craft abortion laws and regulations targeting not so much the right but those who facilitate it.

Writing for a 5-3 majority, Justice Stephen Breyer said the two Texas laws at issue in the case are unconstitutional.

“We conclude that neither of these provisions offers medical benefits sufficient to justify the burdens upon access that each imposes,” he wrote. “Each places a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a previability abortion, each constitutes an undue burden on abortion access, and each violates the Federal Constitution.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b05e4be860efe5
Maslow is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 10:41 AM
SAS Member
 
Warrior Duchess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: New England, USA
Age: 26
Posts: 31
My Mood: Brooding
The majority of the are nothing other than "con-artists" (I really like that term for them!). I've grown so tired of dealing with them and trying to understand where they're even coming from. It's ridiculous.

I'm just glad these restrictions were ruled as unconstitutional. It gives me some hope for the future.

Because on the internet, no one knows I'm actually a bird. :3

Always open to PM!
Warrior Duchess is offline  
post #3 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 12:31 PM
SAS Member
 
millenniumman75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dayton, OH
Gender: Male
Age: 44
Posts: 152,703
My Mood: Angelic
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maslow View Post
Once again, Republicans stomped all over our Constitution just to promote their radical, un-American agenda. They pretended that the laws were necessary to protect women's health, just like they pretend to value our Constitution. Republicans are nothing but con-artists.
And the Democrats are hypnotized by Obama.

Pelosi, Reid? Come on.

It's a sad state of affairs when a life, created by two people (a man and a woman - the ONLY way), is called a lump of cells. How some of these people's consciences don't get them in the night, I have no idea.

millenniumman75
You are a success story waiting to happen!
Live and let live VACUUMS more than a Hoover....
Live and HELP live is better!

TROLL ALERT STATUS:
CHAT -> BERT

FORUMS -> ERNIE
(troll activity on the increase)

WATCH WHAT YOU TYPE!
millenniumman75 is offline  
 
post #4 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 02:03 PM
SAS Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 90
I'm more aligned with the Democratic party's platform....if I absolutely had to choose....on almost every single issue with the exception of abortion. I think abortion is killing babies, plain and simple. I think the women that choose to kill their own unborn children and the doctors (butchers) that perform them should be brought up on murder charges. I feel that strongly about it, and I do not apologize to anyone in any way shape or form for my views on it. I actually have an ex that I found out had had an abortion, and it still haunts her to this day. She has guilt that she cannot get rid of and that she will take to the grave with her. She believes that she was very confused and scared amd wasn't thinking clearly when she did it, and in her own words she feels sometimes like she has "murdered one of her own children". Her words. Not mine.
AnxiousGuy9 is offline  
post #5 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 02:06 PM
Not A Low Calorie Food
 
WillYouStopDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: United States
Gender: Male
Age: 46
Posts: 28,313
My Mood: Relaxed
Ahhhh. The right to choose is a constitutionally protected right. Except when it isn't. The boundless hypocrisy of the left.

/WYSD
WillYouStopDave is offline  
post #6 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 02:31 PM Thread Starter
SAS's Chief Meteorologist
 
Maslow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Denver
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,542
Quote:
Texas Governor Admits Anti-Abortion Law Was About Restricting Abortion
“The decision erodes States’ lawmaking authority to safeguard the health and safety of women and subjects more innocent life to being lost,” he said in a press release. “Texas’ goal is to protect innocent life, while ensuring the highest health and safety standards for women.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b017b379f6cb23
It's not even about protecting the fetus. It's about going to some imaginary, magical place after they die. Conservatives believe that if they don't try to ban abortion, they might not go to heaven.
Maslow is offline  
post #7 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 02:42 PM
Not A Low Calorie Food
 
WillYouStopDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: United States
Gender: Male
Age: 46
Posts: 28,313
My Mood: Relaxed
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maslow View Post
It's not even about protecting the fetus. It's about going to some imaginary, magical place after they die. Conservatives believe that if they don't try to ban abortion, they might not go to heaven.
Well, try to look at it in practical terms. They're just making sure all those fresh tax cows get to grow up and get milked. They might not know it but they're pertectin' yer roads n' bridges. You might not be able to get blood from a stone but you sure can get it from a taxpayer.

/WYSD
WillYouStopDave is offline  
post #8 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 02:49 PM
Permanently Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Hudson Valley
Language: American
Age: 27
Posts: 2,932
How much are you getting payed to post stuff like this ?
TheInvisibleHand is offline  
post #9 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 03:50 PM
Permanently Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Milwaukee, WI (BDSM sadist, Libertarian)
Gender: Male
Age: 46
Posts: 38,433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maslow View Post
Once again, Republicans stomped all over our Constitution just to promote their radical, un-American agenda. They pretended that the laws were necessary to protect women's health, just like they pretend to value our Constitution. Republicans are nothing but con-artists.
Could you please quote to me where in the US Constitution abortion is mentioned? I must have missed it, so I'd greatly appreciate your assistance in the matter.

We know you can't find 2A, even though it's quite explicit. Yet you can find some heavily veiled reference to abortion, so heavily veiled that nobody seems able to find it.

I would note everything not explicitly stated as a federal power goes to the states.
UltraShy is offline  
post #10 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 04:11 PM
SAS Member
 
vsaxena's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Raleigh, NC
Gender: Male
Age: 37
Posts: 1,469
My Mood: Busy
Yes, God forgive that Republicans ask that abortion doctors obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their abortion clinic. And heaven forbid Republicans ask abortion facilities to meet the equipment and sanitation standards of an ambulatory surgical center.

Regardless, to read the full ruling (and not just leftist spin), including the dissent, look here: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...5-274_p8k0.pdf.

"Now it is time for America to bind the wounds of division, have to get together. To all Republicans and Democrats and independents across this nation, I say it is time for us to come together as one united people." ~ President-elect Donald J. Trump
vsaxena is offline  
post #11 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 04:24 PM
Geese
 
AussiePea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The place where everything is trying to kill you (Australia)
Gender: Male
Age: 32
Posts: 20,778
My Mood: Relaxed
Destroyed:

Quote:
MR. KELLER: An extra thank you, Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court: Res judicata bars the facial challenges. In any event, Texas acted to improve abortion safety, and Planned Parenthood provides this increased standard of care and has opened new ASCs. Abortion is legal and accessible in Texas. All the Texas metropolitan areas that have abortion clinics today will have open clinics if the Court affirms, and that includes the six most populous areas of Texas.

JUSTICE GINSBURG: Well, how many women are located over 100 miles from the nearest clinic?
MR. KELLER: Justice Ginsburg, JA 242 provides that 25 percent of Texas women of reproductive age are not within 100 miles of an ASC. But that would not include McAllen that got as¬ applied relief, and it would not include El Paso, where the Santa Teresa, New Mexico facility is.

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: It includes--

JUSTICE GINSBURG: That's - that's odd that you point to the New Mexico facility. New Mexico doesn't have any surgical ASC requirement, and it doesn't have any admitting requirement. So if your argument is right, then New Mexico is not an available way out for Texas because Texas says to protect our women, we need these things. But send them off to Mexico - New Mexico - New Mexico where they don't get it either, no admitting privileges, no ASC. And that's perfectly all right. Well, if that's all right for the - the women in the El Paso area, why isn't it right for the rest of the women in Texas?
Also to note:

Quote:
This law would have shut down the clinic where I terminated my very much wanted pregnancy because my baby had a condition that was not compatible with life. Legislators seem to forget that these laws don't just affect women who are having elective abortions, but people like me, who otherwise would have been forced to carry my baby to term only to watch him die a few hours after birth.
The fact they pretended this was all for better safety is laughable, we all know the real reasons.

Your 100% in anything, even if you're not the best at it, is a success.
AussiePea is offline  
post #12 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-27-2016, 05:01 PM
Permanently Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Milwaukee, WI (BDSM sadist, Libertarian)
Gender: Male
Age: 46
Posts: 38,433
Quote:
Originally Posted by vsaxena View Post
Yes, God forgive that Republicans ask that abortion doctors obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their abortion clinic. And heaven forbid Republicans ask abortion facilities to meet the equipment and sanitation standards of an ambulatory surgical center.

Regardless, to read the full ruling (and not just leftist spin), including the dissent, look here: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...5-274_p8k0.pdf.
It's just to harass abortion doctors. The pro-life crowd knows that they can't ban abortion outright now, so they slowly & methodically chip away at abortion rights little by little as they can. Not unlike how it took the UK an entire century of chipping away at gun rights till they finally got what they always wanted: a total ban.

Republicans don't give a flying f*** about the health of women, so let's quite that ridiculous pretense. If they had their way woman would be having coat hanger abortions in dark alleys.

Banning abortion means little to Republicans, since any millionaire can readily afford a trip to Canada or Europe to get the job done. Or are we going to ban travel by chicks who are knocked up?

Republicans -- having tiny brains that fail to make obvious connections -- would be utterly stumped by how there are all these unwanted & abused black babies (who in 16 years will be stealing your car, assaulting you, and breaking into your home), not to mention filling prisons to the brim at "only" $30,000 per year.

It's odd how Republicans move out to distant suburbs to avoid crime & b*tch about high taxes, yet they're doing everything in their power to produce a future wave of criminals who will victimize them & victimize their wallet with massive cost to the justice system.

Just last night on the news they had how Milwaukee is hiring more cops -- to help replace the 300 that will retire in the next year. Then there is the hell hole of Chicago -- that makes even Milwaukee look lovely by comparison -- where they need more cops such that the animals in the jungle don't shoot each other, which is evidently a favorite hobby for many of them. Gee, do you think these animals just appeared out of nowhere or do you think they were unwanted & abused, treatment that turned them into violent animals? Think they should have been aborted about 20 years ago?

We shouldn't just allow abortion, we should go all out and encourage it. Given poor women $200 in cash to abort. There was actually a charity that did just that; the woman who ran the charity got daily death threats for doing the ultimate of good deeds.
UltraShy is offline  
post #13 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-28-2016, 12:51 AM
SAS Member
 
walterhunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Olympia, WA
Gender: Male
Posts: 20
I don't have a uterus, so I can't honestly imagine what pregnancy would be like. But I agree that it ultimately be up to the woman carrying the baby. And I think it's hypocritical that we suddenly care about human life when it's unborn, yet we constantly kill each other, and prisoners, and let people starve, and constantly breed at a rate which we can't possibly sustain.
If I was with a woman and got her pregnant, I would hope she would discuss it with me before she aborted it. But she shouldn't HAVE to. It's not going to come out of my vagina. Besides, what if I was an abusive piece of human garbage that she was afraid of? Or any other of the countless nightmare situations that can occur? Ultimately, it shouldn't be hard to get an abortion in 2016. And if people have a problem with that, too bad.
I find it funny that any attempts at gun regulations are seen as big govt trying to take our rights away, yet when they try to take away abortion rights, that's totally an acceptable loss women just have to accept.
walterhunt is offline  
post #14 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-28-2016, 04:06 PM
SAS Member
 
Cloze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Your mom
Gender: Male
Age: 29
Posts: 1,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraShy View Post
Could you please quote to me where in the US Constitution abortion is mentioned? I must have missed it, so I'd greatly appreciate your assistance in the matter.

We know you can't find 2A, even though it's quite explicit. Yet you can find some heavily veiled reference to abortion, so heavily veiled that nobody seems able to find it.

I would note everything not explicitly stated as a federal power goes to the states.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ninth Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The rights of the people to determine their lives and wellbeing is codified in the constitution. A right doesn't have to be explicitly stated for it to exist.

Economic Left/Right: -8.40
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.20
Cloze is offline  
post #15 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-28-2016, 04:09 PM
SAS Member
 
Cloze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Your mom
Gender: Male
Age: 29
Posts: 1,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by vsaxena View Post
Yes, God forgive that Republicans ask that abortion doctors obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their abortion clinic. And heaven forbid Republicans ask abortion facilities to meet the equipment and sanitation standards of an ambulatory surgical center.
Why should they? I've never seen an believable explanation beyond the Republicans wanting to restrict access to abortion. Come on, you know this was about restricting access to abortion and not about public safety.

Economic Left/Right: -8.40
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.20
Cloze is offline  
post #16 of 17 (permalink) Old 06-28-2016, 04:12 PM
SAS Member
 
Cloze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Your mom
Gender: Male
Age: 29
Posts: 1,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraShy View Post
It's just to harass abortion doctors. The pro-life crowd knows that they can't ban abortion outright now, so they slowly & methodically chip away at abortion rights little by little as they can. Not unlike how it took the UK an entire century of chipping away at gun rights till they finally got what they always wanted: a total ban.

Republicans don't give a flying f*** about the health of women, so let's quite that ridiculous pretense. If they had their way woman would be having coat hanger abortions in dark alleys.

Banning abortion means little to Republicans, since any millionaire can readily afford a trip to Canada or Europe to get the job done. Or are we going to ban travel by chicks who are knocked up?

Republicans -- having tiny brains that fail to make obvious connections -- would be utterly stumped by how there are all these unwanted & abused black babies (who in 16 years will be stealing your car, assaulting you, and breaking into your home), not to mention filling prisons to the brim at "only" $30,000 per year.

It's odd how Republicans move out to distant suburbs to avoid crime & b*tch about high taxes, yet they're doing everything in their power to produce a future wave of criminals who will victimize them & victimize their wallet with massive cost to the justice system.

Just last night on the news they had how Milwaukee is hiring more cops -- to help replace the 300 that will retire in the next year. Then there is the hell hole of Chicago -- that makes even Milwaukee look lovely by comparison -- where they need more cops such that the animals in the jungle don't shoot each other, which is evidently a favorite hobby for many of them. Gee, do you think these animals just appeared out of nowhere or do you think they were unwanted & abused, treatment that turned them into violent animals? Think they should have been aborted about 20 years ago?

We shouldn't just allow abortion, we should go all out and encourage it. Given poor women $200 in cash to abort. There was actually a charity that did just that; the woman who ran the charity got daily death threats for doing the ultimate of good deeds.
You wouldn't happen to have a pointy hood and a white dress in your closet... But seriously did some black kid steal your lunch money when you were in school or something?

Economic Left/Right: -8.40
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.20
Cloze is offline  
post #17 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-01-2016, 05:46 AM
Permanently Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,647
I love how dispassionately they made the decision. This is something important in the Court’s decision and the majority’s writing, they aren’t trying to justify their grounds for finding a constitutional right to abortion, they aren’t trying to convince anyone that abortion access is important and protected. They did that already in Roe and Casey. The way they wrote this basically sends a message of ‘this is the law, this has been the law for forty years. Deal with it already.’ They treated this as logically and simply as they’d treat any other constitutional right, applied their analysis and made the decision, citing medical evidence as necessary.

@vsaxena the problem is that the regulation is targeting abortion providers specifically and there's no justifiable reason for that. When they allow riskier procedures to be done in facilities that don't meet those requirements, but require it for a much safer procedure, it becomes questionable.
From reading both dissents, the only really valid argument made in either of them was about sever-ability, but to be honest, the way the law was worded the severability was kinda ****ty and would have forced the court to make decisions that a court shouldn't make. It's better if the legislature passes a new law without the parts that violate the constitutional rights.
Wings of Amnesty is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Number of Californians moving to Texas hits highest level in nearly a decade Cletis Society & Culture 23 04-02-2016 09:48 PM
Dirt Car Racing News Ckg2011 Sports Beat 2731 02-20-2016 10:30 AM

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome