Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Texas Loses All Its Medicaid Money (for Women) Due to Its [War on Women]

18788899092

Posts

  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning Registered User regular
    Malkor wrote: »
    lol the Church


    Maybe they should focus on more churchy stuff and less on reproduction

    Really, they're missing a golden opportunity. If they allowed priests and bishops to get married and have kids, and for that matter allowed women to be priests at all, they might be able to talk. Maybe. As long as you claim to be celibate and chaste, though, what the fuck business is it of yours?

  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2012
    Yup, that's an easy discrimination case.

    Laughably easy.

    Just_Bri_Thanks on
    Some days I just want to smack people with a rolled up newspaper. Or a phone book.
    A folding chair is looking like an attractive option right now too...
  • rockrngerrockrnger Registered User regular
    Yup, that's an easy discrimination case.

    Laughably easy.

    Didn't scotus just rule against these kinds of cases?

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote: »
    Yup, that's an easy discrimination case.

    Laughably easy.

    Didn't scotus just rule against these kinds of cases?

    Only with regard to employees the church considers "ministers."

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    I'm not a fan of the church's stance on these things, but the idea that IVF and abortion are both bad because they destroy viable embryos (and thus ensouled human life) is internally consistent. In my social circle there is more flak against the church for NOT condemning IVF. Now to be completely consistent they need to okay the use of contraceptives.

    Except that's not the issue. The issue is the church pressing its beliefs on secular employees.

    There was just a big SCOTUS case saying this sort of thing was, more or less, perfectly legal.

    The reason she might win this one is only because apparently infertility is considered a disability under the law, which may change the case somewhat.

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    I'm not a fan of the church's stance on these things, but the idea that IVF and abortion are both bad because they destroy viable embryos (and thus ensouled human life) is internally consistent. In my social circle there is more flak against the church for NOT condemning IVF. Now to be completely consistent they need to okay the use of contraceptives.

    Except that's not the issue. The issue is the church pressing its beliefs on secular employees.

    There was just a big SCOTUS case saying this sort of thing was, more or less, perfectly legal.

    The reason she might win this one is only because apparently infertility is considered a disability under the law, which may change the case somewhat.

    The disability thing won't matter after Hosanna-Tabor; that case was about a disability as well (narcolepsy), plus the fact that some genius came up with the idea to make it "against our religion" to sue the church.

    If she was actually a secular employee (more like a janitor than a priest) then she might have a case.

  • mythagomythago Registered User regular
    KalTorak wrote: »
    The disability thing won't matter after Hosanna-Tabor; that case was about a disability as well (narcolepsy), plus the fact that some genius came up with the idea to make it "against our religion" to sue the church.

    If she was actually a secular employee (more like a janitor than a priest) then she might have a case.

    "It's against our religion to get sued!" doesn't work. The issue with the recent SCOTUS decision is that religious groups can do whatever they want re their *ministerial* employees. A woman can't sue the Catholic church for refusing to hire her as a priest, say.

    It basically means that any time a religious organization does something shitty to its secular employees, the employee will have to deal with a bullshit motion claiming they were 'ministerial'.

    Three lines of plaintext:
    obsolete signature form
    replaced by JPEGs.
  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    Yeah i said that two posts up.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • ThomamelasThomamelas Bro!Registered User regular
    In other good news, Oklahoma's Supreme Court unanimously struck down the attempt to put a personhood amendment on the ballot.

  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular

    But the bad news is Texas may just defund the program altogether.

    camo_sig2.png
  • YamiB.YamiB. Registered User regular

    It looks like a higher court has reversed this ruling.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/01/us-usa-abortion-texas-idUSBRE8400T320120501
    The ruling, by Judge Jerry Smith of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, reversed a lower court ruling Monday in favor of the family planning organization. The decision on Tuesday means the state is free for now to enforce a new rule banning Planned Parenthood from the Women's Health Program, Texas officials said.

  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    Damn, that was fast.

    camo_sig2.png
  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Damn, that was fast.

    Texas moves fast when it comes to stunting progress.

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • mythagomythago Registered User regular
    You know, most of the time I'm loath to say "judicial activism" or "that judge just was motivated by personal bias", because most judges DO try to reach the correct result. But this is the 5th Circuit.

    Three lines of plaintext:
    obsolete signature form
    replaced by JPEGs.
  • emnmnmeemnmnme Heard about this on conservative radio:Registered User regular
    Henroid wrote: »
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Damn, that was fast.

    Texas moves fast when it comes to stunting progress.

    Texas moves fast when it comes to saving sweet, innocent, doe-eyed little fetuses from ending up in the incinerator.

    easybossfight_zps4752c132.gif
  • MvrckMvrck Registered User regular
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Damn, that was fast.

    They had to get back to putting retards in the chair.

    mvrck.png
  • emp123emp123 Registered User regular
    Henroid wrote: »
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Damn, that was fast.

    Texas moves fast when it comes to stunting progress.

    You have to be ever vigilant since its always happening.

    camo_sig2.png
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • bowenbowen Registered User regular
  • GnomeTankGnomeTank Registered User regular
    And people wonder why I ran away from Texas as fast as I could. As soon as the opportunity arose to move back home, I was gone. That place is really the hellhole people make it out to be.

    Sagroth wrote: »
    Oh c'mon FyreWulff, no one's gonna pay to visit Uranus.
    Steam: Brainling, XBL / PSN: GnomeTank, NintendoID: Brainling, FF14: Zillius Rosh
  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning Registered User regular

    Oh look, the pro-lifers are projecting again.

  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    YamiB. wrote: »

    It looks like a higher court has reversed this ruling.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/01/us-usa-abortion-texas-idUSBRE8400T320120501
    The ruling, by Judge Jerry Smith of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, reversed a lower court ruling Monday in favor of the family planning organization. The decision on Tuesday means the state is free for now to enforce a new rule banning Planned Parenthood from the Women's Health Program, Texas officials said.
    "Texas has a long history of protecting life (of the unborn)," spokeswoman Catherine Frazier said in a statement.
    The (of the unborn) makes the joke

    ed
    "Texas has a long history of pursuing justice (for white people)."

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    Yeah, it really sucks how PP keeps firebombing adoption agencies and killing the people who work there.

    Martini_Philosopher
  • GnomeTankGnomeTank Registered User regular
    KalTorak wrote: »
    Yeah, it really sucks how PP keeps firebombing adoption agencies and killing the people who work there.

    And how they follow adoption and orphanage workers home and murder them and their wives. Good stuff.

    Sagroth wrote: »
    Oh c'mon FyreWulff, no one's gonna pay to visit Uranus.
    Steam: Brainling, XBL / PSN: GnomeTank, NintendoID: Brainling, FF14: Zillius Rosh
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    "Planned parenthood is a terrorist organization! That's why we have to shoot their doctors while they attend church service! It's for the children!"

    TOG Solid wrote:
    If that guy wasn't white he would have gotten popped by so many tasers simultaneously that Marvel could use that as the new origin for Electro.
  • chrisnlchrisnl Registered User regular
    Man, I don't remember the area of Texas that I grew up in being this retarded. It was great being an ignorant kid I guess.

    steam_sig.png
    FFXIV - Ruby Heliconia
  • Magus`Magus` Registered User regular
    GnomeTank wrote: »
    KalTorak wrote: »
    Yeah, it really sucks how PP keeps firebombing adoption agencies and killing the people who work there.

    And how they follow adoption and orphanage workers home and murder them and their wives. Good stuff.

    Whoa whoa, what is this in reference to? (Yes I realize it's sarcasm taken as is)

  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    Are you fucking kidding me?

    I mean, yay for Governor Dayton and all, but state Sen. Gazelka seriously goes on about Viagra like it's a fucking fertility treatment, completely ignoring the (ahem) recreational uses of it.

    "I note that you sponsored the restriction of the use of Ru-486, but still think that Viagra should be unregulated. Can you explain that, Senator?"
    "BONERS = LIFE"

    Shadowen on
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    GnomeTank wrote: »
    And people wonder why I ran away from Texas as fast as I could. As soon as the opportunity arose to move back home, I was gone. That place is really the hellhole people make it out to be.

    And now I know why the Mrs. crossed out every single one of my potential job applications that had "Texas" anywhere on it.

    steam_sig.png
  • DiannaoChongDiannaoChong Registered User regular
    edited May 2012

    holy shit their update:
    UPDATE: 8:03 p.m. -- Jerry Strickland, a spokesman for the Texas attorney general's office, said state attorneys were not comparing Planned Parenthood to a terrorist organization, but rather were citing a Supreme Court case in the brief that happened to be about a terrorist organization.

    "Texas did not state -– and does not believe –- that Planned Parenthood is a terrorist organization or comparable to one. Period," Strickland said. "When parties to lawsuits are wrong on the facts and wrong on the law, they resort to the same outrageous rhetoric Planned Parenthood is using today to distract from the real issues."

    Jesus christ do you think he understood any of what he just said? any of it? I think I am done reading the internet for a while.

    Edit: This is actually their new attack plan isnt it? when someone calls them on lying for distraction, they claim their attackers are changing the narrative right? its the "NU UH, YOU" defense? My boss claimed this when people were outraged by rush calling that woman who said it was too expensive to have sex a slut. "why do they have to change the narrative instead of arguing about the facts her testimony?" "How are they changing the narritive when rush changed it by calling her a slut instead of arguing what she said was wrong? They are directly reacting to him". "omg I dont see how that has anything to do with it". we then had to have a discussion because he didnt think it was offensive that rush used the word slut. He backed down really quickly when he realized he said that out loud.

    DiannaoChong on
    steam_sig.png
  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular

    holy shit their update:
    UPDATE: 8:03 p.m. -- Jerry Strickland, a spokesman for the Texas attorney general's office, said state attorneys were not comparing Planned Parenthood to a terrorist organization, but rather were citing a Supreme Court case in the brief that happened to be about a terrorist organization.

    "Texas did not state -– and does not believe –- that Planned Parenthood is a terrorist organization or comparable to one. Period," Strickland said. "When parties to lawsuits are wrong on the facts and wrong on the law, they resort to the same outrageous rhetoric Planned Parenthood is using today to distract from the real issues."

    Jesus christ do you think he understood any of what he just said? any of it? I think I am done reading the internet for a while.

    Edit: This is actually their new attack plan isnt it? when someone calls them on lying for distraction, they claim their attackers are changing the narrative right? its the "NU UH, YOU" defense? My boss claimed this when people were outraged by rush calling that woman who said it was too expensive to have sex a slut. "why do they have to change the narrative instead of arguing about the facts her testimony?" "How are they changing the narritive when rush changed it by calling her a slut instead of arguing what she said was wrong? They are directly reacting to him". "omg I dont see how that has anything to do with it". we then had to have a discussion because he didnt think it was offensive that rush used the word slut. He backed down really quickly when he realized he said that out loud.

    No, that's the kind of thing a first year law student would tell you.

    If you are weak on the facts, argue the law

    If you are weak on the law, argue the facts

    If you are weak on both, pound the podium


    Quite frankly I'm inclined to believe him on this particular wrinkle being a non-issue

  • AstaerethAstaereth Registered User regular
    Elldren wrote: »
    If you are weak on the facts, pound the law

    If you are weak on the law, pound the table

    I fixed this so it's actually pithy. It was annoying me.

    Find more of my writing at The Thieves' Den.
    Currently airing: board game reviews on Thursdays!
  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular
    Astaereth wrote: »
    Elldren wrote: »
    If you are weak on the facts, pound the law

    If you are weak on the law, pound the table

    I fixed this so it's actually pithy. It was annoying me.

    whatever

    the point was it is a common aphorism, not one maliciously invented by the texas ag office

  • DiannaoChongDiannaoChong Registered User regular
    I'm just saying we wouldn't let Hitler get away with that Elldren. That's all.

    Spoiler:

    steam_sig.png
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    Resurrecting this thread, from the congress thread
    Trace wrote: »
    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/24/21117142-shackled-and-pregnant-wis-case-challenges-fetal-protection-law?lite


    When Alicia Beltran was 12 weeks pregnant, she took herself to a health clinic about a mile from her home in Jackson, Wis., for a prenatal checkup. But what started as a routine visit ended with Beltran eventually handcuffed and shackled in government custody – and at the center of a first-of-its-kind federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a state’s fetal protection law.

    At the hearing, her lawyers say, the judge told Beltran that an attorney would not be provided for her at that time but that she could seek counsel for her next hearing in the case. And yet, a lawyer had been appointed to represent her fetus.


    Not exactly Congress, really. However this is horrifying enough so I'm throwing it in the Congress thread with all the other real life horror stories.


    This is fucked up, and I'm crossing my fingers that the supreme court not only hears this but they don't rule like monsters

    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
    Gnome-Interruptus
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    Supporters of these laws say they are intended to protect unborn children. “Child abuse is child abuse, whether it’s in the womb or out of it,” said Jennifer Mason, communication director for Personhood USA, a non-profit organization seeking personhood status for fetuses. Advocates of fetal personhood claimed a victory in January when the Alabama Supreme Court upheld the inclusion of unborn children in that state’s child endangerment statute.

    Some experts argue that prosecuting pregnant women can ultimately put fetuses at risk, especially when healthcare providers and social workers are the ones reporting women to authorities. There is evidence indicating that women who fear criminal charges or other state intervention are less likely to seek medical care or be honest with their doctors, said Kenneth De Ville, a medical humanities professor at East Carolina University in Greenville, N.C., who published a study on the Wisconsin law. “Prenatal care is really the best thing you can do to enhance fetal health,” he said. “And you’re driving women away from prenatal care.”

    Gee whiz I wonder why that might be.

    TOG Solid wrote:
    If that guy wasn't white he would have gotten popped by so many tasers simultaneously that Marvel could use that as the new origin for Electro.
  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    Why can't women just accept that they're the lawful property of the man who generously chooses to use them to make more sons? Life would be so much easier for everyone.

  • MillMill Registered User regular
    Yeah, that is incredibly fucked up since that law makes it illegal to do basic prenatal care. I'd also imagine that that's going to cause to expecting mothers, who get arrested for this bullshit, higher chance of miscarriage thanks to being denied access to care. Fucking dumbass fundamentalists republicans need to crawl back under the shitty rocks they were living under and let people go about their business, instead of forcing their back-ass-wards views on people in ways that cause more damage.

    I can only hope that our current SCOTUS will strike this shit down, but I'm a little worried that five of them will rule in favor of dumbass fundies.

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    Freedom to be arrested by the state, due to circumstances created by your fucked healthcare system, which you then decline to improve!

    Neco
Sign In or Register to comment.