End Times and Current Events
July 21, 2018, 04:28:11 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39 (KJB)
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

And if Satan(PP) cast out Satan(establishment), he is divided against himself;

Shoutbox
January 29, 2018, 01:21:57 am Christian40 says: It will be interesting to see what happens this year Israel being 70 years as a modern nation may 14 2018
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
September 14, 2017, 04:31:26 am Christian40 says: i have thought that i'm reaping from past sins then my life has been impacted in ways from having non believers in my ancestry.
September 11, 2017, 06:59:33 am Psalm 51:17 says: The law of reaping and sowing. It's amazing how God's mercy and longsuffering has hovered over America so long. (ie, the infrastructure is very bad here b/c for many years, they were grossly underspent on. 1st Tim 6:10, the god of materialism has its roots firmly in the West) And remember once upon a time ago when shacking up b/w straight couples drew shock awe?

Exodus 20:5  Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
September 11, 2017, 03:40:40 am Christian40 says: those in america should better repent or things will only get worse
View Shout History
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: And if Satan(PP) cast out Satan(establishment), he is divided against himself;  (Read 5919 times)
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #30 on: March 07, 2013, 02:39:29 am »

Quote
In 2011, the city quietly rolled out a controversial pilot program that allowed teens access to the contraceptive drug Plan B—the so-called "morning after pill"—in some of its public schools without parental consent.

I just don't get that. How is it that this happens without the parents input? Aren't the people who passed such things parents themselves?

I do get it, but I just...wow.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: April 11, 2013, 05:02:41 pm »

Again, what disturbs me about these recent anti-abortion laws a few states have been passing recently is they have this attitude of, "This is OUR plan to curb abortion, but abortion clinics can keep themselves open if they like, but we have them on a short leash nonetheless". And not to mention too where was all this when Bush Jr was in office for 8 years? They're waiting until NOW to fight against it?

This is just me, but something is cooking behind the scenes.

Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley signs law raising requirements for abortion clinics
By Michael Martinez and Greg Botelho, CNN
updated 7:05 PM EDT, Tue April 9, 2013

(CNN) -- Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley signed a law Tuesday that drastically raises the safety requirements for abortion clinics to operate -- a measure that he says "has been endorsed by pro-life groups across America."

But Planned Parenthood immediately warned of "an almost certain legal challenge," saying the new law's requirements "would be difficult for nearly all providers to meet" and would shut down clinics.

Bentley, a Republican, hailed the new law.

"As a physician, and as a governor, I am proud to sign this legislation," he said in a statement. "This bill provides appropriate standards of care."

Doctors who provide abortions must have admitting privileges at local hospitals, the governor's office said.

A similar new law in Mississippi has put that state's only abortion provider "on the verge of closing" because of such an admitting privileges requirement, Planned Parenthood said. That clinic is challenging the Mississippi law in federal court, saying the state would end up banning abortion because the clinic's doctors haven't been able to gain the privileges.

Nikema Williams, vice president of public policy for Planned Parenthood Southeast, said that "medical experts agree that laws requiring admitting privileges for abortion don't increase health or safety for a woman.

"They just limit a woman's access to safe and legal abortion," Williams said in a statement.

"As a high-quality health care provider working every day to support women's health and safety, Planned Parenthood is evaluating every possible option to protect the health of women in the face of this dangerous law and blatant attack on women's health and rights," she said.

The Alabama measure passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses of the state legislature. Mike Hubbard, speaker of the Alabama House of Representatives, has said, "With the passage of this legislation, we are doing everything we can to ensure the procedure is performed in a safe and healthy environment."

North Dakota governor signs law banning most abortions

Once signed, Alabama's new law would require abortion clinics to meet the standards of an "ambulatory surgical center," Staci Fox, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood, has said.

This means the state's five abortion clinics would have to remodel to increase the sizes of rooms and doorways.

"It puts an undue burden on existing facilities. All of this makes it harder to access health care," Fox said.

The new law also requires doctors at the clinics to ask pregnant minors under age 16 seeking an abortion who the father is, according to a summary of the legislation provided by Hubbard's office.


Again, we will see if this works or not...

The pregnant minor will be able to refuse to give the father's name and age.

Arkansas lawmakers back nation's most restrictive abortion bill

If the girl provides the name and the father is two or more years older than the girl, the facility will have to report the pregnant girl and father to police, the legislation says. The legislation is designed to prevent abuse.

The law is the centerpiece of the "We Dare Defend Our Right to Life" section of the House Republican caucus's 2013 legislative agenda.

The law's House sponsor, Rep. Mary Sue McClurkin, a Republican from Indian Springs Village, Alabama, said abortion clinics truly dedicated to care "will embrace this legislation rather than oppose it.

"For far too long, Alabama has had more health regulations in place to protect your cat or dog at a vet clinic than it does for a woman receiving an abortion; this law will correct that shameful disparity," McClurkin said in a statement.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: April 11, 2013, 05:10:19 pm »

^^ Someone brought this to my attention the other day. Again, someone tell these "conservative" politicians the pieces were already in play many moons ago to strike down these abominations.

http://www.irontontribune.com/2008/09/30/republican-nominees-have-upheld-roe-v-wade/
9/30/13
Republican nominees have upheld Roe v. Wade

Is there a religious and righteous political party in the United States? An untruth when told often and long enough will be perceived by the public to be the truth.

A 1973 Supreme Court decision, Roe V. Wade legalized abortion by a 7 to 2 vote. Six of the seven Justices in the majority were Republican appointees. The only other Democrat appointee, Byron White, voted against Roe V. Wade.

In fact, in every year since 1969, the United States Supreme Court has been controlled by a majority of Republican-appointed judges. There has not been a Democrat-appointed Chief Justice since 1953. Currently, there are seven Republican appointees and two nominated by Democrats.

Obviously if the Republican majority had wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade at any time since 1973, they had the votes to do so. Why haven’t they?

In 2003, the United States Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas overturned a Texas law against sodomy. Once again in the 6-3 decision, four Republicans voted to overturn the law.

Recently, the California Supreme Court overturned the State’s ban on same sex marriage.

Six of the seven California judges were elected Republicans.

From 2000-2006, Republicans controlled both houses of congress, Plus the Presidency. In 2006, the Federal Drug Administration approved an “over the counter” abortion drug which is total abortion, common name Levonorgestrel Drug Plan B Dual Label TB.75. This is not birth control, but is to be used after conception. This pill was so complete an abortion pill, Senate Bill 3 in Indiana was introduced so pharmacist would not have to dispense the drug. You can get a print out from your pharmacist. The head of the FDA serves at thepleasure of President Bush.

My point is clear. The courts that handed down Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas were controlled by Republican appointees. For religious leaders to continue to blame Democrats for Republican actions is wrong.

One’s own Christian relationship should not be questioned because of where they worship or their political leanings.

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

Eph 2:8  For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9  Not of works, lest any man should boast.


Act 17:24  God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
Act 17:25  Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #33 on: April 12, 2013, 04:10:29 am »

Quote
For religious leaders to continue to blame Democrats for Republican actions is wrong.

Especially when it's not a Republican or Democrat issue. It's a politician issue, and the Supreme Court has been manipulated by politicians, not justice. It legally should not matter what party a judge is or the courts. To be one or the other is legal bias, and that in itself nullifies their position and makes the courts worthless.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: May 28, 2013, 11:12:59 am »

Looks like the USSC is in the back pockets of all of the NWO agendas now...

Planned Parenthood Funding Cutoff Bid Rejected by Court
5/28/13
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-28/planned-parenthood-funding-cutoff-bid-rejected-by-court.html?cmpid=yhoo

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to revive an Indiana law that would have blocked Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid dollars because the organization provides abortion services.

The justices today left intact a lower court ruling that said the Indiana law violated Medicaid beneficiaries’ right to freely choose their medical provider.

Indiana is one of several states targeting Planned Parenthood in an effort to prevent even indirect subsidies of abortion. Texas, Arizona, Missouri, Florida, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Tennessee, New Hampshire, Kansas and North Carolina have taken steps to limit public funding to health centers that provide abortion services.

Medicaid is the joint federal-state health care program for the poor. While federal law bars use of Medicaid funds for abortions, providers that perform abortions can receive payment from Medicaid for other types of services.

Under the federal law that governs the program, state Medicaid plans must reimburse any provider “qualified to perform the service or services required.”

Indiana contended that provision isn’t absolute, leaving states room to determine what it means to be “qualified.” Indiana’s 2011 law says state agencies can’t provide public funds to any entity that performs abortions or operates a facility where abortions take place.

more
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: May 28, 2013, 11:31:30 am »

Supreme Court refuses to hear Planned Parenthood cases
5/28/13
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-supreme-court-refuses-to-hear-planned-parenthood-cases-20130528,0,4569389.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fmostviewed+%28L.A.+Times+-+Most+Viewed+Stories%29

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court dealt a setback Tuesday to the campaign of abortion opponents to “defund” Planned Parenthood.

Without comment, the justices turned away Indiana’s defense of a 2011 law that would ban all Medicaid funds to an organization such as Planned Parenthood whose work includes performing abortions.

The high court let stand decisions by a federal judge in Indiana and the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago that blocked the measure from taking effect. The “defunding law excludes Planned Parenthood from Medicaid for a reason unrelated to its fitness to provide medical services, violating its patients’ statutory right to obtain medical care from the qualified provider of their choice,” Judge Diane Sykes said last year for the 7th Circuit.

The Obama administration had joined the case on the side of Planned Parenthood and argued that the Medicaid law gives eligible low-income patients a right to obtain healthcare from any qualified provider. This is known as the free-choice-of-provider rule.

More than 9,300 Medicaid patients in Indiana go to Planned Parenthood clinics for routine medical exams, cancer screening and birth control, the lower court said.

At issue in the case was how far states can go to prevent indirect subsidies for abortion. Congress forbids the spending of federal funds to pay for elective abortions. Indiana has a similar provision in state law.

Two years ago, Indiana lawmakers voted to go further and forbid the spending of any Medicaid money — federal or state — through “any entity” whose facilities perform abortions. Hospitals and state-licensed surgical clinics were exempted. But Planned Parenthood went to federal court and sued on behalf of a doctor, a nurse and two patients.

Arizona’s Legislature passed a similar measure, but it too has been blocked by a federal judge.

Indiana's attorney general appealed to the Supreme Court and urged the justices to review the case and revive the state's law.

Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, welcomed the court's decision.

"All women, no matter where they live, should be able to get quality, affordable healthcare from the healthcare provider they know and trust,” she said.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: May 31, 2013, 12:32:02 am »

California Assembly passes bill specifically exempting abortion clinics from surgical building code standards
http://liveactionnews.org/california-assembly-passes-bill-specifically-exempting-abortion-clinics-from-surgical-building-code-standards/
5/29/13

The state of California, who often leads the nation in laws and legislation, has taken a step backwards, as the California State Assembly passed an act to amend the current health and safety code in state medical facilities in a manner that would allow Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics to have fewer requirements, allowing them to perform their life-taking surgeries in non-surgical facilities. Assembly Bill 980 passed Friday and now moves to the Senate for debate.

Assembly Bill 980 amends current California building codes by allowing surgical abortion centers to be exempted from facility standards that all other surgical medical centers must comply with. In part, the bill says:

"
(c) Notwithstanding any other law, the Building Standards Commission shall not adopt building code standards that establish construction requirements for primary care clinics that provide medication or aspiration abortion services that differ from construction standards applicable to other primary care clinics described in Section 1226.6 of the 2013 Triennial Edition of the Building Standards Code. (You can read the code here.)

Primary care clinics may include a place where you get a flu swab or strep test, and don’t generally include things as severe and risky as abortion. This legislation flies in the face of the direction of the nation, which has seen multiple laws actually enacting requirements for abortion facilities to be properly inspected and equipped to meet medical standards.

While many states have been tightening abortion restrictions to ensure that the Gosnells of the land are stopped in their tracks, the California Assembly has sent a message to abortion providers that the state’s legislators want to help abortionists do business and will aid in removing barriers to doing this – even when logical health and safety issues are presented. This special loophole just for abortion providers shows once again the symbiotic relationship between the abortion industry and its predominately Democrat pro-abortion political allies.

The California ProLife Council is currently trying to inform residents of this potential law’s passage and is asking all Californians to contact their legislators. To register your objection to this law, you may contact your legislator. This link will help you find the appropriate lawmaker.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #37 on: May 31, 2013, 03:49:07 am »

It's...unsettling to see how the world is backing such evil. It's as if the murders are getting ready for the immigration flood. I can't even begin to understand how those people can be so rabid about this, to the point of pushing it beyond all reason and logic, not to mention being void of any human decency. And governments are the biggest supporters. That should tell the citizenry something!
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: June 11, 2013, 12:15:18 am »

Dunno, but all of this talk to defund PP seems to be nothing more than lip service...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/post/komens-planned-parenthood-decision-all-about-politics/2012/02/01/gIQAJS1xhQ_blog.html
Posted at 12:50 PM ET, 02/01/2012 
Komen’s Planned Parenthood decision all about politics

DALLAS – “Not about politics” is the part that even some of Susan G. Komen for the Cure’s most loyal supporters might question.

The Dallas-based organization, which is the country’s biggest breast cancer charity, insisted its controversial decision to defund Planned Parenthood affiliates was made only in light of Komen’s new policy against supporting agencies that are under investigation. (The congressional investigation itself was launched by a conservative Republican and spurred by antiabortion groups.)

The decision was “not about politics,” a Komen statement insisted.

But the truth is that Komen founder Nancy Brinker has strong Republican ties and Cecile Richards, who leads Planned Parenthood, is daughter of late Texas Gov. Ann Richards and has longtime Democratic Party ties. Also worth noting: This is an election year.

Brinker, a longtime GOP donor who was ambassador to Hungary under then-President George W. Bush, received the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Obama in 2009. She has cast Komen as above politics, saying its focus is women’s health.

But the decision to stop funding Planned Parenthood comes shortly after Komen unveiled a new partnership that strengthens its ties to the George W. Bush Institute. The institute is the policy-making arm of Bush’s presidential library, which is scheduled to open in Dallas next year.
 
Founders say the new effort, called the Pink Ribbon Red Ribbon campaign, is an “innovative partnership” aimed at improving breast and cervical screenings for women in developing nations in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America.

Other partners include the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS.

The founding corporate sponsor is Merck, which is making a financial contribution of $3 million over three years and in-kind contributions to a cervical cancer vaccination program in Tanzania.

Merck, which manufactures the Gardasil vaccine, is a longtime campaign donor to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, whose ties to the company were briefly an issue during his failed presidential bid. Rival Michele Bachman accused Perry of pushing the Gardasil vaccine on young girls in Texas at Merck’s behest in 2007.

Richards, too, is a Texan with a Bush connection; it was to George W. that her mother lost her reelection bid. And it is Dallas Democratic donors Ann and Lee Fikes who made news with their a $250,000 donation to Planned Parenthood in response to the Komen decision.

The money will help launch a Breast Health Emergency Fund to offset Komen’s funding cut at 19 local Planned Parenthood programs.

Over the past five years, Komen funding has provided nearly 170,000 clinical breast exams out of more than 4 million nationwide at Planned Parenthood health centers. Komen has also provided more than 6,400 out of 70,000 mammogram referrals.

Those non-abortion-related services are often the collateral damage when Planned Parenthood takes a hit.


Lori Stahl is a Dallas-based journalist. Follow her on Twitter at @LoriStahl.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #39 on: June 11, 2013, 03:10:46 am »

501c3 non-profit
abortion supporter
Texas Democrat governor Ann Richards
Ann Richards daughter
Brinker, a Republican ambassador appointed by Bush
Brinker received honor from Obama
Komen is strengthening ties with the Bush library policy arm
sponsored by Merck, a wicked drug company, maker of Gardasil
Merck is a supporter of Rick Perry

And that is just on the surface. It reads like a nightmare!
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: June 28, 2013, 06:18:32 pm »

Judge puts parts of new Kan. abortion law on hold
6/28/13
http://news.yahoo.com/judge-puts-parts-kan-abortion-law-hold-222041443.html

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — A Kansas judge on Friday temporarily blocked some of the state's new abortion restrictions that were set to take effect next week, including a requirement that providers said would make it nearly impossible for a woman to obtain an emergency abortion.

Shawnee County District Judge Rebecca Crotty blocked two provisions. One requires providers to declare on their websites that the state health department's information on abortions and fetal development is accurate and objective. Another redefines medical emergencies so that they don't include mental health reasons, such as a woman threatening to commit suicide. Critics of the provision have said the new definition is so narrow that a woman never would be able to obtain an emergency abortion.

Crotty refused to block other portions of the law that ban sex-selection abortions, block tax breaks for abortion providers and prohibits them from furnishing materials or instructors for public schools' sexuality courses. Another provision that will take effect requires doctors to provide information to patients that includes a statement that abortion ends the life of "whole, separate, unique, living human being."

The judge ruled in a lawsuit filed by Dr. Herbert Hodes and his daughter, Dr. Traci Nauser, who perform abortions at their Overland Park health center. They asked Crotty to prevent the state from enforcing the entire law while their lawsuit proceeds. Crotty said Hodes and Nauser did not present enough information to justify blocking the entire law, requiring her to review each provision. But the judge said, in the case of the provisions she blocked, they and their patients would suffer irreparable harm.

Hodes and Nauser argued that the new law violates their right to equal legal protection, as guaranteed by the state constitution. Hodes called the ruling "a victory for women in Kansas."

Supporters contend the law preserves life, protects patients and lessens the state's entanglement with abortion. The Republican-dominated Legislature has strong anti-abortion majorities in both chambers, and GOP Gov. Sam Brownback is a strong abortion opponent.

Crotty's ruling came two days after the chief federal judge for Kansas had a hearing in Kansas City, Kan., on a narrower challenge filed by Planned Parenthood, which performs abortions at its Overland Park clinic. Planned Parenthood is challenging provisions requiring providers to give certain information to patients.

The state already has spent nearly $769,000 on private attorneys in defending anti-abortion laws enacted since Brownback took office in January 2011. Attorney General Derek Schmidt, also a Republican, has predicted that defending this year's law will cost the state $500,000 over the next two years.

Health and safety regulations enacted in 2011 specifically for abortion clinics have never been enforced because courts are still reviewing them.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: July 24, 2013, 06:51:44 am »

Again, what disturbs me about these recent anti-abortion laws a few states have been passing recently is they have this attitude of, "This is OUR plan to curb abortion, but abortion clinics can keep themselves open if they like, but we have them on a short leash nonetheless". And not to mention too where was all this when Bush Jr was in office for 8 years? They're waiting until NOW to fight against it?

This is just me, but something is cooking behind the scenes.

Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley signs law raising requirements for abortion clinics
By Michael Martinez and Greg Botelho, CNN
updated 7:05 PM EDT, Tue April 9, 2013

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-delays-enforcement-alabama-abortion-law-until-2014-014233658.html
Judge delays enforcement of Alabama abortion law until 2014
7/23/13

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama (Reuters) - A federal judge on Tuesday delayed until next year the enforcement of Alabama's new abortion law, which tightens restrictions on providers and, according to opponents, could force the closing of more than half of the state's abortion clinics.

The law, signed by Republican Governor Robert Bentley in April, requires every doctor who performs an abortion at a clinic to have staff privileges at a local hospital and mandates the clinics meet the same facility standards as ambulatory care centers.

The law was set to go into effect on August 15.

Tuesday's order by U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson delays the law until March 24, 2014, while the court moves forward on a lawsuit filed in June by Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The delay comes as similar laws have been passed in a number of states.

A law in Mississippi threatens to close the state's sole abortion clinic, which has been unable to obtain hospital privileges for its physicians.

Nine states, including Alabama, have laws on the books requiring abortion clinics to conform to ambulatory care center standards, according to the National Abortion Rights Action League.

Supporters of the law argue it is intended to make abortions safer and improve patient care. But critics say the law will unnecessarily restrict a woman's right under the U.S. Constitution to have an abortion.

**So "supporters" of this bill are saying abortion is OK?

The lawsuit said the law will lead to the closure of three out of the state's five licensed health centers that provide abortions.

Most Alabama clinics hire out-of-town physicians to perform abortions and partner with local doctors who have hospital admitting privileges to provide follow-up care.

Doctors at the clinics are often unable to obtain staff privileges because local hospitals oppose abortion or they live too far from the area, the lawsuit said.

The law "would unconstitutionally restrict the ability of Alabama women, including victims of **** and incest, to access safe and legal abortions," said Wayne Sabel, an attorney representing Planned Parenthood Southeast.

State Representative Mary Sue McClurkin, a Republican who sponsored the legislation, said the law's aim was not to shut abortion clinics.

"I am surprised they are filing lawsuits instead of bringing the clinics up to code," she said when the suit was filed.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #42 on: July 24, 2013, 04:02:42 pm »

Quote
"I am surprised they are filing lawsuits instead of bringing the clinics up to code," she said when the suit was filed

Surprised, really? Valid point though. Why would a "medical" professional not try to have hospital privileges?

Doesn't mean they are required to do business with the hospital. It's technically just a business deal for the doctor to use the hospital facility and it's diagnostic tools to work on his patients. One advantage that these thugs a abortion clinics would want to avoid is the close association with all kinds of medical disciplines within a hospital. They can't pull the wool over those people's eye for long. Medically, hospitals are full of people who know what the deal is medically with abortions, so I'd say that's why the abortionists aren't running to hospitals begging for access.

No privileges, then the patient then has to be under another doctor if something goes wrong and goes to a hospital. Medically, the patient becomes the hospital's patient (well, a doctor with privileges that agrees to take the patient), and not the clinic's, as the clinic is a specialist, not a "primary care" provider. Interesting how that works.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21309



View Profile
« Reply #43 on: July 30, 2013, 06:02:11 am »

Louisiana pro-lifers call for Jindal to defund Planned Parenthood affiliate in wake of Texas fraud


“Based on this serious abuse of taxpayer funds, we encourage the Jindal administration to immediately suspend Louisiana's contract with Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast pending a thorough investigation,” Louisiana Right to Life said in a statement.

rest: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/after-texas-fraud-louisiana-pro-lifers-tell-jindal-to-defund-planned-parent
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: July 30, 2013, 06:34:22 am »

Louisiana pro-lifers call for Jindal to defund Planned Parenthood affiliate in wake of Texas fraud


“Based on this serious abuse of taxpayer funds, we encourage the Jindal administration to immediately suspend Louisiana's contract with Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast pending a thorough investigation,” Louisiana Right to Life said in a statement.

rest: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/after-texas-fraud-louisiana-pro-lifers-tell-jindal-to-defund-planned-parent

Jindal's been in office there since 2007 - and Louisiana pro-lifers have waited until NOW to ask Jindal this?

Seriously - we need to use some discernment here. The perfect time for them to have acted on this was when George W. Bush was in office for 8 years previously. But somehow they just sit on their hands until NOW? Why? Did they just realize a "Democrat" is in office?

Something smells stink about this...

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: July 30, 2013, 08:54:22 am »

Louisiana pro-lifers call for Jindal to defund Planned Parenthood affiliate in wake of Texas fraud


“Based on this serious abuse of taxpayer funds, we encourage the Jindal administration to immediately suspend Louisiana's contract with Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast pending a thorough investigation,” Louisiana Right to Life said in a statement.

rest: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/after-texas-fraud-louisiana-pro-lifers-tell-jindal-to-defund-planned-parent

Was just looking at this pro-life's group web site(Louisiana Right to Life Federation).

Aside it from having Catholics on their Board, Executive Council, and Staff, here's their statement on contraception...

http://www.prolifelouisiana.org/about-us/issue-statements.html
Quote
CONTRACEPTION

The Louisiana RTL Federation insists on a proper distinction between contraception and the abortion. By contraception is meant the use of a drug, procedure, technique or a device to prevent the union of ovum and sperm, I.E. to prevent conception. By abortion is meant anything done to cause the death or destruction of the ovum once it is fertilized. Louisiana RTL Federation believes that the question of contraception presents important personal moral questions, as to which Louisiana RTL Federation takes no position. The Federation opposes, however, abortion in all its forms. In this connection, because it appears that the overwhelming scientific evidence is that the intrauterine device acts as an abortifacient and not as a contraceptive, Louisiana Right To Life Federation opposes the IUD as an abortifacient.

Apparently, they have no problems with it. There's no 2 ways about contraception drugs - they've been proven to be very dangerous and abortion-inducing. No ifs, ands, or buts.
http://endtimesandcurrentevents.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,8464.0.html

Ultimately - this seems to be the agendas of these pro-life groups pushing these state governments(runned by GOPers) to push for these abortion "restriction" laws - while they seem to make decent laws restricting abortion clinics/Planned Parenthood, at the same time they do ALMOST NOTHING addressing these dangerous contraception pills. Even the recent Texas abortion restriction bill addressed almost nothing about it(as a matter of fact, ended up reading a subsequent article where it was quietly being pushed from outside sources).

So it just seems like while they're making everyone think abortion clinics are going to be closed down, and Planned Parenthood is getting defunded, at the same time these contraception pills are quietly being pushed, which will potentially in turn profit ALOT of money for these Big Pharma giants.

John 10:7  Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
Joh 10:8  All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.
Joh 10:9  I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.


Rev 18:23  And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: July 30, 2013, 11:50:36 am »

Ultimately - this seems to be the agendas of these pro-life groups pushing these state governments(runned by GOPers) to push for these abortion "restriction" laws - while they seem to make decent laws restricting abortion clinics/Planned Parenthood, at the same time they do ALMOST NOTHING addressing these dangerous contraception pills. Even the recent Texas abortion restriction bill addressed almost nothing about it(as a matter of fact, ended up reading a subsequent article where it was quietly being pushed from outside sources).

So it just seems like while they're making everyone think abortion clinics are going to be closed down, and Planned Parenthood is getting defunded, at the same time these contraception pills are quietly being pushed, which will potentially in turn profit ALOT of money for these Big Pharma giants.

!

http://news.yahoo.com/abortion-limits-sweep-us-even-purple-states-join-153341784.html
7/30/13
As abortion limits sweep US, even 'purple' states join the crackdown

Excerpt:

States are also increasingly polarized over broader issues of reproductive health – access to birth control (by defunding Planned Parenthood at the state level), the approach to sex education in schools, and how reproductive health intersects with "Obamacare." As of July 1, twenty-two states prohibit abortion coverage in the state health-insurance exchanges that are being set up. And at least 21 states are opting out of Medicaid expansion, which means less reproductive health care for poor women.

But abortion is the hot topic in the world of reproductive policy. Take Virginia. In 2011, the legislature passed a bill requiring abortion facilities to upgrade to hospital-level standards, such as wider hallways and bigger closets. This past April, Hillcrest Clinic in Norfolk, Va., closed its doors, citing the expense of compliance as the main reason. (Another reason, it must be noted, is that demand for abortion had declined, owing to more effective use of birth control.)

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

1 John 4:3  And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

John 6:33  For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: July 31, 2013, 04:30:50 pm »

Indiana Planned Parenthood Medicaid Battle Ended By Judge
7/30/13
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/30/indiana-planned-parenthood_n_3679164.html

INDIANAPOLIS — A judge on Tuesday made permanent her order barring Indiana from denying Medicaid funds to Planned Parenthood clinics, ending the state's two-year legal fight.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt issued his permanent injunction after the U.S. Supreme Court in May refused to hear Indiana's appeal in the case. Days later, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued an administrative ruling siding with Planned Parenthood.

Indiana had sought to prevent Medicaid enrollees from accessing health care at clinics operated by Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky because the organization provides abortions.

Planned Parenthood, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, had argued that a 2011 Indiana law targeting the organization should be blocked because it probably conflicted with a federal Medicaid statute that protects patients' rights to make their own decisions about health care providers.

"This decision recognizes the rights and liberties of health care providers and the women they serve," said ACLU of Indiana Executive Director Jane Henegar. "We hope lawmakers will now see where federal law and the Constitution draw the line to protect individuals against government intrusion."

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller issued a statement saying "it was important and necessary to defend the policy decision of the people's elected representatives in the Legislature that Medicaid dollars should not indirectly subsidize the payroll and overhead expenses of abortion providers. "

"If legal challenges to similar statutes in other states eventually reach the United States Supreme Court, then Indiana would have another opportunity through an amicus brief to assert this legal argument," Zoeller said.

Tuesday's ruling made permanent the judge's June 2011 preliminary injunction. It came a day after the two sides filed an agreement with the court stipulating that the state cannot violate Medicaid's "freedom of choice" provision.

The legal battle dating to May 2011 was marked by a temporary interruption in Planned Parenthood's ability to receive reimbursement for seeing Medicaid patients for routine care such as Pap smears, breast exams and pregnancy tests.

The interruption, however, led 1,600 donors in 48 states and on three continents to provide about $500,000 allowing Medicaid recipients to continue to receive at Planned Parenthood's more than 20 clinics across Indiana, said Betty Cockrum, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky.

"We've been encouraged at every step along the way, but two years is a long time, and it certainly did introduce some confusion out there for our patients," Cockrum said in a telephone interview. "That's unfortunate anytime when Indiana is seeing a lot of economic duress. We're seeing the number of Hoosiers living in poverty increase. It's a bad time for people to have confusion about their health care."

The 2011 law would have made Indiana the first to deny the organization Medicaid funds for general health services. The state argued that Medicaid funds intended to help groups such as Planned Parenthood provide general health care would indirectly subsidize abortions.

The Hyde Amendment, a 1976 provision named after the late Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., bans federal funding for abortions except in cases of ****, incest or when the life of the mother is at risk.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #48 on: August 01, 2013, 04:30:13 am »

Quote
Tuesday's ruling made permanent the judge's June 2011 preliminary injunction.

Uh, no it doesn't! That legal fight is still ongoing.

Quote
The state argued that Medicaid funds intended to help groups such as Planned Parenthood provide general health care would indirectly subsidize abortions.

Here's the kicker...they all talk about a woman's health, insisting that women need PPH for their health care.

Really? So what's with all those other medical clinics, doctor's offices, hospitals, and state health clinics? Women cannot go to all those THOUSANDS of offices for their health care? BULL.

Women don't go to those places for health, they go to Planned Parenthood to kill babies, not for health care!

Quote
"This decision recognizes the rights and liberties of health care providers and the women they serve," said ACLU of Indiana Executive Director Jane Henegar. "We hope lawmakers will now see where federal law and the Constitution draw the line to protect individuals against government intrusion."

Wait, did I read that right? "government intrusion"? What? This person is seriously confused! How is not funding an organization "intrusion" by the government?

Not funding doesn't mean they can't operate. It means they don't get government cash, and why should they? How are they any different than any other business? They aren't, but they don't want the public to know that, because the truth is, certain people are basically stealing the public's money through federal programs, and through those federal programs, the federal government uses that promise of cash to bribe organizations to do the fed's bidding. The feds are doing the exact same thing to the states, bribing them to conform to federal standards under threat of pulling the cash, like the classic threat of taking away "highway funds", or funding for schools.

I say, take your tainted cash, please, and go away!   Roll Eyes

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: August 02, 2013, 04:29:27 pm »

Surprise, surprise! All of this, apparently, was meant to be nothing more than a puppet show starring the false left/right paradigm players...

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gop-key-states-tries-slow-173055789.html
GOP in key states tries to slow anti-abortion push

Fearing voter backlash, GOP leaders in key states try to slow the anti-abortion push

8/2/13

MILWAUKEE (AP) -- Abortion is still legal but getting one in many states will be difficult if laws passed this year are upheld by the courts. In a march through conservative legislatures, anti-abortion Republicans passed a wave of new restrictions that would sharply limit when a woman could terminate a pregnancy and where she could go to do so.

The push brought the anti-abortion movement closer to a key milestone, in which the procedure would become largely inaccessible in the three-fifths of the country controlled by Republicans even if still technically legal under Roe vs. Wade.

But rather than continuing to roll across the GOP heartland in synch with the pro-life movement's plan, the effort may now be hitting a wall. The obstacle comes not from opposing Democrats but from GOP leaders who believe pressing further is a mistake for a party trying to soften its harder edges after election losses last year.

The resisting Republicans include governors and top legislators in more than a half-dozen states, including some of the largest and most politically competitive in the party's 30-state coalition. They are digging in to stop the barrage of abortion proposals, hoping to better cultivate voters not enamored with the GOP's social agenda.

"It's a huge mistake if your ear is not in tune where people are," said Republican state Sen. Dale Schultz in Wisconsin, who is trying to fend off more abortion legislation in the state's GOP-controlled legislature, even though he says he personally supports it. "And we were pushing people too fast. All we're going to do is panic people and this is going to blow up if we don't begin to moderate on some of this stuff."

The Ohio Senate president, Republican Tom Neihaus, blocked a bill in November that would have banned abortions as early as six weeks into pregnancy.

"I just didn't think it was appropriate," said Niehaus, a supporter of earlier anti-abortion measures. "It's a distraction from our primary focus of getting the economy back on track."

But anti-abortion leaders say they are determined to push on into more Republican strongholds, taking advantage of the party's majority status.

"It is definitely the case that the future for us lies beyond what is considered your traditional pro-life states," said Dan McConchie, vice president of Americans United for Life, which circulates model legislation to state lawmakers.

The dissension, strongest in the Midwest and southern border states, is flaring as the GOP prepares for competitive races in the contested regions next year. The anti-abortion movement is poised to press for constitutional amendments giving legal rights to fetuses, bans on abortions based on gender, and an end to abortion exceptions for victims of **** and incest.

Anti-abortion Republicans have gotten more than 170 new abortion laws passed in 30 states since the party won control of a majority of statehouses in 2010. This year's push was highlighted by some of the strongest restrictions yet passed in North Dakota, Arkansas and Texas.

The key measures banned abortions after approximately six weeks, 12 weeks or 20 weeks, depending on the state; required women to see the fetus on an ultrasound; required doctors to have hospital admitting privileges; and required clinics to have full hospital-type facilities. More than a dozen GOP states in the South and West adopted all or most of the package.

If the new laws are upheld by the courts, many providers would close. Only six of the 42 abortion clinics in Texas are expected for remain open, serving the nation's second largest population. Already, only one clinic remains open in Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming.

In the midst of the push, Republican legislatures in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and several other swing states enacted restrictions, but not the tougher ones. Republican majorities in Florida did not add new restrictions and leaders don't expect to. In Virginia, a key anti-abortion measure didn't pass. Republican Gov. Pat McCrory in North Carolina is balking at more action.

GOP officials there object to the idea of legislating abortion repeatedly and to proposals they consider extreme.

"We just passed the biggest abortion bill in Wisconsin in 15 years," said Wisconsin state Sen. Glenn Grothman, among the chamber's leading anti-abortion crusaders. "But to ask our members to do that again, they might not have the stomach for that."

In these states, GOP leaders say they are worried about alienating women and young people, who disproportionately favor abortion rights. These groups voted in lesser numbers than usual for GOP candidates last year. Democratic President Barack Obama won the women's vote by 11 percentage points.

Nationally, most voters approve of restrictions on abortion but 54 percent think it should be legal in most or all cases, according to a poll conducted in July by the Pew Center for People and the Press. The support for abortion rights was 10 percentage points higher in the Great Lakes and South Atlantic regions than in the South.

In Michigan, "There's just not a whole lot of legislative things left do" on abortion, said GOP Senate President Randy Richardville. "We lean conservative, but we're not crazies."

Michigan's Republican House Speaker Jase Bolger blocked one tough abortion bill this year and Republican Gov. Rick Snyder vetoed another last year, which opponents are now trying to circumvent with a ballot initiative.

But abortion rights supporters say that even if the GOP's anti-abortion push loses momentum, the measures already passed in Republican states will have a major impact on women seeking abortions.

"Even if this wave of restrictions stops, it's not like access will be restored," said Elizabeth Nash, the state policy analyst for the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: August 02, 2013, 04:51:36 pm »

^^

Quote
"It is definitely the case that the future for us lies beyond what is considered your traditional pro-life states," said Dan McConchie, vice president of Americans United for Life, which circulates model legislation to state lawmakers.


Yet another controlled-opposition group...

Look at the Board members who work at Jesuit institutions.
http://www.aul.org/about-aul/board/

http://www.aul.org/about-aul/history/
Quote
Throughout the 1960s, pro-abortion forces built the public case for the “liberalization” of abortion laws against little organized opposition. In 1967, Colorado became the first state to legalize abortion in cases of ****, incest, risk to maternal health, and fetal deformity. Within the next three years, a dozen more states followed. New York’s repeal of its abortion law in 1970, legalizing abortion-on-demand virtually throughout pregnancy, was a watershed event that ironically began to turn the tide in the other direction. The New York legislature undid the repeal a year later, only to see the new law vetoed by Governor Nelson Rockefeller. Efforts to legalize abortion in other states stalled, notably in Michigan, where a pro-abortion referendum in 1972 failed by a colossal margin.

Wrong! It was in California when then-governor Ronald Reagan signed the Therapeutic Act in 1967, which lead to about 800K abortions during his tenure there. Before this bill went into law, only 2 states legalized abortion. It was THIS watershed event that turned the tide in the other direction, and eventually lead to Roe V Wade.

Quote
Within a year of our inception, AUL’s first book project, Abortion and Social Justice, was published. Here was a manifesto that sought to rally Americans to the principles of justice and equality under the law that form the heart of the debate over abortion.

Look at that New Age/Jesuitical buzzword - SOCIAL JUSTICE!



Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #51 on: August 02, 2013, 05:29:47 pm »

You miss this?...

Quote
The New York legislature undid the repeal a year later, only to see the new law vetoed by Governor Nelson Rockefeller.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: August 03, 2013, 08:05:37 am »

You miss this?...


I saw that - but that wasn't the point. Pt was that this pro-life group(in their web site), as well as other ones time and time again ignore the fact that Ronald Reagan pushed a big abortion bill in 1967 as governor of California. It was THIS that changed the course for this country, and eventually lead to Roe V Wade(and not the New York one where Nelson Rockefeller vetoed the repeal in 1970).
« Last Edit: August 03, 2013, 01:36:11 pm by BornAgain2 » Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #53 on: August 04, 2013, 04:02:13 am »

I just thought it interesting that a Rockefeller was in the middle of that, and he voted to overturn a ban.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: August 04, 2013, 02:20:45 pm »

I just thought it interesting that a Rockefeller was in the middle of that, and he voted to overturn a ban.

Me too - also to add, most of the current crop of "Republicans" since the "Reagan Revolution" were Rockefeller Republicans..."fiscally conservative", but pro-eugenics/anti-family. And yeah, you rarely ever hear these pro-life groups expose Rockefeller much either.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #55 on: August 16, 2013, 04:06:46 am »

Obama has found another way to get blackmail cash to PPH.

Now they are getting federal money to push his health care scam as a "navigator", along with several other "non-profits".

http://news.yahoo.com/planned-parenthood-obamacare-funds-enrollment-push-234051835.html

Quote
Planned Parenthood to get Obamacare funds for enrollment push

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Planned Parenthood will get federal funds to help Americans enroll in insurance via President Barack Obama's healthcare program, U.S. officials said on Thursday, drawing fire from critics who oppose contraception and abortion in such coverage.

Across the country, 105 groups were awarded a total of $67 million in so-called navigator grants, ranging from the Epilepsy Foundation of Florida and AIDS Alabama, Inc. to the Greater Phoenix Urban League and the Legal Aid Society of Palm Beach County.

The inclusion of Planned Parenthood groups in three U.S. states, which provide women's health services including contraception and abortion, drew new criticism from Republicans and others. The healthcare law has attracted major opposition and legal challenges from religious and conservative groups for requiring insurers to cover the cost of birth control.

"More than 90 percent of what our health centers do is provide basic, preventive care, including cancer screenings and annual well-woman exams," said Eric Ferrero, vice president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

The navigator grants, he said, will enable local affiliates to help women enroll in insurance plans that cover preventive care and maternity care, and "have nothing to do with abortion and won't be used for abortion services."

Rep. Diane Black, a Tennessee Republican, blasted the grants to Planned Parenthood groups "despite assurances from the President when the law was passed that Obamacare would not give federal funding to abortion providers."

Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, in Iowa, will receive $214,427. The Intermountain Planned Parenthood Inc. of Montana will receive $295,604, allowing it to provide assistance at its health centers or via phone, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, in New Hampshire, will receive $145,161 to "assist patients and other consumers with understanding new programs, taking advantage of consumer protections, and navigating the health insurance system to find the most affordable coverage that meets their needs."

Roughly half of the 3 million patients Planned Parenthood treats every year in its clinics, most of them for women's health services such as Pap tests and pelvic exams, are uninsured. Planned Parenthood has therefore been training its health centers' staff to tell women about their options for obtaining insurance under Obamacare.

The grants were awarded only in 34 states that have declined to run their own exchange, requiring the federal government to do so. States such as California, Oregon and New York, which are operating their own exchanges, have their own "navigator" program.

"People are hungry for information on finding the security and peace of mind that come with affordable healthcare coverage," HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told reporters. Navigators will undergo 20 to 30 hours of training by HHS, with an emphasis on securing people's privacy, and will be paid through the grants.

HHS originally allotted $54 million for navigators in these states. The additional $13 million came from the department's Prevention and Public Health Fund.

The spending leaves the 34 states that are not running their own exchanges, because they oppose "Obamacare," well short of what other states have for navigators and other in-person assistance programs. For instance, California has $43 million to spend, Maryland has $24 million, and tiny Vermont has $13 million, according to numbers collected by healthcare consultant Avalere Health LLC.

The list of navigator awards is at http://cciio.cms.gov/programs/exchanges/assistance.html
« Last Edit: August 16, 2013, 04:09:08 am by Kilika » Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: August 16, 2013, 11:55:27 am »

Remember Obamacare was modeled after Romneycare in MA, which provided free taxpayer abortions - so this isn't a surprise. Abominable, yes, but not surprising.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: August 20, 2013, 05:57:25 pm »

New Abortion Restrictions in States Are 0 for 8 in Courts

By Andrew Harris - Aug 20, 2013 2:50 PM CT

State legislatures trying to curtail abortions have suffered a 0-for-8 losing streak after court challenges to their new laws this year.

The laws, all but one signed by Republican governors, drew on ideas from a playbook created by an anti-abortion group. Democrats plan to use the attempted curbs to boost 2014 congressional fundraising and increase voter support, calling the laws part of a “War on Women.”

Four states’ statutes attacked the core of the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings that a woman has a right to the procedure before a fetus is viable. Efforts to bar abortions after six, 12 and 20 weeks of pregnancy were halted in North Dakota, Arkansas and Idaho. An appeals court struck down Arizona’s 20-week ban. Laws imposing restrictions on doctors were blocked in North Dakota and two other states.

Trying to ban abortions before a fetus can live outside the mother’s womb “flies in the face” of U.S. Supreme Court rulings, said Paul B. Linton, a lawyer with the Chicago-based Thomas More Society whose group, an opponent of abortion, isn’t involved in defending early-pregnancy curbs.

Efforts to limit early-pregnancy abortions are unlikely to succeed, he said.

Federal Courts

“I cannot see the Supreme Court upholding any of these laws with respect to the pre-viability applications,” Linton said in an interview, adding: “I can’t see those laws being upheld by lower federal courts.”

A judge in Bismarck, North Dakota, supported that view on July 22 in temporarily striking down a state law barring abortions at the sixth week of pregnancy, when a fetal heartbeat can typically be detected, except in cases of medical emergency.

“The state has extended an invitation to an expensive court battle over a law restricting abortions that is a blatant violation of the constitutional guarantees afforded all women,” U.S. District Judge Daniel L. Hovland wrote.

It has been 40 years since the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade established a woman’s constitutional right to terminate an early pregnancy. Thirty states limited or prohibited abortions at the time. Colorado became the first to legalize it in 1967, after about 80 years of legislation against the procedure in the U.S., according to the pro-choice National Abortion Federation.

Curb Procedures

The high court reiterated its stance in “Roe” in 1992’s Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. The decisions didn’t end legislative attempts to curb the procedure.

Leading the anti-abortion campaign in the states are the Washington-based groups Americans United for Life and National Right to Life Committee. The latter organization started lobbying before “Roe,” said Mary Spaulding Balch, its state-legislation director.

“Not a single year has gone by where we didn’t pass some piece of substantive legislation,” she said. “Our state affiliates have been in the trenches from the beginning.”

Americans United for Life publishes an annual review of laws in states titled “Defending Life,” a guide for lawmakers that contains model legislation.

“We believe that in the end, the abortion issue ought to be left to the states, that it was a serious judicial error for the United States Supreme Court to put itself in the position of being the abortion control board for the country,” said Ovide Lamontagne, the organization’s general counsel and a two-time Republican candidate for governor of New Hampshire. “We are essentially providing a resource for legislators across the country.”

‘Defending Life’

Model bills in “Defending Life” and proposals by state affiliates of the National Right to Life Committee have been the impetus for some of the bills.

“Some people call it the playbook,” Jordan Goldberg, state advocacy counsel for the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights, said of “Defending Life.”

“If you look, you will see a lot of the legislation that’s pending,” based on the models, Goldberg said in a phone interview. “It’s not as if the people in North Dakota woke up one day and said, ‘We have a real problem with the admitting privileges.’”

Her organization, the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood, have led the legal opposition to laws targeting abortion.

Admitting Privileges

Laws resembling Americans United for Life’s proposal to require doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at hospitals within 30 miles of their facilities passed in Mississippi and North Dakota.

Those laws were temporarily blocked by judges who found they likely burdened a woman’s right in states where doctors would be unable to obtain the privileges and sole clinics would be forced to close.

Similar laws now blocked would have shuttered three of five clinics in Alabama and in Wisconsin would have closed two of four and curtailed services at a third.

Proponents of North Dakota’s law argued it was needed to guarantee emergency care for abortion patients. It would have closed the Red River Women’s Clinic in Fargo.

State Judge Wickham Corwin said abortions performed there are “extremely safe and effective” pre-viability procedures, making the statute unnecessary.

Undue Burden

In his July 31 decision, the judge also said the law posed an undue burden on women and that it ran afoul of the Supreme Court’s “Casey” decision.

Of the three hospitals within the specified 30-mile radius of the Red River clinic, Corwin said, one is affiliated with the Catholic Church and can’t be involved with abortions; the second -- a U.S. veterans’ hospital -- is barred from doing them by federal law; and the third has an annual minimum patient-admission requirement for a doctor’s affiliation.

“The legislature has shown open disdain for the rights clearly protected by the federal Constitution,” Corwin wrote.

Two hundred miles to the west in Bismarck on July 22, Hovland, the federal judge, was similarly critical in calling the fetal-heartbeat law a “blatant violation” of women’s rights.

Upon signing that measure into law in March, Republican Governor Jack Dalrymple acknowledged its uncertain future by saying its chance of surviving a court challenge was “in question.” He called it “a legitimate attempt by a state legislature to discover the boundaries of Roe v. Wade.”

Real Restrictions

“The courts are incredibly important stopgaps, but nobody should be sanguine to think the courts are the solution to this,” Louise Melling, the ACLU’s deputy legal director, said in a telephone interview, adding that resistance is needed in the state legislatures.

“It’s important that people realize the impact of these restrictions is real,” Melling said. The New York-based group earlier this year launched a web page, dedicated to the proposition that the abortion rights issue is a women’s issue.

An adjacent page states that more than 300 abortion-restrictive laws have been introduced by state legislators this year.

Steven R. Morrison, a constitutional-law professor at the University of North Dakota in Grand Forks, said some lawmakers don’t understand the constitutional implications of their work.

“They truly believe abortion is murder,” Morrison said. “Why wouldn’t you pass a law that prohibits it? But we don’t live in a theocracy, we live in a democracy, and they’re ignoring the case law as it stands.”

Futile Attempt

Even a futile attempt to curb abortion has moral, political and legal value, said Donald P. Judges, a University of Arkansas law professor.

“For some it’s to make a point to their constituents or perceived constituents,” said Judges, the author of “Hard Choices Lost Voices: How the Abortion Conflict Had Divided America, Distorted Constitutional Rights, and Damaged the Courts.”

In his state, a measure curbing abortions at the 12th week of pregnancy was passed this year by the legislature over Governor Mike Beebe’s veto. Then it was blocked in court by U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright.

Drawing conclusions about trends should await final rulings on the merits of cases challenging state restrictions and subsequent appeals, Lamontagne, of Americans United for Life, said in an e-mail. “Trial courts apply the law as they understand it to be, and they are not always correct,” he said.

Peter Rofes, a Marquette University law professor in Milwaukee, said there’s a positive side to investing “the time, the effort, the money to engage the challenge” of proposing laws almost certain to prompt lawsuits they may not survive.

“It’s a victory for those who seek to keep it in the nation’s consciousness,” he said.

Current Court

Rofes predicted the federal cases will rise at least to the regional appeals courts of appeal. Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen has filed papers signaling his intention to appeal an Aug. 2 ruling by a U.S. judge temporarily blocking the state’s hospital affiliate law.

Judges, the Arkansas law professor, agreed.

“I don’t think the current court is inclined to revisit Roe,” he said. “Until there’s a one-justice switch, I think it’s going to rest in the lower courts.”

Chief Justice John Roberts and associate justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito are perceived as the most likely to vote to revisit the issue and perhaps alter the status quo, Rofes said.

Justices Anthony Kennedy, Steven Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan are widely viewed as unwilling to fundamentally alter the law, he said.

National Right to Life is pushing for a different kind of legislation, barring abortion at the 20th week of a pregnancy on the ground that a fetus at that point can feel pain.

Neural Pathways

Such measures have been passed in the U.S. House of Representatives and 10 states, most recently Texas.

“Pain is a subjective experience, no matter who is experiencing it,” Cassing Hammond, a professor at Northwestern University in Chicago and a doctor of obstetrics and gynecology, said in a phone interview. Neural pathways that transmit that sensation and cerebral development needed to process it as pain typically don’t fully develop in a fetus until at least the 23rd week of a pregnancy, he said, and possibly not until the 29th.

“We simply do not have evidence that those pathways are in place” at 20 weeks, he said, even if neuroscience has advanced since Roe. “These bans do not make good scientific sense.”

Hammond served as chairman of the National Abortion Federation’s board from 2010 to 2012. He said his views are “not about politics. It’s about providing safe care to patients.”

Linton of the Thomas More Society said of the pre-viability fetal-pain laws, “I would like to see these bills upheld. I just don’t think they will be.”

An Arizona law criminalizing abortions performed at or after the 20th week of pregnancy was struck down May 21 by a San Francisco-based federal appeals court. Prohibiting the procedure before fetal viability is unconstitutional, the court said.

State lawmakers based the statute on “the documented risks to women’s health and the strong medical evidence that unborn children feel pain during an abortion at that gestational age,” according to the appeals court ruling.

The state has until Sept. 28 to petition the U.S. Supreme Court for review. Americans United for Life was among the groups filing briefs in support of the law. Arguing against it were attorneys from the Center and the ACLU.

Balch of National Right to Life said her organization hopes the Supreme Court finds a compelling state interest in protecting the life of a child that can feel pain, based on science that wasn’t available in 1973.

“It hasn’t been before the court before, and we would welcome that challenge,” she said.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: August 20, 2013, 06:19:01 pm »

Quote
Trying to ban abortions before a fetus can live outside the mother’s womb “flies in the face” of U.S. Supreme Court rulings, said Paul B. Linton, a lawyer with the Chicago-based Thomas More Society whose group, an opponent of abortion, isn’t involved in defending early-pregnancy curbs.

Efforts to limit early-pregnancy abortions are unlikely to succeed, he said.

Federal Courts

“I cannot see the Supreme Court upholding any of these laws with respect to the pre-viability applications,” Linton said in an interview, adding: “I can’t see those laws being upheld by lower federal courts.”

Well, Thomas Moore, FYI, was a Roman Catholic who helped lead the inquisitions for the Papacy a few centuries ago. No surprise that the Thomas Moore Society is controlled-opposition(at least judging by this guy's comments here).

Quote
It has been 40 years since the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade established a woman’s constitutional right to terminate an early pregnancy. Thirty states limited or prohibited abortions at the time. Colorado became the first to legalize it in 1967, after about 80 years of legislation against the procedure in the U.S., according to the pro-choice National Abortion Federation.

But it was Ronald Reagan who signed a big pro-abortion bill when governor of CA in 1967, which not only lead to 1m abortions during his term there, but all but paved the way for Roe V Wade as more states followed in CA's lead.

Quote
Leading the anti-abortion campaign in the states are the Washington-based groups Americans United for Life and National Right to Life Committee. The latter organization started lobbying before “Roe,” said Mary Spaulding Balch, its state-legislation director.

“Not a single year has gone by where we didn’t pass some piece of substantive legislation,” she said. “Our state affiliates have been in the trenches from the beginning.”


But Ronald Reagan, George HW Bush, and George W. Bush continue to get free rides for appointing Sandra Day O'Conner, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the USSC? You DO know that it was O'Conner's appointee by Reagan that was the clincher to the 1992 5-4 upholding of Roe V Wade, right?

Quote
We believe that in the end, the abortion issue ought to be left to the states, that it was a serious judicial error for the United States Supreme Court to put itself in the position of being the abortion control board for the country,” said Ovide Lamontagne, the organization’s general counsel and a two-time Republican candidate for governor of New Hampshire. “We are essentially providing a resource for legislators across the country.”


Uhm...WHAT? Huh Abortion IS MURDER, PERIOD! And should NOT be legalized anywhere!

Exo_20:13  Thou shalt not kill.


Quote
“The courts are incredibly important stopgaps, but nobody should be sanguine to think the courts are the solution to this,” Louise Melling, the ACLU’s deputy legal director, said in a telephone interview, adding that resistance is needed in the state legislatures.


Yes, they have been compromised. It's not just Clinton/Obama appointed judges making rulings for pro-abortion groups, Reagan/Bush appointed judges are doing so as well.

Quote
An adjacent page states that more than 300 abortion-restrictive laws have been introduced by state legislators this year.


And ALMOST ZERO of these laws were introduced by state legislators when George W. was President for 8 years! Roll Eyes

Quote
In his state, a measure curbing abortions at the 12th week of pregnancy was passed this year by the legislature over Governor Mike Beebe’s veto. Then it was blocked in court by U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright.


A George HW Bush appointee, that is.

Quote
Peter Rofes, a Marquette University law professor in Milwaukee, said there’s a positive side to investing “the time, the effort, the money to engage the challenge” of proposing laws almost certain to prompt lawsuits they may not survive.

“It’s a victory for those who seek to keep it in the nation’s consciousness,” he said.


Or the love of money(as it sounds like you said).

Quote
“I don’t think the current court is inclined to revisit Roe,” he said. “Until there’s a one-justice switch, I think it’s going to rest in the lower courts.”

Chief Justice John Roberts and associate justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito are perceived as the most likely to vote to revisit the issue and perhaps alter the status quo, Rofes said.


Wrong! Both John Roberts and Samuel Alito have made rulings in favor of pro-abortion when they were lower court judges(prior to George W. appointing them in 2005).

Quote
National Right to Life is pushing for a different kind of legislation, barring abortion at the 20th week of a pregnancy on the ground that a fetus at that point can feel pain.


Why is it that these "pro-life" groups set out to "compromise"? Either it's right, or it's wrong. Jesus Christ says either you are with me or against me. There's no gray areas.

Quote
Balch of National Right to Life said her organization hopes the Supreme Court finds a compelling state interest in protecting the life of a child that can feel pain, based on science that wasn’t available in 1973.


Huh? Wasn't this science available in 1992, when Roe V Wade was sent to the USSC to review? Or shouldn't have this science been available to all of the lower court judges that made rulings recently? Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: August 20, 2013, 06:36:40 pm by BornAgain2 » Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: August 27, 2013, 12:42:13 pm »

Your Personal Data Given to Planned Parenthood



 Published on Aug 25, 2013

America's number one abortion mill is expanding into another line of business — advising people like you how to navigate the complexities of Obamacare's health care exchanges. Plus, thanks to a relaxed screening policy, the new positions of trust will be a "go to" source of jobs for ex-cons.
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy