Texas cannot exclude Planned Parenthood from health program: judge

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holly3278
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Holly3278

Guest
AUSTIN, Texas (Reuters) - A federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked a new Texas rule that would have excluded Planned Parenthood clinics from offering women’s health services for the poor in the state because the organization provides abortions.
Click to expand...
Code: 
           The ruling by U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel  in favor of Planned Parenthood means thousands of women enrolled in the  Texas Women's Health Program who go to its clinics will not be required  to find new healthcare providers, at least for now.
Click to expand...
news.yahoo.com/texas-cannot-exclude-planned-parenthood-health-program-judge-183039755.html

This just totally sickens me. I hope that this federal judge’s ruling is overturned and that Texas can continue to exclude Planned Parenthood (which should be called Planned Herodhood since they both slaughter many unborn babies!) from offering health services to the poor. There are many other places that can offer health services to the poor that don’t also provide abortions. Why can’t we just exclude Planned Parenthood from providing health services to the poor and let the other places that don’t provide abortion provide the health services that are needed.
 
This will be appealed, and Texas will win! Do not worry!

👍
 
Do not be discouraged. The truth of Plannned Parenthood has been revealed & is becoming common knowledge. It was just a few years ago that only the pro-life zealots knew the truth of this dark billion dollar foundation. PP & their supporters are on the defense.
 
I guess I was a little disappointed. What a great precedent it would set. The federal government is always passing mandates like the one Texas passed, withholding funds for reasons unrelated to the funding.

I note that the judge that first ruled to restore funding to Planned Parenthood was a Bush appointee, providing evidence to the myth that Republicans appoint pro-life and pro-constitutional judges.
 
And from our friends at HuffPo:

huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/04/texas-planned-parenthood-funding_n_1479175.html

Nice picture. “Rush is a Nazi *#$#!” Really? Rush may be a *#$#!, but a Nazi? :rolleyes:

Further, how crazy is the claim that Atty General Abbot compared Planned Parenthood to a “terrorist organization”?! Because Mr Abbot pointed out the fungible nature of money given to PP, he thinks “that giving Medicaid money to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screenings, pap smears, STD testing and birth control is akin to giving a terrorist organization money for humanitarian activities.”

Unfortunately, his quote is so heavily trimmed, it is impossible to tell the context (and so far, my efforts to find the full quote have failed):
“Money is fungible, and taxpayer subsidies – even if ‘earmarked’ for nonabortion activities – free up other resources for Planned Parenthood to spend on its mission to promote elective abortions … (because ‘[m]oney is fungible,’ First Amendment does not prohibit application of federal material-support statute to individuals who give money to ‘humanitarian’ activities performed by terrorist organizations).”

Rather, I think the statement was about the nature of funding, not about the nature of PP. But leave it up to the HuffPo to report things in an unbiased, objective manner. :rolleyes:
 
Not_Sure said:
Just hold to the spirit of Andrew Jackson: “Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.”

Texas should refuse to follow the ruling.
Click to expand...
So you are advocating the breakdown of our system of government?

How would you feel if Obama said that about a Supreme Court ruling against Obamacare?
 
poker10 said:
So you are advocating the breakdown of our system of government?

How would you feel if Obama said that about a Supreme Court ruling against Obamacare?
Click to expand...
Texas law will not allow them to follow the ruling. What will happen, if they lose the case, is they will shut down the program
 
poker10 said:
So you are advocating the breakdown of our system of government?
Click to expand...
If he doesn’t, I will. I have no problem refusing to follow an immoral ruling. Our system is already broken down rather badly.
 
pnewton said:
I guess I was a little disappointed. What a great precedent it would set. The federal government is always passing mandates like the one Texas passed, withholding funds for reasons unrelated to the funding.

I note that the judge that first ruled to restore funding to Planned Parenthood was a Bush appointee, providing evidence to the myth that Republicans appoint pro-life and pro-constitutional judges.
Click to expand...
pnewton, you set up a false “myth” that the GOP only appoints pro-life and pro-constitutional justices then proceed to tear down the straw man. As if one bad justice discounts all the good justices Bush appointed? I guess Ron Paul if by some fluke got elected he would have 100% control over all the justices he appointed? They would be like puppets and only decide before consulting with him? You’re playing your usual game and its getting old. The Republican appointed justices are overwhelmingly more pro-life and pro-constitution than the Democrat appointed justices. I won’t mention the track record of Libertarian party appointed justices because there aren’t any.

Ishii
 
ishii said:
pnewton, you set up a false “myth” that the GOP only appoints pro-life and pro-constitutional justices then proceed to tear down the straw man.
Click to expand...
No I didn’t. Check my quote versus your quote. You insert the word “only”.
I won’t mention the track record of Libertarian party appointed justices because there aren’t any.
Click to expand...
Then *don’t *mention it. Too late. You already did.

The federal judiciary is a mess created by Democrats and Republicans, as this sort of judicial activism shows.
 
pnewton said:
No I didn’t. Check my quote versus your quote. You insert the word “only”.
Click to expand...
You implied that it was a myth that Republicans appoint pro-life and pro-constitutional justices so you’re saying that the Republicans don’t appoint those kinds of judges, when clearly they do. You have to know that you’re wrong in stating that none of the Republican appointed judges (let alone the majority) are pro-life and pro-constitutional. You’re just unfairly beating up the GOP which seems to be your favorite pastime here. One bad justice appointed does not mean that the GOP does not appoint good judges. But I suspect you know that.
pnewton said:
Then *don’t *mention it. Too late. You already did.
Click to expand...
I mentioned it for the benefit of those who still think that voting for the Libertarian candidate (in this case Gary Johnson) will somehow make a difference. It won’t, other than to help re-elect Obama.
pnewton said:
The federal judiciary is a mess created by Democrats and Republicans, as this sort of judicial activism shows.
Click to expand...
No, you’re wrong. There is a big difference overall between the judges appointed by Republicans and judges appointed by Democrats. Of course since judges aren’t robots there will be disappointments. Some Republican appointed judges will disappoint. Most reasonable people would not use that to unfairly beat up on the GOP. Unfortunately, some seem to love to beat up on the GOP rather than be part of the solution.

Ishii
 
Rulings such as this prove that good Christians are foolish to trust Democrats with their votes. Very few Democrat leaders believe in the separation of powers laid out in the U.S. Constitution, or numerous other parts of our great founding document, for that matter. :dts: Rob
 
Response from pro life groups:
Elizabeth Graham, the head of Texas Right to Life, talked with LifeNews about the decision.
Click to expand...
“Though the preliminary injunction may seem to be a victory for the abortion giant, Governor Perry and Texas Attorney General Abbott have consistently held that Texas will not continue the WHP if taxpayers are forced to subsidize the abortion industry,” she said. “Planned Parenthood is now playing politics with women’s health by risking the whole program by its advocacy of abortion. Attorney General Abbott is fully prepared to defend the intent of the Legislature by allowing participation in the WHP to providers and agencies that provide a full spectrum of health care services and that are not affiliated with abortion.”
Click to expand...
Graham added: “Texas Right to Life very carefully oversaw the WHP renewal legislation, ensuring that low income women could find services at agencies that do not provide abortion. Planned Parenthood’s claims in the lawsuit about discrimination and staff cuts if excluded from the WHP are absurd; if Planned Parenthood would stop committing abortion, they would be eligible for several public revenue streams. We have full confidence in Attorney General Abbott to protect the taxpayers of Texas from directly and indirectly funding America’s largest abortion chain.”
Click to expand...
Joe Pojman, Ph.D., executive director of Texas Alliance for Life, also responded: “Planned Parenthood runs the largest chain of abortion facilities in our state, and they mix the Women’s Health Program and abortions under the same roof at many of those abortion facilities.”
Click to expand...
“For example that is the case in Bryan, Dallas, Houston, and Waco. Governor Perry and the legislature have every right to prevent Planned Parenthood from promoting abortion as a method of family planning with tax dollars. We believe that today’s setback will be temporary and that the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals will recognize the constitutionality of Texas law,” he said. “Of the some 2,500 Women’s Health Program Providers, 98% have nothing to do with Planned Parenthood and abortion. Planned Parenthood, which has no mammogram machines, provides shabby care for low-income women. Planned Parenthood is unable or unwilling to offer comprehensive primary and preventative care, which low-income women deserve. A woman will not see a doctor at Planned Parenthood unless she is there for an abortion. The state ordered Planned Parenthood San Antonio to return thousands of WHP funds in 2009 because Planned Parenthood had been illegally operating unlicensed abortion facilities at the same sites where they were providing WHP services.”
Click to expand...
Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser also responded, saying, “Planned Parenthood, America’s abortion giant, is holding hostage the health care of low-income women across Texas in order to keep its pockets lined with taxpayer dollars.”
Click to expand...
“As Governor Perry has pointed out, Planned Parenthood clinics represent less than two percent of the more than 2,500 enrolled providers. By suing in court and demanding taxpayer funding, Planned Parenthood may leave the state with no choice but to end the Women’s Health Program in order to ensure that taxpayers are not forced to subsidize the abortion industry,” she continued.
Click to expand...
lifenews.com/2012/05/04/court-rules-texas-must-fund-planned-parenthood-abortion-biz
 
ishii said:
You have to know that you’re wrong in stating that none of the Republican appointed judges (let alone the majority) are pro-life and pro-constitutional.
Click to expand...
I did not use the word “none” nor “only”, nor did I mean to imply that, as that would be absurd. I regret you saw an implication where none was intended. No, I do not love to beat up on the GOP. In fact, I politics is a small percentage of my posts here.
 
pnewton said:
I did not use the word “none” nor “only”, nor did I mean to imply that, as that would be absurd. I regret you saw an implication where none was intended. No, I do not love to beat up on the GOP. In fact, I politics is a small percentage of my posts here.
Click to expand...
Well, my apologies for misinterpreting you. Perhaps you could better explain what you meant by the part in bold below:
pnewton said:
I note that the judge that first ruled to restore funding to Planned Parenthood was a Bush appointee, providing evidence to the myth that Republicans appoint pro-life and pro-constitutional judges.
Click to expand...
Ishii
 
poker10 said:
So you are advocating the breakdown of our system of government?

How would you feel if Obama said that about a Supreme Court ruling against Obamacare?
Click to expand...
Obama would be another matter. Same as if the SCOTUS hands down an opinion against the Affordable Care Act aka “Obamacare”. There will be lots of praising on that opinion here while another ruling of the SCOTUS might not be accepted. Why? Because not everyone agrees on any of these types of rulings. People of all stripes interpret the Constitution differently. Some of it may also merely depend on one’s politics as to which opinions are cheered and which are jeered.
 
I look at the bigger picture so I pray they wouldn’t be able to exclude them since PP does provide many health care services to many women beyond performing abortion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top