End Times and Current Events

General Category => Massacre of Innocence – The Occult Roots of Abortion => Topic started by: Mark on June 21, 2013, 02:56:47 pm



Title: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on June 21, 2013, 02:56:47 pm
House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations

A Texas House committee has approved new restrictions on abortions in the state, after cutting short an 11-hour hearing and denying hundreds of people the opportunity to testify against them.
 
House Affairs Committee Chairman Byron Cook held a perfunctory meeting Friday to approve all of the measures, with Republicans voting for the measures and Democrats opposing. The vote came after hundreds of abortion rights supporters packed a hearing Thursday until 3:30 a.m. Friday morning.
 
Opponents hoped to stall the measures, but Cook cut off public testimony saying it was becoming repetitive. Houston Democrat Jessica Farrar said in 20 years she'd never seen a chairman cut short testimony.
 
The proposed laws would limit what clinics and doctors can perform abortions, and ban them after 20 weeks instead of 24.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/house-committee-oks-texas-abortion-regulations


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 21, 2013, 03:26:41 pm
Odd how Perry and the GOP-lead TX legislature waited until Obama's SECOND term to push for this. Wonder why they didn't do anything when his colleague Bush II was in office.

President George W. Bush did not introduce, lobby for, nor sign any law that acknowledged the right to life and so could stop the killing of even a single child. Instead he had an enormous pro-abortion influence, e.g., giving Planned Parenthood hundreds of millions of dollars more than did even Bill Clinton.
http://prolifeprofiles.com/george-w-bush-abortion

Quote
The proposed laws would limit what clinics and doctors can perform abortions, and ban them after 20 weeks instead of 24.

So that's it? They can keep them open as long as they follow certain "restrictions", and they lowered the ban on abortions from 24 to 20 weeks?

1Cor 5:6  Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
1Co 5:7  Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Co 5:8  Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.



Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on June 26, 2013, 07:18:13 am
Texas abortion bill falls after challenge

Despite barely beating a midnight deadline, hundreds of jeering protesters helped stop Texas lawmakers from passing one of the toughest abortion measures in the country.
 
As the protesters raised the noise to deafening levels in the Texas Senate chamber late Tuesday, Republicans scrambled to gather their colleagues at the podium for a stroke-of-midnight vote.
 
"Get them out!" Sen. Donna Campbell shouted to a security guard, pointing to the thundering crowd in the gallery overhead that had already been screaming for more than 10 minutes.
 
"Time is running out," Campbell pleaded. "I want them out of here!"
 
It didn't work. The noise never stopped and despite barely beating the midnight end-of-session deadline with a vote to pass the bill, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said the chaos in the chamber prevented him from formally signing it before the deadline passed, effectively killing it.
 
Dewhurst denounced the protesters as an "unruly mob." Democrats who urged them on called the outburst democracy in action.
 
In either point of view, a raucous crowd of chanting, singing, shouting demonstrators effectively took over the Texas Capitol and blocked a bill that abortion rights groups warned would close most abortion clinics in the state.
 
"They were asking for their voices to be heard," said Sen. Wendy Davis of Fort Worth, who spent nearly 11 hours trying to filibuster the bill before the outburst. "The results speak for themselves."

rest: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ABORTION_RESTRICTIONS_TEXAS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-06-26-06-42-21


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 26, 2013, 08:12:18 am
I'm from Texas so the local news here broadcasted this little sideshow - just proves right there that the political arenas on both the national and local levels are nothing more than WWE sideshows.

This is just ridiculous - I had no idea you can filibuster something by talking your head off for hours on end. I just can't imagine anyone saying something coherently rational for even more than an hour.

Ecc_5:2  Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on June 26, 2013, 08:33:41 am
I'm from Texas so the local news here broadcasted this little sideshow - just proves right there that the political arenas on both the national and local levels are nothing more than WWE sideshows.

This is just ridiculous - I had no idea you can filibuster something by talking your head off for hours on end. I just can't imagine anyone saying something coherently rational for even more than an hour.

Ecc_5:2  Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.

Really? as that is the whole reason for a fillibuster, sadly that ISNT what you had here. What you had was a bunch of Ballam worshipping witches in the balcony and around the floor hollaring and yelling. That isnt a fillibuster.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 26, 2013, 08:38:39 am
Really? as that is the whole reason for a fillibuster, sadly that ISNT what you had here. What you had was a bunch of Ballam worshipping witches in the balcony and around the floor hollaring and yelling. That isnt a fillibuster.

Well yeah, that's what I was trying to say - I had no idea you could filibuster anything doing THAT, and to boot I can't imagine anyone saying anything decently coherently for even 1 hour, much less many hours like they did.

Which was why I said it was like watching the WWE.

And it happened in the STATE OF TEXAS - no, it's not this conservative Christian state everyone makes it out to be(there's a lot of megachurches here), but it IS THE STATE OF TEXAS, and NOT CALIFORNIA!


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 26, 2013, 08:45:05 am
Another thing - notice the apathy by the American public, pretty much. No, I'm not saying we as Christians should run around worrying et al, but just observe how both the MSM and the public are reacting to it.

For example, the MSM is running away with this whole Aaron Hernandez story(NE Patriots player entangled in a murder case) quite a bit over the last week, and this seems to be the story most are buzzing about more than anything else. But en yet, stories like being discussed in this thread no one is really buzzing about.

Luke 21:34  And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares.
Luk 21:35  For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.
Luk 21:36  Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.



Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 26, 2013, 06:15:49 pm
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-26/texas-abortion-limits-sent-back-to-state-lawmakers-by-perry-1-.html?cmpid=yhoo
6/26/13
Texas Abortion Limits Sent Back to State Lawmakers by Perry

Texas Governor Rick Perry called the state legislature back into session July 1 to give lawmakers another chance to approve a measure that might close most of the state’s abortion clinics.

The legislation died in a special session that ended last night after a Democratic senator filibustered. Republican backers forced a vote approving the measure that was later ruled invalid because it came after the midnight conclusion of the session.

“Texans value life and want to protect women and the unborn,” Perry said in a statement today.

The measure that failed yesterday would ban abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy and require that they be performed in ambulatory surgical centers by doctors with admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles (50 kilometers). Most clinics would have to alter facilities to meet the requirements, which abortion-rights advocates say they can’t afford. Doctors at other clinics may struggle to win privileges.

In the past three years, Republican-led states increasingly have restricted when and how women can end pregnancies. Twenty-week bans have been among the most popular, passing in at least 10 states since 2010. Some measures face legal challenges and haven’t taken effect.

In May, an Arizona law that made it a crime for doctors to perform abortions after 20 weeks was struck down by a federal appeals court. The ruling said the measure violated the precedent set by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which granted the right to an abortion until a fetus is viable, typically considered about 24 weeks.

The Texas measure passed the House, but failed in the Senate after Wendy Davis, a Democrat, filibustered more than 10 hours. Republicans then forced a vote on the legislation.

After some confusion, Republican leaders said the vote came after the midnight end of the special session and didn’t count.



Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Kilika on June 27, 2013, 02:39:26 am
Quote
In May, an Arizona law that made it a crime for doctors to perform abortions after 20 weeks was struck down by a federal appeals court.

Yeah, the feds got a bone to pick with Arizona, so of course they struck down a ruling that opposes Washington's socialist agenda.

Stick a fork in it, this country is done!


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 28, 2013, 03:40:33 pm
Being from TX(as I've said in other posts), this has made front page news in our papers(for obvious reasons) - Dunno, but it's turning out into one of those good cop vs bad cop/WWE shows. This same Lt. Gov is also the same guy who played his role by allowing himself to be portrayed as a "moderate" in last year's Senate race(which went to Ted Cruz - who's playing the role of good cop on Capitol Hill now with this immigration bill).

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-senate-blowup-threatens-lt-gov-future-185326611.html
6/28/13
Texas Senate blowup threatens lt. gov.'s future

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — With the crowd in the Texas Senate gallery chanting at deafening levels, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst stood at the podium with his hands in his pockets as his fellow Republicans pleaded and shouted for order.

The protesters refused to settle down as Dewhurst scrambled to the Senate floor and desperately tried to beat a midnight deadline to save one of his top priorities: legislation limiting abortions. He failed, amid one of the wildest scenes in the Texas Legislature in recent memory.

The bill will get another chance next week now that the governor has called another special legislative session, but Dewhurst's political future may not be so easily saved.

Damage left by the raucous scene of an out-of-control Senate — broadcast live on the Internet — has made Dewhurst a target for blame among rivals within his own party who wonder why the presiding officer of the chamber let it happen.

Texas' lieutenant governor is one of the most powerful politicians in the state. Elected statewide and independent of the governor's office, the lieutenant governor controls the flow of legislation in the Senate. Dewhurst has held the post since 2002, when he rode a conservative wave that has allowed Republicans to dominate state politics for more than a decade. But he suffered a crushing defeat by a fellow Republican in last year's U.S. Senate race.

more


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on June 29, 2013, 08:53:01 pm
im quite sure this violates the filibusterer rules...


State Sen. Wendy Davis Donned Catheter for Pro-Abortion Filibuster

State Sen. Wendy Davis (D-TX), the woman who gave an 11-hour filibuster to protect late-term abortion against a proposed law in the state of Texas, put on running shoes and a back brace, and inserted a urinary catheter in preparation for her speech. Her filibuster in favor of abortion after 20 weeks (5 months) ended after she went off topic, and was cut of by the Republican majority. “She’s a total fighter,” said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood.

While national Democrats praised Davis for her filibuster, which took the chamber into recesses, Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) called a special session of the legislature in order to finish passage of the law.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/28/State-Davis-catheter


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Kilika on June 30, 2013, 04:05:51 am
Like they care!


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Kilika on July 03, 2013, 05:06:53 am
Ya think this will make the main stream news?  ::)

Quote
Texas Pro-Abortion Protesters Chant 'Hail Satan!'

by Debra Heine 2 Jul 2013

...Texas blogger, Adam Cahn was there, and has a report and video from the scene where pro-life women shared their abortion related testimonies, and the pro abort mob responded with repeated chants of "hail Satan."  He notes that they had been chanting those words all day, but it took awhile to catch it on video...(cont.)

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/07/02/Pro-Aborts-Chant-Hail-Satan-At-Texas-State-Capitol-As-Pro-Lifers-Sing-Amazing-Grace?utm_source=contentsharing&utm_medium=linkexchange&utm_term=postion2&utm_content=Pro-Aborts-Chant-Hail-Satan-At-Texas-State-Capitol-As-Pro-Lifers-Sing-Amazing-Grace&utm_campaign=foxnews (http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/07/02/Pro-Aborts-Chant-Hail-Satan-At-Texas-State-Capitol-As-Pro-Lifers-Sing-Amazing-Grace?utm_source=contentsharing&utm_medium=linkexchange&utm_term=postion2&utm_content=Pro-Aborts-Chant-Hail-Satan-At-Texas-State-Capitol-As-Pro-Lifers-Sing-Amazing-Grace&utm_campaign=foxnews)


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on July 03, 2013, 05:49:42 am
 :o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFo3NYM-9_s



Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Kilika on July 03, 2013, 04:00:10 pm
Yeah, I didn't even listen to it, and just left it as a link.

I try not to give the enemy any more airtime than needed! We already know that fallen angels and demons walk among us. They will have their reward in God's time.

"What shall we then say to these things? If God [be] for us, who [can be] against us?" Romans 8:31 (KJB)


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on July 11, 2013, 07:19:27 am
again...

Texas House approves sweeping abortion restrictions


The Texas House of Representatives approved sweeping abortion restrictions on Tuesday, including a ban after 20 weeks of pregnancy and tougher standards for clinics that perform the procedure.
 
The vote of 98-49 came after a full day of sometimes emotional debate. Before the measure can head to the state Senate, it needs a final vote from the House, which is expected on Wednesday.

The House approved the same proposal during a previous special session of the legislature, but it failed to pass in the Senate after Democratic Senator Wendy Davis staged an 11-hour filibuster that gained national attention.

Planned Parenthood, the country's largest provider of abortions, says the proposed stricter standards for clinics could cause all but six of the 42 abortion facilities in Texas to shut down. Bill author Republican Jodie Laubenberg said no facility would be forced to close.

Texas Governor Rick Perry, a Republican who opposes abortion, called lawmakers back to Austin for a second special session to reconsider the proposal. Most lawmakers in the Republican controlled Senate favor the bill.

Since the second special session began on July 1, thousands of Texans have packed the Capitol to testify at hearings, hold rallies and march.

After the vote on Tuesday, bill opponents crowded the area outside the House chamber, chanting "Defense! Defense!" to cheer on lawmakers who voted against the bill and were emerging from the legislative chamber.

During the debate on Tuesday, Representative Jason Villalba, a Republican whose wife is expecting a baby boy, spoke passionately in favor of the bill while showing his colleagues a sonogram picture of "my son."

"We fight this fight because of innocent human life," he said.

The 20-week provision - a version of which has been passed by a dozen states - is based on controversial research suggesting fetuses feel pain at that point in the pregnancy.

Bill opponent Representative Senfronia Thompson, a Democrat, unsuccessfully proposed an amendment to exempt victims of **** and incest from the 20-week provision.

"I don't think that you want to traumatize (a) young woman by making her carry a child that her stepfather has impregnated her with, or her father," Thompson said.

Thompson held up a coat hanger to make the point that women may be forced to turn to unsafe abortion methods.

Last week, two states imposed new abortion restrictions.

Ohio stripped funding from Planned Parenthood and put new requirements on those performing and seeking abortions. Wisconsin passed a law requiring women seeking an abortion to undergo an ultrasound and new requirements on doctors performing abortions. A federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked a portion of that law.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/10/us-usa-abortion-texas-idUSBRE96805G20130710


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 12, 2013, 02:14:13 am
Why in the world are Rick Perry and David Dewhurst letting this happen?

Sorry, hate to say it, but the GOP in the TX legislature are responsible for this too for not taking a stand.

Eph 6:13  Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 12, 2013, 07:29:29 pm
I read in my paper today that Rick Santorum came down to help out passing this bill - really, how did this Knights of Malta member get involved with this now?

When you look at it closely - it wasn't so much that what Wendy Davis did was unconstitutional, again, WHY didn't David Dewhurst, Rick Perry, and Dan Patrick(TX Senate GOP leader) take a STAND against her antics that night? After all, it was unconstitutional, and it wouldn't have taken much effort to begin with for these guys to take a stand, and they just sat on their hands and did NOTHING? And now they had to bring down a globalist in Santorum(also the same guy who helped pro-abortion believer Mitt Romney get the GOP nom) to help them sort out this mess?

Hate to say it, but I don't think a single good intention by either side is being put out. And we should also realize that these state legislatures are waiting until NOW(since Obama got into office, that is) to pass these anti-abortion bills, when they could have done so very easily during Bush Jr's 1st term. Now the USSC has 7 justices with pro-abortion records, largely thanks to W. Bush appointing 2 of them himself. Just saying.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on July 16, 2013, 06:52:18 am
Abortion Activists Shout “F— the Church” During Chants at Texas Capitol

The pro-abortion madness is continuing for yet another week. On the heels of death threats from an abortion activist to the Lt. Governor comes another outrage.
 
As members of the Texas legislature attempt to debate a bill that would ban late-term abortions after 20 weeks, abortion activists are shouting.
 
The typical pro-abortion chant goes something like this: “Women must decide their fate, not the church, not the state.” Bryan Kemper of Stand True relayed to LifeNews reports from his staff at the scene and says many of the dozens of abortion advocates screaming tonight in the Texas capitol are replacing “not the church” with “f— the church.”

rest+vid: http://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/09/abortion-activists-shout-f-the-church-during-chants-at-texas-capitol/


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 16, 2013, 10:48:20 am
Abortion Activists Shout “F— the Church” During Chants at Texas Capitol

The pro-abortion madness is continuing for yet another week. On the heels of death threats from an abortion activist to the Lt. Governor comes another outrage.
 
As members of the Texas legislature attempt to debate a bill that would ban late-term abortions after 20 weeks, abortion activists are shouting.
 
The typical pro-abortion chant goes something like this: “Women must decide their fate, not the church, not the state.” Bryan Kemper of Stand True relayed to LifeNews reports from his staff at the scene and says many of the dozens of abortion advocates screaming tonight in the Texas capitol are replacing “not the church” with “f— the church.”

rest+vid: http://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/09/abortion-activists-shout-f-the-church-during-chants-at-texas-capitol/

Hate to say this, but didn't like the looks of the pro-life leadership there either - saw crucifixes, "Mary was pro-life" signs, etc - just screamed Catholicism to me. Remember the Jesuits control both sides of the conflicts.

Mat 1:18  Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 16, 2013, 12:24:58 pm
Surprise, Surprise! A "loophole" to all of this!

http://news.yahoo.com/more-texas-women-could-seek-star-pills-abortion-025122442.html
More Texas Women Could Seek 'Star Pills' for Abortion
7/15/13

Dr. Lester Minto raised four daughters in South Texas, just miles from the Mexican border, where most women are Hispanic and 3 out of 5 girls are pregnant before they reach adulthood.

"My wife died and I raised them on my own," said Minto, 64, who made sure his girls had access to birth control. "Not a single one of mine got pregnant."

For the last three decades, Minto, a family physician and advocate for women, has owned the Reproductive Services clinic in Harlingen, Texas, which performs about 1,500 to 2,000 abortions a year.

But now, with the stringent new anti-abortion law that just passed the Texas legislature, he worries that the women he serves, those from "deep" Texas and Mexico, will turn in greater numbers to do-it-yourself remedy for an unwanted pregnancy -- misoprostol, which goes under the name Cytotec.

The drug, used off-label in medical abortions, is smuggled in by relatives from Mexico to begin a miscarriage -- or what Hispanic women call, "bringing your period down," according to Minto.

"They get things started, then show up in the emergency room and avoid the negative image of having done an abortion," said Minto.

Hispanic women have the highest rate of unwanted pregnancies nationwide -- about 54 percent, according to Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas, executive director of the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health. Many are uninsured and speak no English.

"With an increase of barriers mounting, what we are hearing is that a lot of women are turning to other folks they know who can smuggle [misoprostol] over the border or are finding it in flea markets," said Gonzalez-Rojas.

"It's the kind of thing -- people know where to get it and are very quiet. While it's not the most dangerous drug, there are a lot of questions about how to take it appropriately. We have tremendous concerns when women take their health into their own hands."

And it's not just women in Texas, according to Gonzalez-Rojas.

"There are lots of cases throughout the country of low-income women, even in New York City, using misoprostol or Cytotec," she said. "I think it's more about the stigma that exists around abortion and they get a lot of mixed messages and turn to underground methods."

Misoprostol, a prostaglandin inhibitor, is usually used as part of a two-part, FDA-approved medical abortion with mifepristone or RU486. Alone, it is routinely used off-label for obstetrical and gynecological procedures such as cervical ripening, labor induction and mid-trimester terminations. It can be used to induce miscarriage, typically up to nine weeks, but can also be safely given in through the second semester.

In combination, the two drugs are 95 to 97 percent effective. Taken alone, misoprostol is only 80 to 85 percent effective, and is suspected of causing birth defects if it fails.

After care is critical to ensure the pregnancy tissue is expelled to prevent infection. In a worst-case scenario, if a woman has placenta previa, (when a baby's placenta partially or totally covers the mother's cervix) she can bleed to death if the drug is used alone[/color].

In 2007, a Massachusetts teenager took misoprostol in an attempt to induce a miscarriage at 25 weeks and the 1-pound baby was delivered prematurely and died. Amber Abreu, who was 18, faced murder charges that were later dismissed.
 
"If done properly and done in combination, they are safe," said Minto. But alone, misoprostol "doesn't work that well."

"It's kind of like a cheap cure for a radiator leak," he said. "Its efficacy rate is about 30 percent when used alone and improperly. But even though I don't approve of it, I can't criticize it. I would probably try the same if I were in a situation like these women."

Misoprostol is more readily available than mifepristone because it is prescribed to prevent gastric ulcers.

Hispanic women call them "star pills" for their hexagonal shape and they are commonly used in Latin America, where abortion is illegal, turning a shameful procedure into something that looks like a miscarriage. American immigrants can obtain them for about $2 a pill from relatives in overseas bodegas and pharmacies, according to Gonzalez-Rojas.

The Texas law, backed by Republican Gov. Rick Perry, is one of the strictest in the United States. It bans abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy and hold clinics like Minto's to the same physical standards as hospital surgical centers.

Its supporters say that the strengthened regulations for the structures and doctors will protect women's health.

Rep. Jason Villalba, a Republican from Dallas, said the new law will not have a negative impact on low-income women, as critics have suggested.

"I am pro-life, but no one is denying Roe v. Wade is the law of the land," he said. "But if we are going to provide a procedure, then the state has the right to regulate how it's done to protect our women who receive this procedure
.

**So this he saying this bill isn't anti-abortion/pro-life to begin with?

Mat_12:34  O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.


"We want women to have the same kind of surgical care, for instance, if they have an appendix or tonsils removed," said Villalba.

One of the new regulations is that abortion providers are located within 30 miles of a hospital.

"If something goes awry," he said, "it's a serious procedure -- we want the doctor to be able to get to a hospital quickly and provide care."

Villalba wouldn't answer questions directly about the possibility of more women using these pills, but argued more broadly that clinics that can't comply with new regulations will "fall by the wayside." Villalba insisted women who choose abortion will still have access. He said opponents of the bill have exaggerated the numbers of clinics that will close.

"Here's the good news," Villalba said. "The clinics [that] remain after the dust is settled will have new standards to protect women."


But advocates like Gonzalez-Rojas say the new law is "an affront on women."

"What we know is that with the increase of barriers mounting, the limited clinics down there are likely going to close if they face all these regulations," she said. "Women get put in desperate situations. We don't know how the black market will turn out, so they might get something that isn't the right drug. We are fighting the laws to make sure women get access to care."

The bill was opposed by many doctors, including leaders of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Texas Medical Association.

About 1 in 3 American women will have an abortion by the time they reach 45, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which advocates for sexual and reproductive health and rights. In the first six months of 2013, states enacted 43 restrictions on access to abortion.

In Texas, the abortion rate has remained steady since 2005. The rate in 2008, the last year for which there are statistics, was lower than in the rest of the country: about 16.5 abortions per 1,000 women, aged 15 to 44. The national rate for that year was 19.6.
 
"You begin to discover the devil is in the details," said Minto, who said he will either have to close down his clinic or move his practice to Mexico.

With new regulations, the procedure for a medical abortion takes three days: A woman must get a sonogram and an explanation of the procedure. Twenty-four hours later, she gets the first pill -- RU 486 or mifepristone, a hormone blocker that makes the fetus unviable. After another 24 hours, the woman must return so the doctor can give her misoprostol, which causes the uterus to contract and expel the fetus.

Until the new law, as is the standard practice in other states, women take the second pill at home and then have a follow up visit with the doctor.

"It's added another doctor visit and, if you live 250 miles away or more, you have to stay in a hotel," he said.

Some women in Texas live as far as to 900 miles from an abortion clinic.

Minto said the safety record and his certification inspections over the last three decades have been "impeccable." He charges women less than $500 for a procedure -- either medical or surgical abortion.

"If you have a case of ****, it's tough," he said. "Where do you send innocent 12, 12, 13-year-old girls? What do they do? I thought about those girls in Cleveland who were held hostage. According to Texas law, if they get pregnant, after 20 weeks, forget it. We have just gone to Taliban Texas."

The next step will be a court challenge to the new law, but Minto is undaunted.

"My licensed abortion clinic has to close," said Minto, "But I'll never give up helping women. I am not a quitter."


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on July 18, 2013, 11:42:21 am
GOV. PERRY SIGNS SWEEPING ABORTION RESTRICTIONS

Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed sweeping new abortion restrictions on Thursday that could shutter most of the clinics in the state.

More than 100 Republican lawmakers attended the signing ceremony with a small band of protesters outside dressed in black and holding a sign that read, "Shame." The legislation had sparked weeks of protests at the state Capitol.

The new law bans abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy and dictates when abortion-inducing drugs can be taken. But it also requires abortion clinic doctors to have hospital admitting privileges and restricts abortions to surgical centers. Only five of Texas' 42 abortion clinics currently meet the new requirements.

The law will take effect in October and clinics will have a year to upgrade their facilities or shutdown. Perry said the new law "builds upon our commitment to protecting life in the state of Texas."

The governor and other top Republican politicians in the state made passing the law a top priority, in part to please supporters before the primary election in March. They failed to pass the bill last month on the last day of a special legislative session because of a Democratic state senator's lengthy filibuster and a raucous crowd. But they were successful last week after Perry called a second special session to get the bill approved.

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said Thursday that the "radical left" had inflicted "intentional chaos" that delayed the bill's initial passage. He credited prayer and even "the hand of God" in making Thursday's event happen, as about 25 protesters could be heard chanting "Shame! Shame! Shame!" out in the hallway.

Supporters of the law argue that it will ensure high-quality health care for women and fetuses, but opponents view it as over-regulation intended to make abortions harder to obtain.

Federal judges have blocked enforcement of similar measures in other states, questioning their constitutionality. Opponents are expected to file similar suits in Texas now that Perry has signed the law.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ABORTION_RESTRICTIONS_TEXAS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-07-18-11-10-54


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 18, 2013, 01:46:51 pm
FYI, Texas was never really this "conservative pro-life" state everyone tries to make it out to be. As for this bill, I'll believe it when I see it.

George W. Bush
Former President of the U.S. (R)
Tier 4 - Personhood Never

President George W. Bush did not introduce, lobby for, nor sign any law that acknowledged the right to life and so could stop the killing of even a single child. Instead he had an enormous pro-abortion influence, e.g., giving Planned Parenthood hundreds of millions of dollars more than did even Bill Clinton.

As a Republican President Whom Pro-lifers Elected: George W. Bush did much to destroy innocent human life, as easily documented:
- by his own policies Bush approved of the killing of 3,340,624 children, see calculator below
- his judges on the Texas supreme court gave that state its most pro-abortion ruling ever
- his judges, with those of the two previous pro-life presidents, voted to starve to death Terri Schiavo
- he and his two pro-life predecessors nominated a majority of the federal judiciary, which is pro-choice
- although a consummate compromiser, he refused to support South Dakota's 2006 abortion ban
- he hurt even more children by telling ABC he won't support protection of kids if some cannot be killed
- he still gave no public support even after South Dakota immorally added his "exceptions" to a 2008 bill
- he kept his very first campaign promise which was that he would nominate many pro-choice judges
- he kept his presidential debate promise to not oppose the chemical designed to killBush photo op with prop children, RU-486
- he never tried to outlaw the grisly stem cell research on the tiniest children
- he became the first president to fund embryonic stem cell research
- he publicly advocated a ban on human cloning but then killed that ban when it finally had its chance
- he believes not every child should be protected by love and by law
- he thinks a doctor should stop caring for a mom in crisis just long enough to kill her child
- he supports the position that started the abortion holocaust, that children of rapists can be killed
- his only absolute stand on life is his fight to keep it "legal" to kill those he says have no right to life
- he never told the truth that the partial-birth abortion ban would not stop a single scheduled abortion
- he rejects the God-given right to life and believes rather that he can decide if a child could be killed
- he wanted to nominate pro-abortion Alberto Gonzales to the Supreme Court for life but was thwarted
- he is proud of the pro-choice judges he has nominated, and never named one who held to a right to life
- he is unable to name a single sitting Supreme Court justice who ever acknowledged the right to life
- he is proud to attend the same post-modern denomination (and church) as Hillary Clinton
- he was helped by his wife staying quiet on her pro-choice views until a day after his election
- he is proud of the openly pro-abortion Bush women, mother, wife and daughters
- he hurt the 2008 Republican convention by permitting only pro-abortion prime time speakers in 2004
- he surrounded himself with pro-choice officials boosting the careers of those who kill children
- his religious conversion is linked to becoming the evangelical liaison for his father's presidential campaign
- and predictably, though against the promise of Nat'l RTL,  he gave hundreds of millions of dollars more to Planned Parenthood than Bill Clinton ever did, a .
 Sources below, many of them primary, document the shocking and horrific Bush abortion legacy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

After all, the pro-life industry had all along given him a pass for promoting pro-abortion judges, including Alberto Gonzales while Bush was Governor of Texas.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 18, 2013, 01:53:53 pm
^^ More on this from another link source...

http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1978.cfm
PRESIDENT BUSH STABS CHRISTIAN VOTERS IN THE HEART AS HE NOMINATES PRO-ABORTION JUDGE TO BE THE NEXT ATTORNEY GENERAL

Excerpt:

NEWS BRIEF: "Pro-lifers not thrilled with Gonzales choice: Bush's pick for attorney general upheld abortion on Texas court", WorldNetDaily, November 10, 2004

"Pro-life activists are criticizing President Bush's choice of Alberto Gonzales to replace John Ashcroft as attorney general, worrying the White House counsel will not aggressively uphold the administration's anti-abortion stance. Gonzales is a former member of the Texas Supreme Court, where he voted to allow a teenager to get an abortion without notifying her parents, circumventing the notification law in that state ... Chuck Baldwin, a pastor and columnist, slammed Gonzales, citing the Texas case and stating, 'Gonzales is anything but pro-life'."

Did you catch the most important point? Alberto Gonzales voted to circumvent existing law in the state of Texas! When a Judge of a State Supreme Court votes to override clear law instead of just interpreting that law, this nation is in real trouble. Texas law forbade a pregnant teen to get an abortion without notifying her parents. The law was firm and unambiguous. Yet, Judge Gonzales voted to side-step that firm, clear law. If an ordinary citizen side-steps a law, we call him a criminal and arrest him; but when a sitting judge does the same thing, he is merely called an "activist judge".

Not only is this judicial activism at its worst -- which President Bush says he will not allow -- but Gonzales identified himself by his decision as a bold Liberal pro-abortionist.





Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 18, 2013, 02:43:22 pm
I also read an article recently over how the reason these states are largely passing these restrictive anti-abortion bills is b/c of the 2014 midterm elections next year.

Pt being that do NOT be fooled by this carrot they hang out over how we need to go out and vote in order to make the world a better place. We've been down this route many times before - remember the whole "culture wars" that went on for many years, where they used social conservative issues like abortion and pro-family to divide the country in these election years, and then ALL BY DESIGN, it ended up blowing up in everyone's faces in the long run.

And like discussed in other threads(and this one), these same groups and state governments all but sat on their hands and did nothing BEFORE Obama got into office.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 19, 2013, 04:06:53 am
I read in my paper today that Rick Santorum came down to help out passing this bill - really, how did this Knights of Malta member get involved with this now?

Santorum to jump into Texas abortion ban battle
7/9/13
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/07/09/santorum-to-jump-into-texas-abortion-ban-battle/


Rick Santorum
Presidential Candidate
Tier 2 - Personhood Whenever


Rick Santorum attempts to protect the innocent yet he undermines and therefore delays the country's enforcement of the God-given right to life of unborn children by defending abortion regulations that end with words that say, in effect, "and then you can kill the baby."

Santorum Violates Pledge with Child Killing Regulations: Rick Santorum's campaign site continues to praise and advocate for legislation that regulates the killing of children including for example the Partial Birth Abortion "Ban", the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act, and regarding the abortion drug, for the RU-486 Patient Health and Safety Protection Act. Each of these regulations in effect end with words, "and then you can kill the baby." The 15-year PBA ban fiasco raised a quarter of a billion dollars as a fund-raiser but as Dr. James Dobson wrote:

<skip>

Santorum Recommends Anesthetic for Holocaust Victims Before Killing: Motivated by well-meaning but morally backward ideas, unfortunately, Rick Santorum advocates The Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act by euphemistically describing giving the child a painkiller before killing her, as, "allowing the child to be treated for that pain."4 This Act is a violation of God's enduring command, Do Not Murder, because as all regulations re-authorize behavior, after offering anesthetic the abortionist is then given permission to kill even this late-term baby. And by the law of unintended consequences, legislating anesthesia for the child will also encourage some mothers to go ahead and abort their children, for it will alleviate the guilt of some who will convince themselves, "At least my baby won't feel pain." Abortion regulations make it harder to end abortion because they make child killing appear more reasonable to the public and humane. And a fetal pain bill makes even late-term abortion appear to be more socially palatable. Abortion regulations that become "law" will even keep such killings legal for years to come if Roe v. Wade is ever merely overturned (short of personhood passing), for then all state abortion regulations will keep the abortion clinic doors open, for every one of them end with: "and then you can kill the baby."

Summary: Even though Rick Santorum signed the Personhood Pledge, he still doesn't understand this most basic concept of just government: the right to life. He is in favor of enforcing personhood but he is also willing to regulate child killing, which regulations themselves undermine the eventual personhood victory. "Child killing regulations just prune the abortion weed, and strengthen its root," says Jason Troyer of Colorado Right To Life. So like pruning one's favorite bush to make it grow strong, as leading abortion advocates are urging (see AmericanRTL.org/regs), let's regulate the procedure and we will make it appear more reasonable and humane and it this way pro-lifers will unintentionally "keep abortion legal."


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 22, 2013, 06:18:19 am
Here's a passage in Isaiah thought I wanted to share - it seems like it's come to a point where everyone is in this "compromising" mode now. The new anti-abortion laws some of these states are pushing through are just MERELY restrictions? Again, why can't they just pass laws banning them completely?

Isaiah 59:1  Behold, the LORD'S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:
Isa 59:2  But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.
Isa 59:3  For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perverseness.
Isa 59:4  None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.
Isa 59:5  They hatch cockatrice' eggs, and weave the spider's web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper.
Isa 59:6  Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hands.
Isa 59:7  Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are in their paths.
Isa 59:8  The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.
Isa 59:9  Therefore is judgment far from us, neither doth justice overtake us: we wait for light, but behold obscurity; for brightness, but we walk in darkness.


Yes, like mentioned in previous posts, these GOP-runned state governments like TX, AL, AR, ND, etc had their chances under Reagan/Bushes for years and years to push these anti-abortion laws, but they just sat on their hands and did nothing. And even worse, Churchianity just stood back and did nothing all of these years, despite them insisting we needed to vote for Republican candidates.

Dunno, but even these new anti-abortion laws calling for MERE "restrictions" is still coming short of justice in this land. And as a result, they are conceiving mischief and bringing for iniquity.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 22, 2013, 06:40:16 am
More potential proof that what we're seeing now is likely nothing more than a puppet show(yes, I know both political "parties" are one and the same, but nonetheless look at the players involved)...

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/5643-planned-parenthood-republicans-a-decades-long-history
Wednesday, 16 March 2011 13:35   
Planned Parenthood Republicans: A Decades-Long History


Trends within politics rarely occur in a vacuum. Instead, they develop within a broader ideological and historical context, which accounts for individual elected officials’ political motivations to this very day. Planned Parenthood, for instance, has always enjoyed the support of a notable component of the Republican Party, especially its moderate or Rockefeller wing, comprised of influential Establishment elitists, internationalists, and environmentalists.
 
The seven Republicans who voted in favor of retaining federal funding for Planned Parenthood, in addition to Senators Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, and Olympia Snowe, all hail from this tradition. Beyond their obvious support for pro-choice causes, these individuals are also characterized by a commitment to centrist policies and fiscal largesse — all indicative of their opposition to the principles of traditional, constitutional government.

Ever since its earliest days, Planned Parenthood has counted among its supporters prominent members of the Republican Party. As early as 1942, Connecticut Senator Prescott Bush (picture, above), grandfather of President George W. Bush, was a supporter of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League, and in 1947, served as the treasurer for the first national campaign for Planned Parenthood. The political repercussions hit hard. Prescott Bush was knocked out of an expected victory for a Senate seat in Connecticut in 1950 after syndicated columnist Drew Pearson declared that it "has been made known" that Bush was a leader in the "Birth Control Society" (the original name of Planned Parenthood was the Birth Control Federation of America). Prescott Bush won a Senate seat two years later, and his son George and daughter-in-law Barbara continued to support Planned Parenthood even after George's election to Congress from Texas. In fact, he was such an advocate for family planning that some House colleagues nicknamed him "Rubbers."

In addition, Prescott’s son George H.W. also supported family planning efforts while serving as a Texas congressman. President George H.W. Bush was best known for his opposition to Ronald Reagan’s supply-side economics, rooted in the free-market ideas of Hayek and Friedman, deriding the conservative Reagan as a proponent of “voodoo economics.” He wrote a constituent in 1970: “I introduced legislation earlier this year which would provide federal funds for research in family planning devices and increased services to people who need them but cannot afford them. We must help our young people become aware of the fact that families can be planned and that there are benefits economically and socially to be derived from small families.” ("George Bush to Mrs. Jim Hunter, Jr., Oct. 23, 1970" [Virginia B. Whitehill Papers, DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist University].)

**George HW did so while serving as Congressman in TEXAS? Hhhhmmm...again, look at the roots going back...don't think TX was ever an anti-abortion state to begin with.

Although stemming from the opposite wing of the GOP, the Goldwater family of Arizona also supported Planned Parenthood. In his final term in the U.S. Senate, Barry Goldwater adopted a pro-choice position, voting in 1983 against a constitutional amendment that would have reversed Roe v. Wade and returned legislative authority over abortion to the states. Back in 1937, his wife Peggy had become a founding member of Planned Parenthood of Arizona, and the couple remained active in the organization throughout Goldwater's Senate career. Though he initially rejected Planned Parenthood's position on abortion, his long association with the group would ultimately make a convert of him, also as he personally approved of his daughter Joanne’s illegal abortion in 1955, as recounted in the HBO documentary Mr. Conservative.

When she was in her 30s, Peggy Goldwater met Margaret Sanger and became part of a small group organizing Phoenix's first birth control clinic, called the Mothers' Health Clinic. Mrs.  Goldwater developed a very strong commitment to the birth control movement which continued throughout her life. When she died in 1985, the Planned Parenthood Press (Planned Parenthood Arizona's newsletter), lauded her for her commitment to contraceptive access and developed an award in her honor.

Yet another prominent Republican family has a history of supporting Planned Parenthood. Former Massachusetts Governor and current Presidential contender Mitt Romney has had a convoluted and revealing history on life issues, as well as in his relationship with Planned Parenthood. In 1994, when Romney first ran for public office, he was observed attending a Planned Parenthood fundraiser in Cohasset, Massachusetts, with his wife Ann, who was seen handing a check for $150 from a joint bank account to Nicki Nichols ****, former president of the Massachusetts Planned Parenthood Federation.

**Yes, even Churchianity supported Mitt Romney last year!

Romney has flip-flopped egregiously on the question of abortion. In 2002, he announced that he supported a “woman’s right to choose,” and in 1994, said he supported Roe v. Wade. Later that year, according to the Boston Herald, he "came down more firmly in the abortion rights camp,” declaring his support for the "morning after" pill and a federal bill protecting visitors to health clinics from anti-abortion violence. In a debate later that year against Ted Kennedy, Romney said that he had supported abortion rights consistently since 1970 when his mother Lenore ran as a pro-abortion rights candidate for the U.S. Senate in Michigan. He linked his support for abortion rights to the death "many years ago" of a "dear, close family relative" following a botched illegal abortion. "You will not see me wavering on that," he added.

Later in 2002, Romney claimed he would "preserve and protect" abortion rights in Massachusetts, and told activists from NARAL Pro Choice America that “you need someone like me in Washington," according to notes taken by a member of NARAL. NARAL officials interpreted this as a reference to his national political ambitions. In addition, he answered "yes" in a questionnaire from Planned Parenthood in 2002 on whether he would support "efforts to increase access to emergency contraception."

In an interview with On The Issues, Romney straddled the fence, saying: "I believe from a political perspective that life begins at conception. I don't pretend to know, if you will, from a theological standpoint when life begins. I'd committed to the people of Massachusetts that I would not change the laws one way or the other, and I honored that commitment." (Emphasis added.)

To this day, Planned Parenthood sponsors a special interest group, Planned Parenthood Republicans for Choice, which gives the annual Barry Goldwater Award to a pro-choice Republican elected official of its choosing. Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.) was the 2009 recipient, and now-Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) was the 2008 recipient. Rep. Bob Dold (R-Ill.), who was endorsed by the group Republican Majority for Choice and  was one of seven Republicans to vote for PPFA funding, currently holds Senator Mark Kirk’s former House seat in a left-leaning Chicago suburb. Interestingly, the co-chair of the organization, Randy Moody, was a former chief lobbyist and executive within the ultra-liberal teachers union, the National Education Association (NEA).

**Odd how conservatives throughout all of these years have put Goldwater up on a pedestial as being a long-time traditional conservative. ::)

Planned Parenthood Republicans for Choice has been issuing the self-contradictory Barry Goldwater Award since 1995, and almost all of the awardees come from the steady, yet dwindling presence of so-called moderates within the Republican Party, who are proponents of "centrism" and lack a genuine commitment to the principles of limited, constitutional government (which Barry Goldwater upheld throughout his entire life).

Despite his support for "reproductive rights," (the right to have an abortion) Goldwater is nonetheless remembered as a proponent of constitutional conservatism, placing him as an historical and ideological opponent of those who are ironically being honored in his name. Just as Goldwater’s principal adversary was former New York Governor Nelson D. Rockefeller, those who are recipients of this award would have been Goldwater’s political foes in the GOP, as they stem from the party’s "moderate" (neoconservative) wing, as opposed to Goldwater’s Old Right, constitutionalist, free-market, individualist libertarian tradition. That Old Right tradition is espoused by many in the Tea Party today, such as pro-life Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who has advocated stricter crackdowns on abortion-on-demand.

The history of the Republican Party, to a degree, is shaped by a long record of GOP icons supporting the pro-abortion, socially-liberal causes of groups including Planned Parenthood. With the unitary exception of Barry Goldwater (whose support of Planned Parenthood was motivated by a libertarian belief in governmental non-involvement in human reproduction), these Planned Parenthood Republicans are also committed to other left-wing causes, such as Mitt Romney's support of universal health carewhen he was Massachusetts governor, affectionately called "RomneyCare."  The commitment to the inexorably-linked "seamless garment" of fiscal and social conservatism, championed by figures such as Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) has not always been a paradigm at home in the Republican Party.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, not that I'm trying to start a left/right paradigm smackdown debate, but nonetheless look at the ROOTS of this wickedness, and where they trace back.

Hosea 4:6  My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

Yes, it's important to know who your enemies are. I know we don't war against flesh and blood, but nonetheless it should drive anyone crazy when you hear these modern-day Christian ministries continually tie Obama/Hillary to Margaret Sanger, like they're the only conspirators.(no, not defending Obama and Hillary, but just saying)

Job 4:8  Even as I have seen, they that plow iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same.
Job 4:9  By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of his nostrils are they consumed.


Prov 22:7  The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.
Pro 22:8  He that soweth iniquity shall reap vanity: and the rod of his anger shall fail.


Matthew 20:25  But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on July 22, 2013, 06:44:02 am
MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry Dons Tampon Earrings To Protest Texas Abortion Bill

Some filibuster abortion bills, some march against them, and some wear tampons on their ears.

On her MSNBC show Sunday morning, Melissa Harris-Perry brought attention to Texas’ recently-passed abortion regulations—and the burnt orange-clad demonstrators who had fought their passage—in her own way: with a pair of homemade tampon earrings.

“My producer Lorena made for me last week some tampon earrings,” Harris-Perry said as she put on the jewelry. “The Texas state legislature said that you couldn’t bring tampons in, when these women were going to, in fact, stand up for their own reproductive rights.”

During a second special session of the Texas legislature, security in the Capitol building briefly banned tampons from the rotunda for fear that the feminine products would be tossed at lawmakers passing the last-minute bill. The earlier protests had been so disruptive that Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst had been unable to call a vote on the bill, resulting in an embarrassing but temporary setback for Texas Republicans, who vowed not to let demonstrators get the better of them again. But Capitol security got a bit overzealous in confiscating tampons from female protestors, a policy they quickly reversed after it garnered national attention.

“So just in case that ever happens again, ladies, you can just bring them on your earrings,” Harris-Perry said.

Watch the clip below, via MSNBC:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/melissa-harris-perry-dons-tampon-earrings-to-protest-texas-abortion-bill/

Quote
On her MSNBC show Sunday morning, Melissa Harris-Perry brought attention to Texas’ recently-passed abortion regulations—and the burnt orange-clad demonstrators who had fought their passage

It was the ones in OARNGE that were
Abortion Activists Shout “F— the Church” During Chants at Texas Capitol
http://endtimesandcurrentevents.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,8948.msg37880.html#msg37880

and
Texas Pro-Abortion Protesters Chant 'Hail Satan!'
http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/07/02/Pro-Aborts-Chant-Hail-Satan-At-Texas-State-Capitol-As-Pro-Lifers-Sing-Amazing-Grace?utm

Maybe instead of tampons, she should have worn her BAAL priestess outfit soaked in the blood of dead sacrificed babies


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 22, 2013, 07:18:29 am
Yes, it's important to know who your enemies are. I know we don't war against flesh and blood, but nonetheless it should drive anyone crazy when you hear these modern-day Christian ministries continually tie Obama/Hillary to Margaret Sanger, like they're the only conspirators.(no, not defending Obama and Hillary, but just saying)

Another thing - part of the end times deceptions, since the 1980's in particular, has been to deceive Christians into thinking we have to be political active in order to save this country. This is exactly what these David Barton/Glenn Beck types have been deceiving everyone into thinking they should be doing. However, all they are doing is keeping Christians in the dark over the globalist agendas being implemented by our government, especially when a GOP politician is in office.(ie-they've been quietly implementing GMO foods, forced vaccinations, Big Pharma, etc, and for that matter too quietly legalizing abortion and the homosexual agenda all of these years)

John_18:36  Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on July 25, 2013, 06:47:41 am
This is the spirit you get when you reject the Lord in Romans 1, oh they were also OARNGE SHIRTS, so...

Teen Girl Defends Sign Saying “Jesus Isn’t a D—, Keep Him Out of My ****”

During the pro-abortion protests leading up to the Texas vote on the late-term abortion ban, the Internet was shocked to see a young girl hold a sign saying “Jesus Isn’t a D—, Keep Him Out of May ****.”
 
Earlier this month, a man on Twitter accepted responsibility for the sign, saying his young daughter made it and had her friend hold it. Billy Joe Cain is an Austin resident who is a video game producer and has no problem with young girls holding vulgar signs referring to sexual parts. In fact, he said he is “proud” of her.
 
Now, the teen girl behind the sign is defending it.
 
In a blog post, the teen, Tuesday Cain, says:
 
I also believe in the right to choose and the separation of church and state. Or to put it another way — to put it the way I wrote it when I was protesting at the Capitol last week:
 
“Jesus isn’t a **** so keep him out of my ****.”
 
Yes, that’s my sign.
 
I came up with it last week when my friend and I were trying to think of ideas for what would get people’s attention to protest the scary restrictions that are happening in my state trying to take away a woman’s right to safe and accessible abortions. you mean to murder babies to BAAL, as that is all it is. Its not anything else at all.
 
It worked.
 
When my friend and I took turns holding the sign, one of the pictures of her went viral.
 
Then my dad went online to defend the sign on Twitter and other online forums.
 
That’s when people started calling me a “****.”
 
Tuesday goes on to complain about the name people called her and saying she has no plans to have sex, despite producing a sign that talks about sexual parts.
 
She also goes on to admit that one person she knows who has had abortions regrets her decision and is now pro-life. Cain hasn’t learned from that woman’s abortion experience but, instead, uses it as a reason to promote abortion.
 
I know someone who has had a few abortions. She now says that abortion is bad and she fights against a woman’s right to choose.
 
This makes it all the more important for me to protest, even if I am only 14.
 
Nowhere in her post does Cain admit that the bill she opposes would kill babies past the point of viability and up to the day of birth. Instead, she uses Christianity to support her position — forgetting the Biblical commandment not to kill.
 
Writing at National Review, Jay Nordlinger responds to the teen’s blog post:
 
There are a million things to say about this dear girl, and her sign, but one of them is this: What does that “****” business mean, exactly? I’m no anatomist, but don’t babies form in the womb? The thing is, a lot of these pro-choice folk regard abortion as a form of birth control, right?
 
And it is, really: No baby, no birth.
 
Ted Kennedy used to say that anti-abortion people were invading “our bedrooms.” I thought that was an interesting way of putting it. I have no doubt that Kennedy thought of abortion as birth control. Ted used the same method to get rid of unwanted woman

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/24/teen-girl-defends-sign-saying-jesus-isnt-a-d-keep-him-out-of-my-****/

http://tinyurl.com/lkm9bwt


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 05, 2013, 05:33:35 pm
Here we go again - but guess this shouldn't come as a surprise as the courts system has been compromised...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/aug/31/abortion-rick-perry
8/5/13
Abortion law sonogram clause proposal rejected by US judge

Court rejects key parts of Texas governor's anti-abortion law plans, including making women listen to baby's heartbeat


A court has blocked key parts of a Texas anti-abortion law drawn up by Rick Perry, the state's governor and the leading Republican presidential candidate, which would force women seeking terminations to view a sonogram and listen to the heartbeat of their foetus.

A federal court judge also struck down a requirement that doctors describe the unborn baby to the mother in the hope that she would change her mind about an abortion. The judge said the provisions were an unconstitutional intrusion on the rights of women and doctors.

Perry designated the law, which would have taken effect on Thursday, as an "emergency issue", fast-tracking it through the legislature earlier this year.

He has a clear lead in polls of Republican primary voters as the party's presidential candidate. Opponents say he has used the law to demonstrate his anti-abortion credentials to conservatives and the Christian right, and to create an election issue.

Perry has also drawn criticism for the unusual degree of government intrusion into a personal decision, not least because he is a vigorous critic of regulation. He has promised that, if elected, he will make the government in Washington mostly "inconsequential" to people's lives.

The judge, Sam Sparks, said it was not legal to force either women or doctors to meet the requirements relating to viewing the sonogram and listening to the baby's heartbeat. He also struck down a provision that could strip a doctor of a licence to practise for failing to comply.

"The act compels physicians to advance an ideological agenda with which they may not agree, regardless of any medical necessity, and irrespective of whether the pregnant women wish to listen," the judge said. "[It] violates the first amendment [of the US constitution, guaranteeing free speech] by compelling physicians and patients to engage in government-mandated speech and expression."

The law exempted women pregnant through **** or incest, but only if they made an objection in writing. The court blocked this part of the legislation, too.

"The court need not belabour the obvious by explaining why, for instance, women who are pregnant as a result of sexual assault or incest may not wish to certify that fact in writing, particularly if they are too afraid of retaliation to even report the matter to police," Sparks said.

The Centre for Reproductive Rights, which brought the case to block the legislation, called the ruling a huge victory, saying that politicians did not have the right to interfere in how doctors practised medicine, or in women's private medical decisions.

Perry denounced the ruling, which is expected to go to the supreme court on appeal. "Every life lost to abortion is a tragedy and today's ruling is a great disappointment to all Texans who stand in defence of life," he said. "This important sonogram legislation ensures that every Texas woman seeking an abortion has all the facts about the life she is carrying, and understands the devastating impact of such a life-changing decision."

But the ruling is likely to help Perry by giving him fuel for the argument that power should lie with state governments rather than the courts or Washington.

Critics have noted that Perry showed little interest in abortion when a member of the Texas legislature, but embraced it when he became governor in 2000.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 05, 2013, 05:38:45 pm
Quote
The judge, Sam Sparks, said it was not legal to force either women or doctors to meet the requirements relating to viewing the sonogram and listening to the baby's heartbeat. He also struck down a provision that could strip a doctor of a licence to practise for failing to comply.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Sparks

Sparks was nominated by President George H.W. Bush on October 1, 1991, to a new seat created by 104 Stat. 5089. He was confirmed by the Senate on November 21, 1991, and received his commission on November 25, 1991.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Kilika on August 06, 2013, 02:36:12 am
Quote
"The act compels physicians to advance an ideological agenda with which they may not agree, regardless of any medical necessity, and irrespective of whether the pregnant women wish to listen," the judge said. "[It] violates the first amendment [of the US constitution, guaranteeing free speech] by compelling physicians and patients to engage in government-mandated speech and expression."

Nobody can tell me that isn't a judge that just ruled based on bias, and not law.

Here's why..."act compels physicians to advance an ideological agenda...regardless of medical necessity...whether the pregnant women wish to listen".

That right there. Now they say regardless of medical necessity? Uh, There are requirements of doctors to inform the patient of their medical condition, the risks of the condition, etc.

To inform the woman of her medical condition and the associated risks of both keeping and terminating a pregnancy is not advancing an agenda! In fact, it's supporting a woman's right to choose, having the patient fully educated about their health situation so that they can make an informed decision about their own health.

It's not the patients they are protecting from an agenda, it's the abortion clinics they are protecting, so the clinics won't have to inform the patients that they are in fact killing a child. They want the women to not think of the "medical condition" as an unborn child, but as a malady to be treated.



Show a woman a sonogram and have her listen to it's heartbeat changes all that and they know it. The clinics don't want women to even consider what an abortion is really doing.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 30, 2013, 12:49:54 pm
http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/abortion-rules-advance-without-approval-from-advis/nZgn3/

Posted: 5:19 p.m. Thursday, Aug. 29, 2013

Abortion rules advance without approval from advisory board

Proposed abortion rules, written in response to the sweeping regulations Gov. Rick Perry signed into law in July, moved forward Thursday — but not in the expected way.

The State Health Services Council, a nine-member advisory panel, declined to vote on the proposed rules at a morning meeting as members pointedly declined to second a motion for approval.

What point they were trying to make, however, is a mystery. Members of the council quickly left the dais, with several declining to explain their decision. No motion for approval had failed for lack of a second in recent memory, said Carrie Williams, spokeswoman for the Department of State Health Services.

The lack of a vote did not slow progress of the rules toward final approval. They were sent to Health and Human Services Commission Kyle Janek, who will approve their publication in the Texas Register, triggering a 30-day period for written public comments, an agency spokeswoman said.

The rules were drafted by the Department of State Health Services, which regulates abortion clinics, to enact House Bill 2, which as of Oct. 29 will ban abortions after 20 weeks post-fertilization, require abortion doctors to have admitting privileges in a nearby hospital and require women seeking a drug-induced abortion to make four clinic visits instead of three.

A requirement that abortion clinics meet the same standards as ambulatory surgical centers will take effect Sept. 1, 2014.

During public comments Thursday, many of the 20 people who spoke against the rules urged the council to soften surgical center requirements that were described as unnecessary, onerous and designed to force clinics to close — including 8-feet-wide hallways, large operating rooms and male locker rooms.

Two council members asked if such changes could be implemented.

Agency lawyer Lisa Hernandez said the new law gave the council no leeway in modifying the surgical standards or make other suggested changes, including granting waivers or time extensions to existing abortion clinics.




Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 30, 2013, 12:52:41 pm
Quote
A requirement that abortion clinics meet the same standards as ambulatory surgical centers will take effect Sept. 1, 2014.

So this starts in September of NEXT YEAR? Seriously, that's MORE than a year from now(slightly, albeit). Wow...pretty much everyone working for Caesar is not who you think they are! ::)


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Kilika on August 30, 2013, 01:24:56 pm
Quote
What point they were trying to make, however, is a mystery. Members of the council quickly left the dais, with several declining to explain their decision. No motion for approval had failed for lack of a second in recent memory, said Carrie Williams, spokeswoman for the Department of State Health Services.

Not a mystery to me. That is classic politician disassociation from a bill, and at the same time not preventing it's passage. They have realized that if they can just weather the initial storm over a bill, it will soon blow over, and on to the next topic of the day, though the voting record remains, their part becomes clouded in history as the record only shows a vote, or non-vote. Political cowardice as I see it.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on August 31, 2013, 03:40:05 pm
'Choice: Texas' Abortion Video Game Encourages Players to Overcome Obstacles to Have an Abortion

An "abortion video game" designed to show the obstacles Texan women face when pursuing the procedure has sparked controversy, with pro-life supporters claiming it completely fails to acknowledge the life at stake and offers no voice to the unborn baby.
 
"I am saddened by this game," Emily Horne, a lobbyist for Texas Right to Life and a Texas native, said in a recent interview with Polygon. "It reduces abortion to a dry, simplistic view and it completely ignores the voice of the unborn baby, who obviously has no voice or perspective in this at all."
 
The game, called "Choice: Texas, A Very Serious Game," is in its developmental stages and involves players embarking on a quest to navigate past Texas' abortion restrictions to achieve the ultimate goal of having an abortion. Players may pick from five characters representing women facing different geographical, financial, or healthcare-related obstacles that they must overcome to receive an abortion. For example, one character is presented as a 19-year-old bartender and **** victim, who wishes to terminate her pregnancy, while another character is an excited, expectant mother who faces medical complications with her pregnancy.
 
The game's description on the website Indiegogo says "Choice: Texas" is an "educational interactive fiction game."
 
"Players will explore the game through one of several characters, each of whom reflects specific socioeconomic, geographic, and demographic factors impacting abortion access in Texas. Although billed as interactive fiction, Choice: Texas is based on extensive research into healthcare access, legal restrictions, geography, and demographics, and is reflective of the real circumstances facing women in the state," the description reads.
 
The game's creators are Carly Kocurek, a Texas native and assistant professor of Digital Humanities and Media Studies at the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago, and Allyson Whipple, an Austin-area poet, writer, and self-described feminist. Whipple wrote in a blog post on her website that the purpose of the game is to show that some women have "better choice options" than others.
 
"Cost is not the only struggle women have to deal with. Those who can't take much time off work, or who have to care for children, struggle with making time for mandatory counseling and clinic visits. Those who live in rural areas may have to travel far and take several days out from their normal lives - and this is made especially difficult if they don't have cars," Whipple writes.
 
"In addition, recent Texas legislative changes that will cause clinic closures will require these women to travel even farther. Carly and I created a cast of characters that cover a swath of ages, races, economic levels, and geographic locations," she continues, adding, "[the game] shows that while women in Texas ostensibly have freedom of choice, some women have less choice than others."
 
Whipple also told RH Reality Check that she hopes the game can be used as a sex education tool for older high schoolers, "with the right teacher in the right school district."
 
Horne of Texas Right to Life added to Polygon that the pro-life movement in the U.S. is constantly evolving, and she wouldn't be surprised to see a video game promoting the pro-life perspective sometime in the future.
 
"There are always new ways to discuss this sort of thing. The pro-life moment is constantly adapting and exploring new ways to reach people. We're focused on legislation and education but it wouldn't surprise me to see people with different talents looking at [games] as a way to reach people," Horne said.
 
"There are lots of people in different walks of life and with different skills who are looking for ways to talk to the pro-life point of view," she added.
 
Kocurek and Whipple will introduce a working prototype of "Choice: Texas" at the upcoming Future and Reality of Gaming [F.R.O.G.] conference in October. They expect the game to be released in February 2014.
 
In July, Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed a law titled, House Bill 2, restricting abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The law also requires abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at hospitals within 30 miles of their clinic, and have their abortion facility meet the same safety standards as ambulatory care centers. Additionally, the law requires the abortion-inducing bill RU-486 to be administered in person.
 
This new set of abortion restrictions in Texas sparked a national debate, with hundreds of pro-life and pro-abortion protesters flocking to the state's capitol building to offer their support or opposition for the bill. Democratic Senator Wendy Davis successfully delayed the abortion legislation by holding a 10-hour filibuster, but Gov. Perry then called a special session for lawmakers to have the bill passed.

Read more at http://global.christianpost.com/news/choice-texas-abortion-video-game-encourages-players-to-overcome-obstacles-to-have-an-abortion-103445/#Gq2J6L7oo6guVJSD.99


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 31, 2013, 03:59:50 pm
"I am saddened by this game," Emily Horne, a lobbyist for Texas Right to Life and a Texas native, said in a recent interview with Polygon. "It reduces abortion to a dry, simplistic view and it completely ignores the voice of the unborn baby, who obviously has no voice or perspective in this at all."

Not that I endorse those secular violent video games that were talked about during those 1990's school shootings, but where are all these "conservative" politicians like Henry Hyde/John McCain and all of these pro-family groups exposing THIS NOW?

 
Quote
Horne of Texas Right to Life added to Polygon that the pro-life movement in the U.S. is constantly evolving, and she wouldn't be surprised to see a video game promoting the pro-life perspective sometime in the future.
 
"There are always new ways to discuss this sort of thing. The pro-life moment is constantly adapting and exploring new ways to reach people. We're focused on legislation and education but it wouldn't surprise me to see people with different talents looking at [games] as a way to reach people," Horne said.

Why use this New Age buzzword? And why don't they put out pro-life video game representations NOW?

Quote
"There are lots of people in different walks of life and with different skills who are looking for ways to talk to the pro-life point of view," she added.

You mean like it's OK to yoke up with other anti-Christ faiths?


With that being said - sometimes things like this can REALLY make you a loss for words. I would have never imagined a video game as abominable as THIS to hit the market! And I thought those other violent video games were the worst of the worst!


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on September 28, 2013, 08:31:37 am
Planned Parenthood Sues Texas Over New Abortion Bill

Texas’ new abortion law is headed to court thanks to a federal lawsuit filed Friday by Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider.
 
The lawsuit targets specific portions of the Texas omnibus abortion bill, including provisions that would impose stricter sanitary standards on abortion clinics and require providers gain admitting privileges at local hospitals, NBC News reports.
 
Four to seven abortion clinics have already said they would be forced to close their doors due to a supposed inability to meet the basic requirements outlined in the new bill, The Dallas Morning News reported.

The lawsuit also opposes the provision of the bill that requires abortion medication providers follow FDA protocol for the administration of abortion-inducing pills.
 
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Center for Reproductive Rights, and at least a dozen abortion clinics have joined the lawsuit.
 
“I grew up in Texas and learned pretty early on that women only got what they fought for,” said Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards. “I think folks in the state have never fought harder.”
 
Despite frequent interruptions from the gallery and an 11-plus hour filibuster from State Senator Wendy Davis, the Texas Legislature earlier this year passed the omnibus bill. It was later signed into law by Republican Governor Rick Perry.
 
“Women shouldn’t have to go to court after every legislative session,” said Center for Reproductive Rights president Nancy Northup, adding that “women’s rights now depend on where they live.”
 
The pro-abortion groups argue that “rather than protecting women’s health, the Act will harm Texas women. It will also violate Plaintiffs’ and their patients’ rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

Interestingly enough, the group’s lawsuit does not take aim at the part of the omnibus abortion legislation that bans abortions past 20 weeks of pregnancy.
 
“The simple answer is that you can only do so much at once,” said Jim George, one of the case’s litigators.
 
Abortions after 20 week “are relatively rare and the immediate problem we’re facing here is that there are large parts of Texas that would be effectively precluded from ever getting an abortion by the statutes,” he said.
 
The groups may have also chosen to avoid the 20-week ban because abortions at that stage are extremely unpopular. Indeed, according to a recent poll from Quinnipiac, a plurality of American women oppose late-term abortions:

(http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/qpoll-abortion.jpg)

The pro-abortion groups filed suit with the U.S. District Court for the Western District, Austin Division, the NBC News report notes.
 
Provided Texas’ omnibus abortion legislation isn’t blocked in court, the new laws go into effect on October 29.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/28/planned-parenthood-sues-texas-over-new-abortion-bill/


Title: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 28, 2013, 03:42:05 pm
Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional
http://news.yahoo.com/fed-judge-texas-abortion-limits-unconstitutional-190525066.html
10/28/13

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A federal judge has determined that new Texas abortion restrictions violate the U.S. Constitution, a ruling that keeps open — at least for now — dozens of abortion clinics that were set to halt operations Tuesday had key parts of the law taken effect.

In a decision released Monday that the state is certain to appeal, District Judge Lee Yeakel wrote that the regulations requiring doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital creates an undue obstacle to women seeking an abortion.

"The admitting-privileges provision of House Bill 2 does not bear a rational relationship to the legitimate right of the state in preserving and promoting fetal life or a woman's health and, in any event, places a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus and is thus an undue burden to her," he wrote.

While Yeakel found that the state could regulate how a doctor prescribes an abortion-inducing pill, he said the law did not allow for a doctor to adjust treatment taken in order to best protect the health of the woman taking it. Therefore he blocked the provision requiring doctors to follow U.S. Food and Drug Administration protocol for the pills in all instances.

"The medication abortion provision may not be enforced against any physician who determines, in appropriate medical judgment, to perform the medication-abortion using off-label protocol for the preservation of the life or health of the mother," Yeakel, appointed by President George W. Bush, wrote.

Lawyers for Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers that brought the lawsuit had argued the requirement that doctors have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the abortion clinic would force the closure of a third of the clinics in Texas. They also complained that requiring doctors to follow the FDA's original label for an abortion-inducing drug would deny women the benefit of recent advances in medical science.

Other portions of the law, known as House Bill 2, include a ban on abortions after 20 weeks and a requirement beginning in October 2014 that all abortions take place in a surgical facility. Neither of those sections was part of this lawsuit.

Amy Hagstrom Miller, president of Whole Woman's Health, celebrated the victory on admitting privileges but said the judge did not go far enough in overturning the requirement that doctors follow an 18-year-old protocol in prescribing medical abortions.

"Nearly 40 percent of the women we serve at Whole Woman's Health choose medication abortion and now Texas is preventing these women from the advances in medical practice that other women across the United States will be able to access," she said. "These restrictions are not based on sound medical practice."

The Texas attorney general's office had argued that the law protects women and the life of the fetus. Attorney General Greg Abbott was expected to file an emergency appeal of Yeakel's order to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

"Today's decision will not stop our ongoing efforts to protect life and ensure the women of our state aren't exposed to any more of the abortion-mill horror stories that have made headlines recently," Republican Gov. Rick Perry said in a statement. "We will continue fighting to implement the laws passed by the duly-elected officials of our state, laws that reflect the will and values of Texans."

The law requiring admitting privileges was the biggest obstacle facing abortion clinics in Texas, and the ruling gives them a temporary reprieve until new regulations go into effect next year.

Mississippi passed a similar law last year, which a federal judge also blocked pending a trial scheduled to begin in March. Mississippi's attorney general asked the 5th Circuit to lift the temporary injunction so the law could be enforced, but the judges have left it in place signaling they believe there is a legitimate constitutional question.

Unlike the Mississippi case, Yeakel's order is a final decision, setting the groundwork for the 5th Circuit to review the merits of the law, not just an injunction against it.

The proposed restrictions were among the toughest in the nation and gained notoriety when Democratic state Sen. Wendy Davis launched a nearly 13-hour filibuster against them in June. The law also bans abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy and beginning in October 2014 requires doctors to perform all abortions in surgical facilities.

The filibuster forced Gov. Rick Perry to call a second special legislative session for the Republican-controlled Legislature to pass the law. Davis is now running for governor on a women's rights platform. Since Perry is retiring, Abbott is Davis' likely Republican opponent, adding a political layer to the legal drama.

During the trial, officials for one chain of abortion clinics testified that they've tried to obtain admitting privileges for their doctors at 32 hospitals, but so far only 15 accepted applications and none have announced a decision. Many hospitals with religious affiliations will not allow abortion doctors to work there, while others fear protests if they provide privileges. Many have requirements that doctors live within a certain radius of the facility, or perform a minimum number of surgeries a year that must be performed in a hospital.

Beth Shapiro, chairwoman of board of directors of Lubbock's Planned Parenthood Women's Health Center, said no hospital in Lubbock has granted privileges to the lone doctor from East Texas who flies in to do abortions when there are procedures scheduled. There is not incentive for hospitals to do so, she said.

"I don't see why local hospitals would give privileges to someone who's not going to admit patients," Shapiro said. "I don't see what the business and financial incentive would be. ...it's "more work and not going to increase patient load."

Hospitals are required to do yearly reviews on physicians to keep accreditation up to date, she said.

Shapiro said she wasn't aware of a woman getting an abortion in Lubbock who had complications and needed hospital care.


Title: Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 28, 2013, 03:46:16 pm
In a decision released Monday that the state is certain to appeal, District Judge Lee Yeakel wrote that the regulations requiring doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital creates an undue obstacle to women seeking an abortion.


A George W. Bush appointee...
http://www.txwd.uscourts.gov/general/judges/biographyview.asp?bID=29


Title: Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 29, 2013, 12:30:27 pm
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/texas-abortion-clinics-stay-open-110622210.html
Texas abortion clinics stay open following ruling

After judge's ruling to throw out new law, Texas abortion clinics set to resume appointments

10/29/13

LUBBOCK, Texas (AP) -- The only abortion clinic in a 300-mile swath of West Texas can resume taking appointments Tuesday, after a federal judge struck down new restrictions that would have effectively shuttered it and at least a dozen other clinics across the state.

Lubbock's Planned Parenthood Women's Health Center had stopped making appointments last week, bracing for this week's scheduled enforcement of a new requirement that all doctors performing abortions in the state must have admitting privileges at a hospital less than 30 miles away.

Supporters who sued to block the requirement, part of a broad series of abortion limits the Legislature approved in July, argued it was meant to outlaw abortions, not make them safer as state officials had claimed. The judge agreed, finding that the law imposed an unconstitutional burden on women seeking to terminate a pregnancy.

The admitting privileges provision "does not bear a rational relationship to the legitimate right of the state in preserving and promoting fetal life or a woman's health and, in any event, places a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion," Judge Lee Yeakel, an appointee of President George W. Bush, a former Texas Republican governor, wrote in his decision.

The non-descript brown Lubbock clinic, often targeted by protesters, performs abortions only on Thursdays, when a doctor flies in from East Texas to perform them. Clinic officials said the 30-mile limit would effectively end abortions at the facility.

Abortion rights supporters argued most hospitals will not grant abortion doctors admitting privileges for religious, business or competitive reasons. As a result, they said, the law would shut down about a third of the 38 clinics in Texas.

"I don't see why local hospitals would give privileges to someone who's not going to admit patients," said Beth Shapiro, chairwoman of the board of directors of Lubbock's center. "I don't see what the business and financial incentive would be."

She said hospitals have to conduct yearly reviews to keep accreditation up to date.

"Why go through those procedures if the providers aren't using the hospital?" Shapiro said.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, whose office argued the law protects women and the life of the fetus, immediately filed an appeal with the conservative 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

"I have no doubt that this case is going all the way to the United States Supreme Court," Abbott said during a stop in Brownsville, Texas, as part of his campaign to replace retiring Gov. Rick Perry.

Federal judges in Wisconsin, Kansas, Mississippi and Alabama also have found problems with state laws prohibiting doctors from conducting abortions if they don't have hospital admitting privileges.

All the other appeals — including the one from Mississippi, which like Texas is within the 5th Circuit — deal only with whether to lift a temporary injunction preventing the restriction from taking effect. The Texas appeal could be the first that directly addresses the question of whether the provision violates the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion.

The law also threatened to stop abortions at both clinics in Fort Worth and two of the five clinics in neighboring Dallas County, said Danielle Wells, spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas. Those clinics had continued to make appointments, but had warned that they might be canceled because of the law.

During the trial, officials for one chain of abortion clinics testified that they've tried to obtain admitting privileges for their doctors at 32 hospitals, but so far only 15 accepted applications and none have announced a decision.

The abortion law will likely take center stage in the Texas gubernatorial campaign. Abbott is adamantly anti-abortion and opposes the procedure even in cases of incest and ****.

Abbott's likely opponent, if he wins the 2014 Republican nomination, is Democrat state Sen. Wendy Davis, who gained national attention for a nearly 13-hour filibuster that temporarily stalled passage of the law in the Republican-controlled Legislature.

"As a mother, I would rather see our tax dollars spent on improving our kid's schools rather than defending this law," she said in a statement following the ruling.

In another part of his ruling, Yeakel partially blocked the provision requiring doctors to follow an 18-year-old U.S. Food and Drug Administration protocol. He found that the state could regulate how a doctor prescribes an abortion-inducing pill, but the law failed to allow for a doctor to adjust treatment in order to best protect the health of the woman taking it.

Abortion rights supporters complained that requiring doctors to follow the FDA's original label for an abortion-inducing drug would deny women the benefit of recent advances in medical science.

Other portions of the law, known as House Bill 2, include a ban on abortions after 20 weeks and a requirement beginning in October 2014 that all abortions take place in a surgical facility. Neither of those sections was part of this lawsuit.

Amy Hagstrom Miller, president of Whole Woman's Health, said the judge did not go far enough.

"Nearly 40 percent of the women we serve at Whole Woman's Health choose medication abortion and now Texas is preventing these women from the advances in medical practice that other women across the United States will be able to access," she said.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on October 30, 2013, 06:43:27 am
Bush-Appointed Judge Strikes Down Part of Texas Abortion Law as ‘Undue Burden’ on Women

A federal judge appointed by then-President George H.W. Bush has struck down portions of a new Texas abortion law, declaring the regulations an unconstitutional and “undue burden” on a woman’s ability to have an abortion.
 
The ruling by District Judge Lee Yeakel came one day before the regulations were to be enacted. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is expected to file an appeal with the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, Louisiana.
 
“I have no doubt that this case is going all the way to the United States Supreme Court,” he told reporters following the ruling.
 
As previously reported, House Bill 2 (HB 2) passed the Texas House of Representatives in June, and cleared the Senate a month later after being delayed by a filibuster led by Forth Worth Democrat Wendy Davis. It was signed into law days after its passage by Governor Rick Perry.

Last month, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the ACLU of Texas and the Center for Reproductive Rights filed suit against the new law, asking the court to grant an injunction to prevent the statute from going into effect on October 29th. Specifically, the suit challenged the requirement that abortionists have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the facility, and that they follow the Food and Drug Administration’s original dosage protocol for the pill RU-486.
 
Abbott, a Roman Catholic, had argued that the regulations would improve the level of care and protect the life and health of women who obtained abortions. But Planned Parenthood and others asserted that the admitting privileges requirement would have shut down the majority of the state’s 38 abortion facilities as many hospitals will not work with abortionists.
 
On Monday, in a 26-page opinion, Judge Yeakel agreed with Planned Parenthood and others.

“The admitting-privileges provision of House Bill 2 does not bear a rational relationship to the legitimate right of the state in preserving and promoting fetal life or a woman’s health and, in any event, places a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus and is thus an undue burden to her,” he wrote. “The court will enjoin enforcement of that provision.”
 
A similar law surrounding admitting privileges was also halted earlier this year in Mississippi and was likewise appealed to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
 
While finding parts of the medicinal abortion rules to be sound, Yeakel struck down other provisions, stating that they do not allow the abortionist to make his own decisions on how to handle individual abortions.
 
“Although the medication- abortion provisions do not generally place an undue burden on a woman seeking an abortion, they do if they ban a medication abortion where a physician determines, in appropriate medical judgment, such a procedure is necessary for the preservation of the life or health of the mother,” he stated.
 
Following the release of Yeakel’s decision, abortion advocacy groups cheered the defeat of two of the the four components of the new law.
 
“Today’s ruling is a victory for Texas women,” Danielle Well of Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas told reporters. “It sends a clear message to lawmakers that politicians have no place in a woman’s medical decisions, and it’s unconstitutional for them to interfere in those decisions.”
 
But Governor Rick Perry vowed to defend the law for as long as it takes.
 
“Today’s decision will not stop our ongoing efforts to protect life and ensure the women of our state aren’t exposed to any more of the abortion-mill horror stories that have made headlines recently,” he said in a statement. “We will continue fighting to implement the laws passed by the duly-elected officials of our state, laws that reflect the will and values of Texans.”
 
Texas regulations barring abortions after 20 weeks and requiring abortion facilities to meet surgical center standards were not a part of the lawsuit. As abortionists in the state advise that the vast majority of abortions occur before 20 weeks, the late term-abortion ban will go into effect today as planned—unchallenged.

http://christiannews.net/2013/10/29/bush-appointed-judge-strikes-down-part-of-texas-abortion-law-as-undue-burden-on-women/

WOW, by making sure tha the baby killer has admitting rights to a hospital is an "undue burdon" on the babys mom? Really?


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 30, 2013, 01:56:40 pm
Bush-Appointed Judge Strikes Down Part of Texas Abortion Law as ‘Undue Burden’ on Women


A Dubya appointed judge?

So where is all the outrage from James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Paige Patterson, Hal Lindsey, Gary Bauer, Ralph Reed, etc over THIS? ::)


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on November 01, 2013, 05:48:15 am
Ruling halts abortions at third of Texas' clinics


AUSTIN, Texas (November 1, 2013)- A third of the abortion clinics in Texas can no longer perform the procedure starting Friday after a federal appeals court allowed most of the state's new abortion restrictions to take effect.

A panel of judges at the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled Thursday evening that Texas can enforce its law requiring doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital while a lawsuit challenging the restrictions moves forward. The panel issued the ruling three days after District Judge Lee Yeakel determined that the provision violated the U.S. Constitution and said it serves no medical purpose.

The panel's ruling is not final, and a different panel of judges will likely hear the case in January. But in the meantime, Texas clinics will have to follow the order. Twelve of the 32 clinics in Texas that perform abortions don't have doctors who have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, meaning they won't be able to perform the procedure, though they can provide other services.

In its 20-page ruling, the appeals court panel acknowledged that the new provision "may increase the cost of accessing an abortion provider and decrease the number of physicians available to perform abortions." However, the panel said that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that having "the incidental effect of making it more difficult or more expensive to procure an abortion cannot be enough to invalidate" a law that serves a valid purpose, "one not designed to strike at the right itself."

Although several conservative states in recent months have approved broad abortion limits, the Texas ones were particularly divisive because of the number of clinics affected and the distance some women would have to travel to get an abortion.

After Yeakel ruled Monday, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott had made an emergency appeal to the 5th Circuit, arguing that the requirement that doctors have admitting privileges is a constitutional use of the Legislature's authority.

"This unanimous decision is a vindication of the careful deliberation by the Texas Legislature to craft a law to protect the health and safety of Texas women," Abbott, a Republican who is running for governor, said in a written statement after Thursday's decision.

Planned Parenthood said the ruling means "abortion will no longer be available in vast stretches of Texas." Lawyers for Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers had argued that the regulations do not protect women.

"This fight is far from over," Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said in a statement. "This restriction clearly violates Texas women's constitutional rights by drastically reducing access to safe and legal abortion statewide."

The appeals court left in place a portion of Yeakel's order that prevents the state from enforcing the 18-year-old U.S. Food and Drug Administration protocol for abortion-inducing drugs in cases where the woman is between 50 and 63 days into her pregnancy. Doctors testifying before the court had said such women would be harmed if the protocol were enforced.

The law that the Legislature passed this summer also bans abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy and beginning in October 2014 requires doctors to perform all abortions in surgical facilities.

The restrictions are among the toughest in the nation and gained notoriety when Democratic state Sen. Wendy Davis launched a nearly 13-hour filibuster against them in June. Davis has since launched her own gubernatorial campaign and could face Abbott in the November 2014 election.

Officials for one chain of abortion clinics testified during the trial that Yeakel oversaw that they've tried to obtain admitting privileges for their doctors at 32 hospitals, but so far only 15 accepted applications and none have announced a decision. Many hospitals with religious affiliations will not allow abortion doctors to work there, while others fear protests if they provide privileges. Many have requirements that doctors live within a certain radius of the facility, or perform a minimum number of surgeries a year that must be done in a hospital.

Federal judges in Wisconsin, Kansas, Mississippi and Alabama all have found problems with state laws prohibiting doctors from conducting abortions if they don't have hospital admitting privileges.

Mississippi is also in the 5th Circuit, and the appeals court in that case had left in place a temporary injunction preventing the law from being enforced. But unlike in the Mississippi case, Yeakel's order was a final decision, setting the groundwork for the 5th Circuit to review the merits of the law.

 - See more at: http://www.onenewsnow.com/ap/legal/ruling-halts-abortions-at-third-of-texas-clinics#sthash.hmNT1Rdm.dpuf


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 01, 2013, 12:35:53 pm
This was as expected - pretty much a temporary injunction, as this case will move forward to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in January.

If anything, this case will be a big lightning rod for next year's TX governor election(one of the candidates being Wendy Davis).


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Kilika on November 01, 2013, 02:47:12 pm
This was as expected - pretty much a temporary injunction, as this case will move forward to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in January.

If anything, this case will be a big lightning rod for next year's TX governor election(one of the candidates being Wendy Davis).

Kind of obvious how they are setting things up for the election.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 19, 2013, 10:27:44 pm
The headline is misleading - all the USSC did was uphold the TEMPORARY INJUNCTION made by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals(to let this TX law passed stand for now) - otherwise, the 5CCA will hear the case in January.

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-abortion-law-stands-supreme-court-splits-5-015300460.html
11/19/13
Texas abortion law stands: Supreme Court splits 5-4 on hearing the case

A new Texas law requiring doctors performing abortions to have hospital admitting privileges has forced more than a dozen clinics in the state to close. The case is on a path back to the Supreme Court.


The US Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to block a tough new Texas law that has forced more than a dozen abortion clinics in the state to close their doors.

The justices split 5 to 4 on whether to block the law. The action came in a controversial case over abortion restrictions that is likely to find its way quickly back to the high court in the months ahead.

In the meantime, the law will remain in full effect pending an appeal at the New Orleans-based Fifth US Circuit Court of Appeals.

That court is set to hear oral arguments in January.

The new law, which took effect last month, requires any physician performing an abortion at a Texas clinic to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic.

Obtaining such privileges is difficult and the new requirement has caused roughly one-third of the state’s abortion clinics to close their doors while leaving an estimated 20,000 Texas women without such services, according to abortion rights advocates.

“This law is blocking women in Texas from getting a safe and legal medical procedure that has been their constitutionally protected right for 40 years,” said Cecil Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, in a statement.

“This is outrageous and unacceptable,” she said.

Elizabeth Graham, director of Texas Right to Life, hailed the high court’s action as a significant step forward.

“This ruling signals that Texas is on the verge of a decisive legal pro-life victory,” she said. “The recent closures of abortion clinics, even if temporary, prove that [the Texas law] does have a major impact in protecting women and their unborn children from substandard care at abortion clinics.”

The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the justices should intervene in the case to block the Texas law from being enforced while the expedited appeal to the Fifth Circuit is underway.

Abortion rights advocates had asked the courts to uphold an injunction issued by a federal judge who ruled last month that the new Texas law was overly restrictive of a woman’s right to obtain an abortion. After declaring the law unconstitutional, the judge issued an injunction blocking enforcement of the statute pending any appeals.

Texas officials appealed the decision to the Fifth Circuit and asked the appeals court to lift the federal judge’s injunction. The appeals court did so.

Abortion providers in Texas filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to preserve the status quo in Texas so that abortion clinics could remain open during the ongoing appeals.

In declining the block the law, Justice Antonin Scalia said that the appeals court’s earlier decision was based on its conclusion that Texas officials were likely to prevail in the case, with the new statute being upheld as constitutional.

The justices owed deference to the appeals court’s conclusion, he said.

“It would flout core principles of federalism by mandating postponement of a state law without asserting that the law is even probably unconstitutional,” Justice Scalia wrote in a four-page order.

“Reasonable minds can perhaps disagree about whether the Court of Appeals should have granted a stay in this case,” he said. “But there is no doubt that the applicants have not carried their heavy burden of showing that doing so was a clear violation of accepted legal standards.”

In a dissent, Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan said they would have taken action to block the new Texas law.

Justice Breyer, writing for the dissenters, said that the federal judge’s initial injunction would have preserved the status quo, allowing clinics to remain open and serve women in their communities as the litigation continued.

“By putting Texas’ new law into immediate effect, it instantly leaves 24 counties in the Rio Grande Valley… with no abortion provider because those providers do not have admitting privileges and are unlikely to get them,” Breyer wrote in a 5-page dissent. He added that the new law “may substantially reduce access to safe abortions elsewhere in Texas.”

Breyer said that the underlying legal issue concerning the constitutionality of the Texas law “is a difficult question.”

“Lawmakers in Texas and other states have passed laws like this for the sole purpose of limiting access to safe, legal abortion, not promote women’s health,” Terri Burke, executive director of the ACLU of Texas, said in a statement.

Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said the Texas law was “unworkable, unconscionable and unconstitutional.”

“The shattering stories of women turned away at clinic doors and denied their constitutional right to abortion are already numerous, and they multiply every single day this underhanded law is enforced,” Ms. Northup said.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeremiah 8:11  For they have healed the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 19, 2013, 10:34:27 pm
Quote
In declining the block the law, Justice Antonin Scalia said that the appeals court’s earlier decision was based on its conclusion that Texas officials were likely to prevail in the case, with the new statute being upheld as constitutional.

The justices owed deference to the appeals court’s conclusion, he said.

“It would flout core principles of federalism by mandating postponement of a state law without asserting that the law is even probably unconstitutional,” Justice Scalia wrote in a four-page order.

“Reasonable minds can perhaps disagree about whether the Court of Appeals should have granted a stay in this case,” he said. “But there is no doubt that the applicants have not carried their heavy burden of showing that doing so was a clear violation of accepted legal standards.”

Well speak for yourself, Justice Scalia! Didn't you rule the opposite in the OK case recently? ::)

US top court rejects pre-abortion ultrasound case
http://endtimesandcurrentevents.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,9658.0.html


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 27, 2014, 05:56:54 pm
US appeals court upholds new Texas abortion rules
3/27/14

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A federal appeals court on Thursday upheld Texas' tough abortion restrictions that have forced the closure of nearly 20 clinics around the state, saying the new rules don't jeopardize women's health.

A panel of judges at the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court judge who said the rules violate the U.S. Constitution and served no medical purpose. Despite the lower court's ruling, the appeals court already had allowed some rules to go into effect while it considered the case. The latest decision means more regulations will begin later this year, as scheduled, and sets the case up for a likely appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In its opinion, the appeals court said the law "on its face does not impose an undue burden on the life and health of a woman."

Planned Parenthood, which sued to block the law, called the ruling "terrible" and said that "safe and legal abortion will continue to be virtually impossible for thousands of Texas women to access."

"The latest restrictions in Texas will force women to have abortions later in pregnancy, if they are able to get to a doctor at all," Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood Votes, said in a statement. The American Civil Liberties Union said "The law is having a devastating impact on women in Texas, and the court should have struck it down."

Texas lawmakers last summer passed some of the toughest restrictions in the U.S. on when, where and how women may obtain an abortion. The Republican-controlled Legislature required abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital and placed strict limits on doctors prescribing abortion-inducing pills.

Debate of the law drew thousands of demonstrators on both sides of the issue to the state Capitol in Austin and sparked a 12-plus hour filibuster by state Sen. Wendy Davis, a Fort Worth Democrat who succeeded in temporarily blocking passage. Though the restrictions later passed overwhelmingly, Davis catapulted to political stardom and is now running for governor.

The office of Attorney General Greg Abbott, who is also running for governor, defended the law in court.

Republican leaders in Texas oppose abortion, except in cases where the life of the mother is at risk. In passing the new rules, they argued they were protecting the health of the woman.

But abortion-rights supporters called the measures an attempt to effectively ban abortion statewide through overregulation. Many abortion doctors do not have admitting privileges and limiting when and where they may prescribe abortion-inducing pills discourages women from choosing that option, they say.

Other aspects of the new rules, including a requirement that all procedures take place in a surgical facility, do not take effect until September.

U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel ruled in October that the provisions place an unconstitutional burden on women's access to abortion.

Three days after Yeakel's ruling, the 5th Circuit allowed Texas to enforce the law while the state appealed the decision. Some 19 clinics have shut down since, leaving 24 still open to serve a population of 26 million Texans. More closures could happen after the additional restrictions are in place.

Regardless, the Supreme Court probably will have the last word on the restrictions. The court's four liberal justices already have indicated they are inclined to hear an appeal.

In November, the four dissented from a high court ruling that upheld the 5th Circuit's decision to allow Texas to enforce the law while the appeal proceeded.

Justice Stephen Breyer called the issue of the law's constitutionality a difficult question. "It is a question, I believe, that at least four members of this court will wish to consider irrespective of the Fifth Circuit's ultimate decision," Breyer wrote in a brief opinion that was joined by Justices Rith Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.

Five votes constitute a majority on the nine-justice court, but it takes only four to grant full review of a lower court ruling.

http://news.yahoo.com/us-appeals-court-upholds-texas-abortion-rules-205911473.html


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 27, 2014, 06:08:51 pm
 ??? Didn't they say TX's new abortion restrictions law are so strict, that 19 facilities closed? But somehow THIS?

http://news.yahoo.com/abortion-clinic-planned-texas-law-closes-facilities-150542801--finance.html
3/27/14
New abortion clinic planned for Texas as law closes facilities

DALLAS (Reuters) - Planned Parenthood will open a $5 million surgical abortion facility in San Antonio in a few months as other providers have been forced to close because of stringent restrictions passed by Texas lawmakers last year.

The facility is expected to be completed by September, when new restrictions take effect, imposing surgical center standards for abortion clinics, even those that perform nonsurgical medication abortions.

Opponents of the regulations said they are a veiled attempt to shut clinics by imposing unnecessary and costly requirements, while supporters maintain they are aimed at protecting women's health and should be adopted by other states.

Since Texas enacted the law, which requires a physician to have admitting privileges at an appropriately equipped hospital within 30 miles, a third of clinics in the state have been closed, leaving 19 for a population of 26 million.

Once the ambulatory surgical center regulation goes into effect on September 1, only about six abortion clinics would likely be able to meet all of the new requirements, Planned Parenthood said. The six would be in San Antonio, Houston, Austin, Dallas and Fort Worth.

**Which is pretty much all of the big cities in TX, save maybe El Paso.

"Women may have the right to legal abortion in theory, but in practice, this right is vanishing for many women in Texas," Planned Parenthood South Texas spokeswoman Mara Posada said on Thursday.

More states have passed abortion restrictions during the last two years than in the previous decade, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group supporting the right to abortion whose reports are cited by both sides in the debate.

Texas, seen as an incubator of conservative policies, has garnered a great deal of attention because its regulations have so far survived court challenges while many others have not.

**Like I mentioned in other threads - TX is NOT this "conservative" state everyone tries to make it out to be. There are ALOT of megachurches here(ie-John Hagee, Ed Young Jr, Joel Osteen, just to name a few of the reprobates). With that being said - yes, I find it strange how other states haven't survived court challenges with this like TX has - maybe it's part of their Hegelian Dialectic game, I don't know.

"Texas has shown to other states what happens when restrictions are allowed to go into effect," said Elizabeth Nash, state issues manager for the Guttmacher Institute.

Two neighboring states - Oklahoma and Louisiana - are proposing similar admitting privileges restrictions, with the Oklahoma House of Representatives approving the measure by a wide margin last month.

**Didn't OK recently strike down its SSM ban, and allow a statute of Satan on state property? Isn't Louisiana predominantly runned by Catholics? Pt being that don't ignore the elephant in the room.

Last year, Texas was one of four states that adopted an admitting privileges requirement. Alabama and Wisconsin laws are currently blocked by pending litigation. North Dakota's only abortion facility was able to secure admitting privileges and remain open, the Guttmacher Institute said.

Admitting privileges allow a doctor, who is typically recognized as a staff member of a hospital, to admit a patient to that facility. It is common sense to make that a requirement for abortion providers, according to Joe Pojman, director of the anti-abortion group, Texas Alliance for Life.

"In the event of a serious complication from an abortion, the physician should be able to follow the patient to the emergency room to continue caring for his or her patient," Pojman said.

The provisions effectively shut down many abortion clinics in rural areas in Texas, a large state where hospitals are far removed from many clinics.

The Texas Hospital Association, which represents more the 400 hospitals, called the restrictions unnecessary because women experiencing abortion complications already can go to a hospital emergency room and be treated.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on May 05, 2014, 12:30:06 pm
Texas Is Permanently Shutting Abortion Clinics and the Supreme Court Can't Do Anything About It
Regardless of what the judicial system does with Texas’s antiabortion law, its on-the-ground effects are unlikely to be reversed.




When Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed a sweeping anti-abortion law in 2013, he did so knowing the measure faced an uncertain future. Indeed, the law is already winding its way through the legal system, and if its opponents have their way, Texas's reproductive legal code will land in the hands of the Supreme Court.

But such a decision is likely a year or years a way, and back in the Lone Star State, the final judicial score won't much matter.

The law has already had tremendous success in closing abortion clinics and restricting abortion access in Texas. And those successes appear all but certain to stick—with or without the Supreme Court's approval of the law that created them.

There were more than 40 clinics that provided abortions in Texas in 2011. There are now 20 still open, and after the law's last steps of implementation are taken in September, all but six are expected to close. Most of the closed clinics will never reopen, their operators say.

Few businesses could survive a years-long hibernation, and that's all the more true for clinics, providers say. The added difficulty of finding qualified doctors, getting new licences, and navigating state health department regulations is a hurdle higher than most closed clinics are likely to clear—especially in a state where a sizable portion of the public is vehemently opposed to abortion and unwilling to aid it in any way.

"I can't find anyone to deliver water or resurface the parking lot, because they're against abortion. I can't get someone to fix a leak in the roof," said Amy Hagstrom Miller, CEO of Whole Women's Health.

In March, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit—which covers Texas, Mississippi, and Louisiana—upheld the law as constitutional. Additionally, the court declined a request to keep two of the law's provisions, both of which were instrumental in the clinic closures, from taking effect before the legal struggle over the law is completed.

The clinic closures will increase as the law phases in a set of requirements for abortion facilities. The first set, which included a requirement that doctors performing the procedure have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles, went into effect last November, prompting many clinics to close. The final set of restrictions—that all abortions, including drug-induced, be performed in ambulatory surgical centers—takes effect in September.

Hagstrom Miller's company had five abortion facilities and one ambulatory surgical center in Texas in 2013. Two closed as a result of the admitting-privilege requirement in March, and it's likely that only the surgical center in San Antonio will remain by September.

"The opposition has been extremely strategic," Hagstrom Miller said. "This law is perfectly crafted."

Ambulatory surgical centers are facilities that conduct outpatient or same-day surgical procedures, and must meet specific requirements regarding infrastructure, procedures, and equipment. The centers cost far more to run than abortion clinics, and would cost several million dollars to build from the ground up.

Hagstrom Miller also said it has been impossible to find hospitals that will agree to give admitting privileges to abortion providers, or ambulatory surgical centers that will sell or lease their facilities. Leasing or buying the space itself is expensive and difficult, and Hagstrom Miller currently has mortgages on three buildings, which she will have to sell. She purchased those under a different name, and did construction without associating them with Whole Woman's Health out of concern that she wouldn't get permitting or might attract protests.

The antiabortion coalition that backs the law sees all of this as sound public policy, arguing that the law's restrictions were put in place to protect women seeking medical care, and if the centers can't meet them, then they should be closed and stay closed.

"If the state is passing regulations that are similar or equivalent to those that all other medical facilities provide, and some [clinics] close because they're not meeting standards that other medical facilities have to meet, I don't see a problem with that," said Dan McConchie, vice president for government affairs at Americans United for Life, an advocacy group that worked on parts of the Texas legislation.

The six remaining abortion clinics come September will be clustered in major cities, which opponents of the law argue unfairly disadvantages women in rural areas—particularly the Rio Grande Valley—who tend to be poorer and less able to travel long distances for an abortion. Those clinics that remain will be serving more women with fewer doctors, leading to longer wait times and delayed procedures, the opponents say.

The legal struggle over the law continues, but in Texas, the law's challengers are looking beyond their state's borders. Following a broad Republican conquest of statehouses in 2010, a wave of state-level antiabortion laws have been passed—including in states whose circuit courts abortion rights groups hope will be more sympathetic to their arguments.

As challenges to those laws work their way up the legal system, opponents of the Texas law are hoping for a circuit-court ruling that is incompatible with the 5th Circuit appeals decision. Such a contradiction would open the possibility of the entire issue being elevated to the Supreme Court, where—depending on the scope of the decision—Texas's law could either be upheld or struck down.

But the U.S. judicial system is a deliberative one, and with the request for a stay denied, the Texas law is unlikely to be voided anytime soon.

"[A decision] is a ways away," said Jennifer Dalven, director of the Reproductive Freedom Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, which was part of the suit filed against the Texas legislation. "I dont think it would be next year; more likely in the year after that."


http://www.nationaljournal.com/health-care/texas-is-permanently-shutting-abortion-clinics-and-the-supreme-court-can-t-do-anything-about-it-20140505


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 05, 2014, 05:20:16 pm
After this is successful, HOPEFULLY they can remove all of the FLOURIDE out of the water system, MSG/Aspertame/etc out of our food supply, etc.



Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Mark on May 23, 2014, 06:53:51 am
20 and Counting: Abortion Facilities Continue to Close Due to Texas Pro-Life Law

A north Texas abortion center has become the twentieth abortion facility in the Lone Star State to close its doors as a result of pro-life legislation recently signed by Texas Governor Rick Perry.

For over 30 years, Northpark Medical Group has offered abortion procedures to women in the Dallas area. The facility’s website describes the center as “being the foremost and preeminent provider of first and second trimester abortion services up to 15 weeks in the Dallas area.”

According to reports, Northpark Medical Group is affiliated with Texas abortionist Douglas Karpen. As previously reported, Karpen allegedly killed babies born alive during late-term abortion procedures, but he was cleared of all wrongdoings by a Texas grand jury late last year.

Now, Karpen’s Northpark Medical Group abortion center in Dallas has reportedly closed its doors because its abortionists failed to meet required health standards. Specifically, the abortionists were unable to meet the increased health standards of a pro-life bill—HB2—signed by Governor Rick Perry last summer.

As previously reported, HB2 bans most abortions after 20 weeks gestation and requires all abortion facilities to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. Pro-abortion activists have condemned the new standards, saying Texas politicians are robbing women of their “reproductive rights.” Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, argued that “women are suffering” as a result of the pro-life measures.

“A small group of politicians bent on imposing their personal agenda on every Texan have created a health care catastrophe for women of all backgrounds, but especially those who are low income, rural and women of color,” Richards wrote in a column this week. “Women are suffering, and it’s time to put an end to this appalling situation.”

Despite the outcry from pro-abortion lobbyists, 20 abortion facilities in Texas have closed their doors since last summer. According to a USA Today report, only half a dozen abortion facilities might still be open by the end of this year, which is a significant decrease from the 41 facilities operating in the state just three years ago.

Meanwhile, pro-life advocates say the abortion center closings are very encouraging. Kyleen Wright, president of the Texans for Life Coalition and an early supporter of HB2, told Christian News Network that abortion facilities have a long history of unsafe health conditions.

“We have long heard complaints about many of these abortion doctors,” Wright said, “but the women often go silent out of shame, privacy issues, or as a requirement of any favorable settlement.”

Even pro-choice women are often appalled by conditions in abortion facilities, Wright added. And the conditions at Northpark Medical Group in Dallas were no different, she said.

“One of the abortion doctors linked to this clinic had been disciplined by the Texas Medical Board and another was 84 years old,” Wright stated. “It is troubling that these doctors cannot meet the hospital credentialing requirements at any of the nearby hospitals.”

Wright also asserted that the requirements outlined in HB2 are similar to those enforced upon normal hospitals by credentialing committees.

“Hospital credentialing committees want to know about past malpractice issues, continuing education, loss of privileges at other hospitals, etc.,” she explained. “They also generally want proof of insurance and letters of recommendation from other doctors. Any reputable surgeon should readily be able to supply these things. Again, it troubling that these [abortionists] cannot.”

Wright confirmed to Christian News Network that additional abortion facilities in Texas will likely close by later this year.

“When the final element of HB2 goes into effect September 1, all but seven [abortion facilities] have indicated they will close, rather than upgrade their facilities to meet the ambulatory surgical center requirement,” she stated.

Overall, Wright said that the closures will result in greater protection for both women and babies in the state.

“Obviously, fewer abortion clinics means fewer women and babies hurt by abortion,” she said.

http://christiannews.net/2014/05/22/20-and-counting-abortion-facilities-continue-to-close-due-to-texas-pro-life-law/


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 23, 2014, 09:48:28 am
Well, we'll see where this goes from here - IOW, don't be fooled by all this - from what I've read, this state is pushing abortion drugs like this RUI(or whatever it's called). IOW, looks like Big Pharma is looking for an opportunity to cash in(among other things).

As for this state of Texas being "true blue conservative"? Again, don't let this fool you - there's LOTS of megachurches here, and one of the First Baptists in my area keeps doing Rick Warren's PDL nonsense.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 29, 2014, 07:38:14 pm
http://theweek.com/article/index/265441/why-texas-abortion-rates-arent-falling-as-quickly-as-everyone-expected
Why Texas' abortion rates aren't falling as quickly as everyone expected

It's not the first time a barrage of anti-abortion legislation hasn't had the desired effect

7/29/14

In the months since Texas' controversial abortion restrictions began to go into effect, the state's health-care landscape has been transformed.

A new study conducted by researchers at the University of Texas's Policy Evaluation Project found that since state legislators passed HB2 — the raft of restrictions on abortion doctors and facilities made famous last summer by Wendy Davis' marathon filibuster — 19 of Texas's 41 abortion clinics have closed their doors. The closures are thanks to a provision of HB2 that requires abortion providers to receive admitting privileges at local hospitals, a hurdle that has been impossible for many doctors to surmount.

Today, vast swathes of the state have no abortion clinics. The researchers estimate that 290,000 reproductive-age Texas women live more than 200 miles from an abortion facility, up from just 10,000 in April 2013.

There was no way, given the meteoric decline in the number of providers, that the abortion rate wasn't going to fall. The question was by how much. In the study, which provides a rare and fascinating view into the law's real-time effects, the UT researchers found that the state was on track to see 13 percent fewer abortions annually. It's a steeper drop than the national average, but nowhere near the catastrophic levels that the clinic closures might have spurred. "In some ways, we were expecting a bigger decline," Dan Grossman, one of the authors of the report, told the Texas Tribune.

Why isn't the new law working as well as anti-abortion advocates might have hoped? It's not the first time a barrage of such legislation hasn't had the desired effect.

Beginning in the 1990s, anti-abortion legislators began to impose laws designed to convince women not to have abortions. The requirements were tailored to help women understand the gravity of their decision. Twenty-three states required doctors to provide an ultrasound before an abortion, so women could see their embryo or fetus. Thirty-five states mandated pre-abortion counseling, including — in some states — information about the fetus' ability to feel pain and the assertion that life begins at conception. Twenty-six states required a waiting period, usually 24 hours, between the counseling and the procedure. The abortion rate continued to decline slowly — as it has every year since 1992 — but the laws had no discernable effect.

By passing these laws targeted at women, anti-abortion legislators were hoping to decrease demand for abortion. When that didn't work, they turned to laws like HB2, which affect supply. If more clinics close, one might reasonably assume, the demand for abortion will also decline, either because wait times at the existing facilities are too long or because women will decide that an abortion isn't worth the hassle or expense. After all, the cost of an abortion increases exponentially with each passing month; after the first trimester, the price moves into quadruple digits.

HB2 did have a significant impact on one kind of abortion: medication abortion, which allows women to terminate an early pregnancy with a pill. The law limits the use of medication abortion to the first seven weeks of pregnancy (the scientific consensus says that it can be used up to nine weeks) and requires four trips to the clinic. According to the UT study, the use of medication abortion dropped by a staggering 70 percent. Nationally, medication abortion accounts for 23 percent of nonhospital abortions.

But the decline in drug-induced abortion means that sizable numbers of women are just waiting later to have a more expensive surgical procedure, sometimes driving twice to a facility that's hundreds of miles away. They've been assisted in the past year by Texas groups who raise money to help subsidize the cost of abortion procedures, especially for low-income women who need to make a long trip. But these groups are small and their resources are limited, leaving much of the financial burden on the women.

All of this reinforces the fact that abortion opponents will have to make the procedure all but illegal before the legal abortion rate will fall dramatically. In economic terms, abortion is inelastic — unaffected by price. Unfortunately, what's about to happen in Texas won't just increase the cost, it will make abortions nearly impossible to obtain.

Beginning in September, clinics will be required to comply with another provision of HB2, which mandates that all abortions take place in ambulatory surgical centers — essentially minihospitals. Only six of the 22 remaining abortion providers qualify as ASCs, and few of the non-ASCs will be able to make the costly renovations to bring their facilities up to code. The UT researchers found that 22 percent of abortions in the state take place at ASCs, raising questions about how much of the demand they'll be able to handle. At the same time, cuts to family-planning funding that went into effect in 2011 are making it difficult for women to access the birth control they want.

As a result, the number of unintended births will almost certainly climb. But Grossman says it's also likely that the number of self-induced abortions, often using off-brand versions of the abortion pill, will increase. That's because cutting off the supply of abortions won't reduce demand — it will force women to take increasingly drastic measures to get the procedure.


Title: Federal judge halts key part of Texas abortion law
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 29, 2014, 06:54:06 pm
Federal judge halts key part of Texas abortion law
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/29/federal-judge-halts-key-part-texas-abortion-law/
8/29/14

AUSTIN, Texas –  A federal judge Friday threw out new Texas abortion restrictions that would have effectively closed more than a dozen clinics in the state.

U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel sided with clinics that sued over one of the most disputed measures of a sweeping anti-abortion bill signed by Republican Gov. Rick Perry in 2013. The ruling stops new restrictions that would have left seven abortion facilities in Texas come Monday. There are currently 19 abortion providers in the state, according to groups challenging the law.

"The overall effect of the provisions is to create an impermissible obstacle as applied to all women seeking a previability abortion," Yeakel wrote in his 21-page ruling.

The trial in Texas was the latest battle over tough new abortion restrictions sweeping across the U.S. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican who is the favorite to become governor next year, vowed to appeal to try to uphold the law.

The law would require abortion facilities in Texas to meet hospital-level operating standards, which supporters say will protect women's health.

Clinics called it a backdoor effort to outlaw abortions, which has been a constitutional right since the Roe v. Wade ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973.

"It's an undue burden for women in Texas -- and thankfully today the court agreed," said Amy Hagstrom Miller, CEO of Whole Woman's Health, which would have been among the clinic operators affected. "The evidence has been stacking up against the state and against the politicians who so cynically passed these laws in the name of safety."

The more stringent Texas requirements -- such as mandatory operating rooms and air filtration systems -- would have effectively shuttered 18 licensed abortion clinics. Some already no longer offer abortions after another part of the 2013 bill required doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.

That part of the law has already been upheld by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court in New Orleans, where the state will now seek a second reversal.

"The State disagrees with the court's ruling and will seek immediate relief from the Fifth Circuit, which has already upheld" the law once, Abbott spokeswoman Lauren Bean said.

Similar rules on admitting privileges have been blocked by federal courts in Mississippi, Kansas and Wisconsin.

Attorneys for the state denied that women would be burdened by fewer abortion facilities, saying nearly 9 in 10 women in Texas would still live within 150 miles of a provider. Critics say that still leaves nearly a million Texas women embarking on drives longer than three hours to get an abortion.

Opposition to the Texas law was so visible that Democrat Wendy Davis launched her campaign for governor behind the celebrity she achieved through a nearly 13-hour filibuster last summer that temporarily blocked the bill in the state Senate.

Her opponent in November is Abbott.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 04, 2014, 01:39:04 pm
http://news.yahoo.com/texas-abortion-clinic-reopen-court-ruling-210936930.html
Texas abortion clinic to reopen after court ruling
9/3/14

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Women in South Texas facing a 200-mile drive for access to legal abortions learned Wednesday that a local clinic shuttered by a sweeping anti-abortion law would reopen, marking the first tangible effect of a court ruling last week that blocked key parts of the state law.

Whole Woman's Health clinic in McAllen, a city near the Mexico border, closed in March after its doctors said they couldn't obtain admitting privileges at nearby hospitals as the state now requires. But a federal judge ruled Friday that the law created unconstitutional barriers to abortions in South Texas, and the clinic is now set to reopen later this week, chief executive Amy Hagstrom Miller said.

Questions are now also being raised about whether the ruling had other broader ramifications than first thought.

U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel made two key rulings in Friday's 21-page decision. He struck down a mandate that required all abortion clinics in Texas to adopt costly hospital-level operating standards and exempted clinics in McAllen and El Paso from an already upheld requirement that doctors who perform abortions obtain admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.

A four-day trial last month narrowly focused on the El Paso and McAllen areas because clinics there serve regions where access to abortions would otherwise be particularly difficult. But language Yeakel included in a separate final judgment has left some questioning whether his order — inadvertently or not — banned the admitting-privileges law at all Texas abortion clinics.

State health officials say they're playing it safe pending guidance from a federal appeals court.

"We would have definitely cited those as violations," Department of State Health Services spokeswoman Carrie Williams said of clinics that would have been in violation of the admitting-privileges law prior to Friday's ruling. "Now we're going to need to parse that out on a case-by-case basis."

Texas currently has 19 abortion providers — already down from more than 40 just two years ago, according to groups that sued the state for the second time over the law known as HB2. Only seven would have remained in business had Yeakel sided with the state.

Republican Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott also noted that Yeakel's decision "appears to invalidate the admitting-privileges law across the board" in an appeal filed with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court in New Orleans.

That court has scheduled a hearing for Sept. 12.

Until then, Hagstrom Miller, who runs the Whole Woman's Health clinic, said she is already taking weekend appointments for her McAllen facility. When the clinic closed, women seeking an abortion had to embark on a nearly 500-mile round-trip drive to San Antonio to obtain a legal abortion in Texas. Hagstrom Miller said the McAllen clinic had been performing 40 to 45 abortions each week prior to closure.

She said that Whole Woman's Health is for now interpreting Yeakel's ruling "a little more conservatively" than others who might view the decision as a possible sweeping repeal. But she said re-opening the McAllen clinic alone would have a dramatic impact.

"We are more than resilient in the face of these threats. We are stronger and more determined than ever," she said.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 14, 2014, 11:11:52 pm
http://news.yahoo.com/justices-stop-parts-texas-abortion-law-223922271--politics.html
Justices stop parts of Texas abortion law
10/14/14

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked key parts of a 2013 law in Texas that had closed all but eight facilities providing abortions in America's second most-populous state.

In an unsigned order, the justices sided with abortion rights advocates and health care providers in suspending an Oct. 2 ruling by a panel of the New Orleans-based U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that Texas could immediately apply a rule making abortion clinics statewide spend millions of dollars on hospital-level upgrades.

The court also put on hold a provision of the law only as it applies to clinics in McAllen and El Paso that requires doctors at the facilities to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. The admitting privileges rule remains in effect elsewhere in Texas.

Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas said they would have ruled against the clinics in all respects.

The 5th Circuit is still considering the overall constitutionality of the sweeping measure overwhelmingly passed by the GOP-controlled Texas Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Rick Perry last year.

Even as it weighs the merits of the law, the appeals court had said it could be enforced — opening the door for the emergency appeal to the Supreme Court.

"We're seeing the terrible impact these restrictions have on thousands of Texas women who effectively no longer have access to safe and legal abortion," said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "We're relieved that the court stepped in to stop this, and we hope this dangerous law is ultimately overturned completely."

Abortion opponents predicted they will ultimately prevail.

"This does not protect the health and safety of women who are undergoing abortion," said Joe Pojman, executive director of Texas Alliance for Life. ""This is definitely a short-term loss, but not necessarily a long- term loss."

The 5th Circuit decision had blocked an August ruling by Austin-based U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel, who had found that requiring hospital-style upgrades was less about safety than making access to abortion difficult. Yeakel's ruling temporarily suspended the upgrade rules before they could go into effect Sept. 1 — and the order from the Supreme Court means they are on hold again.

Allowing the rules on hospital-level upgrades to be enforced — including mandatory operating rooms and air filtration systems — shuttered more than a dozen clinics across Texas.

Until the nation's highest court intervened, only abortion facilities in the Houston, Austin, San Antonio and the Dallas-Fort Worth areas remained open. And none was left along the Texas-Mexico border or outside any of the state's largest urban areas.

Some other clinics had closed even earlier amid enforcement of the rule on admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. That portion has already been upheld twice by the appeals court.

The fight over the Texas law is the latest over tough new abortion restrictions that have been enacted across the country. The office of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican who is the favorite in next month's governor's race, is leading the defense of the law.

Democrat Wendy Davis launched her campaign for governor behind the celebrity she achieved through a nearly 13-hour filibuster last summer that temporarily blocked the law's passage. Davis said she was "thankful that women can continue to make their own personal decisions." Abbott's office said he would continue to defend the law.

Attorneys for the state have denied that Texas women would be burdened by fewer abortion facilities, saying nearly 9 in 10 would still live within 150 miles of a provider. The law's opponents note that leaves nearly a million Texas women embarking on drives longer than three hours to get an abortion.

Hilltop Women's Reproductive Services in El Paso has been referring women who want abortions to another clinic it owns in New Mexico. Gloria Martinez, Hilltop's administrative nurse, said she would call state officials Wednesday before deciding whether the clinic will resume performing abortions.


Title: Re: House committee OKs Texas abortion regulations
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 29, 2015, 04:51:50 pm
https://www.yahoo.com/health/supreme-court-allows-texas-abortion-clinics-to-122786307907.html
Supreme Court Allows Texas Abortion Clinics to Remain Open
6/29/15

The Supreme Court is refusing to allow Texas to enforce restrictions that would force 10 abortion clinics to close.

The justices voted 5-4 on Monday granting an emergency appeal from the clinics after a federal appeals court upheld new regulations and refused to keep them on hold while the clinics appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court order will remain in effect at least until the court decides whether to hear the clinics’ appeal of the lower court ruling, not before the fall.

This is the biggest case on the hot-button subject in nearly a quarter-century.

Since the court has stepped in, the hearing and the eventual ruling will come amid the 2016 presidential campaign.

The court granted an emergency appeal from abortion providers in Texas, who want the justices to block two provisions of a state law that already has forced the closure of roughly half the licensed abortion clinics in the state. Ten of the remaining 19 clinics will have to shut their doors by July 1, without an order from the Supreme Court.

The Texas law is among a wave of state measures in recent years that have placed restrictions on when in a pregnancy abortions may be performed, imposed limits on abortions using drugs instead of surgery and increased standards for clinics and the doctors who work in them.

The Texas case involves the last of these categories. The provisions at issue require clinics to meet hospital-like surgical standards and also call on doctors who work in the clinics to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry signed the law in 2013 when he was the state’s governor.

Backers of the law say those are common-sense measures intended to protect women. Abortion rights groups say the regulations have only one aim: to make it harder, if not impossible, for women to get abortions in Texas.

The case could be attractive to the justices because it might allow them to give more definition to the key phrase from their last big abortion ruling, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in 1992. States generally can regulate abortion unless doing so places “an undue burden” on a woman’s right to get an abortion.

“Courts have been fumbling for years about what does it mean to be undue under Casey,” said Priscilla Smith, a Yale Law School professor and defender of abortion rights.

Some abortion opponents also see the case as a strong candidate for Supreme Court review. “The likelihood of this case getting to the Supreme Court is very high and I think that’s a good thing,” said Mike Norton, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian-oriented public interest law firm.

The justices blocked the two provisions once before, in November 2014 while the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was weighing whether those parts of the law violate a woman’s right to an abortion. The appeals court upheld the provisions on June 9 and has since refused to put its ruling on hold while the clinics ready their appeal to the Supreme Court.

In 2013, four justices - enough to hear an appeal - said the high court probably would want to weigh in. In an earlier phase of the same case, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote that the court probably would take up the controversial provisions.

Related: Women Face Harder Path to Abortion as States Extend Waiting Period

The constitutionality of the new law is a difficult question, Breyer wrote. “It is a question, I believe, that at least four members of this court will wish to consider irrespective of the 5th Circuit’s ultimate decision,” he said in an opinion that was joined by the other three liberal justices.

Since then, a different set of judges from the same appeals court has prevented Mississippi from enforcing its own admitting privileges requirement because doing so would close the last abortion clinic in the state. In that case, the court said that Mississippi could not force women to cross state lines to get an abortion.

The state already was seeking Supreme Court review and the justices could say as early as Monday whether they will weigh in, although the Texas case could cause the justices to defer action in Mississippi.

In Texas, women in the El Paso area in the western part of the state would have to cross into New Mexico to reach the nearest clinic. The appeals court said that wasn’t a problem because many Texas women in that part of the state already do so.

Justice Anthony Kennedy’s views are likely to determine the outcome in this case, as in so many other divisive issues.

Kennedy was one of the three authors of the Casey opinion that reaffirmed a woman’s right to an abortion and struck down a Pennsylvania requirement that women tell their husbands before getting an abortion. But he also wrote the 2007 opinion that upheld a federal ban on an abortion procedure that opponents call partial-birth abortion.

Legal experts on both sides of the issue said there is no indication that Kennedy might abandon his support for abortion rights altogether. But they differ on how Kennedy will view the clinic restrictions.

“I think he’s quite devoted to the Casey standard and to the sense of Casey as compromised,” said Smith, the Yale Law School professor, who argued the 2007 case at the Supreme Court.

But Carter Snead, a Notre Dame University law professor and abortion opponent, said Kennedy generally has been willing to sustain legal restrictions on abortion.

“In fact, during his tenure on the court, he has only struck down one abortion restriction, namely, the spousal notification provision at issue in Planned Parenthood v. Casey,” Snead said.