Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not seeing it. The same is required of ambulatory surgery centers. Why shouldn't women's health care have to meet the same standards as everyone else's?
Frankly, I'm stumped as to why so many of you are willing to accept and celebrate the SCOTUS ruling that allows facilities that treat women, exclusively, to have lower standards.
OK, now you're just copying and pasting the same thing. That's not having a discussion. It means you are out of arguments.
It doesn't. It concerns itself with the equal rights of the citizens of the United States. If a law's purpose is to restrict access to medical procedures that are enjoyed only by women, then the law is restricting the rights of women versus the general population.
The law was improving the quality of medical care at those clinics.
The state could write new laws removing restrictions regarding abortions. This would greatly increase access to abortions and allow anyone to perform them, would that make you happy?
This thread encouraged me to listen to the audio and follow along with the transcript for about 30 minutes. If I had to guess, I would say the entire audio is about 2 hours long.
So many of the issues brought up in this thread are specifically addressed in the arguments. I found it fascinating to listen to, partially because I was a Political Science major in College, and I firmly believe in our system of 3 separate, but equal, branches of government with their checks and balances on each other (while recognizing that there need to be tweaks).
If you have the time, I encourage you to listen to it, or any other case that might be of interest to you. Apologies if this has already been posted, this thread is up to 56 pages now...
Can you be more specific? If the Supreme Court, based on input from medical expert testimony, agreed that the procedure is safe enough to not warrant special laws and requirements, why do *you* still believe otherwise? Can you share what it is that leads you to believe that abortion is dangerous?
I mean why not just do it in the alleyways? It's safe enough right?
Dangerous in what way? They couldn't come up with even one example of anyone being adversely affected by the procedure when they were arguing the case. Read the transcript. That is the main reason they struck the law down.
To be fair, the case was likely already decided before the case was even heard. The judges aren't judging, they're voting. Which is why, had Scalia been on the court, it would have broke 5-4.
Stop pretending the Supreme Court is legitimate.
If Trump replaces Scalia and Ginsburg dies, you could retry the case and overturn this decision.
I mean, Scalia, before he died, had been pushing for years to effectively retry Roe v. Wade. If Trump gets eight years of nominations, it might very-well be overturned. So what?
I mean why not just do it in the alleyways? It's safe enough right?
It would be a lot more honest if you just came out and said "I strongly dislike abortion", rather than make false claims about the safety of it and then when pressed to elaborate, respond with silly emotional things such as this.
You got nothing. It's obvious. Moving along now ...
OK, now you're just copying and pasting the same thing. That's not having a discussion. It means you are out of arguments.
Nope. You haven't answered the question... Why shouldn't women's health care have to meet the same standards as everyone else's?
Frankly, I'm stumped as to why so many of you are willing to accept and celebrate the SCOTUS ruling that allows facilities that treat women, exclusively, to have lower standards.
To be fair, the case was likely already decided before the case was even heard. The judges aren't judging, they're voting. Which is why, had Scalia been on the court, it would have broke 5-4.
Stop pretending the Supreme Court is legitimate.
If Trump replaces Scalia and Ginsburg dies, you could retry the case and overturn this decision.
I mean, Scalia, before he died, had been pushing for years to effectively retry Roe v. Wade. If Trump gets eight years of nominations, it might very-well be overturned. So what?
The Supreme Court is legitimate. This case was decided this way the Texas law was not about healthcare, it was about stopping abortion, and controlling women.
I mean why not just do it in the alleyways? It's safe enough right?
It's a safe medical procedure.
And your argument is nonsensical. Vasectomies are safe, right? Do you advocate having the procedure done in alleys? Having a tooth pulled is safe, right? Again, do it in alleys?
The law was improving the quality of medical care at those clinics.
It's quite clear that many don't want that. Better to keep women 2nd class citizens in regards to their health care. They're actually celebrating that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
