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.
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.
Seriously? Everyone knows the Supreme Court isn't legitimate, even liberals know it.
Liberals don't believe the court was legitimate in the "Heller" case, or McDonald v. Chicago, or Citizens-United, or countless other decisions that split 5-4, and that they didn't agree with.
For that matter, the liberals are freaking out right now because Scalia died, and both parties desperately want the presidency so that they can appoint possibly several new Supreme Court Justices.
The liberals jumped up and down when Scalia died, because they believed Obama would appoint a "left-leaning" justice, who would "vote" their way.
The Supreme Court is a political appointment, and only a moron would believe otherwise.
As a liberal, I firmly believe the court is legitimate. I don't agree with all their decisions, and I can readily explain where I think their legal reasoning is faulty, but I have 100% faith in the Supreme Court and the system. Bad decisions eventually get corrected, like Dred Scott did. And no, I did not jump up and down when Scalia died.
I'm not a moron, either. Supreme Court appointments are politicized, and the justices are people, just like us, who have their own beliefs and opinions. At the same time, the review system is designed to assure us well-qualified jurists who meet high ethical standards and whose passion is the law. We may end up with a few justices who've not been of the highest quality, but overall, again and again and again, we've enjoyed the legacy of brilliant legal thinkers who've upheld the principles of our Constitution.
The thread that will not die. However, it is difficult to 'win' an argument with supporters of Professor Trump.
I will agree about the colonoscopy risks. Indeed, in my 26 years of reviewing medical records for disability, I have declared to my doctor that I see no reason to ever undergo a colonoscopy (I am now 61), since my family has zero history of such cancer. I have seen far too many cases where the claimant underwent a colonoscopy and subsequently required emergency care treatment (usually a few days after returning home from having the procedure done).
Of course, if one has a family history of such, or of really any type of cancer, then I do encourage them to undergo the procedure if advised by the physician.
He said would punish a woman-- but did he say against abortions??
Trump clarified his views on abortion, saying he favors abortion rights, but respects those who oppose his position. “I believe it is a personal decision that should be left to the women and their doctors,†he said.
The death rate from pregnancy and childbirth is much higher. Statistically, more women's lives are saved from abortion than if they didn't.
That wasn't even the argument. The question was whether the state of Texas had the authority to place regulations on abortion clinics to make them more safe.
I mean, the medical industry is probably the most-regulated industry in the entire country, but no one questions Texas' authority to regulate their healthcare industry, except in the case of regulations on abortion clinics. Then everyone freaks out.
He said would punish a woman-- but did he say against abortions??
Trump clarified his views on abortion, saying he favors abortion rights, but respects those who oppose his position. “I believe it is a personal decision that should be left to the women and their doctors,†he said.
He no longer favors abortion rights, and did state earlier this year that he would punish the woman, but hours later recanted and said he'd punish the doctor instead.
That wasn't even the argument. The question was whether the state of Texas had the authority to place regulations on abortion clinics to make them more safe.
I mean, the medical industry is probably the most-regulated industry in the entire country, but no one questions Texas' authority to regulate their healthcare industry, except in the case of regulations on abortion clinics. Then everyone freaks out.
The question wasn't about regulations to make clinics more safe, the question was about the state claiming that safety was their aim, when, in fact, shutting down the clinics was their aim. The argument made to the Supreme Court was that safety was not their aim, at all. Their aim was to make the regulations so burdensome that the clinics would have to close, thereby restricting women's access to a safe and legal medical procedure.
The question wasn't about regulations to make clinics more safe, the question was about the state claiming that safety was their aim, when, in fact, shutting down the clinics was their aim.
Oh, good grief. When are you all going to look at the actual effects of such a decision instead of letting your emotions commandeer your reactions?
Either ALL patients are afforded the protection of minimal required standards in ambulatory surgery centers (suction aspiration abortion is a surgical procedure), or none are.
Or do you all support specifically making women an inferior class in regards to health care and subsequently everything else?
The thread that will not die. However, it is difficult to 'win' an argument with supporters of Professor Trump.
I will agree about the colonoscopy risks. Indeed, in my 26 years of reviewing medical records for disability, I have declared to my doctor that I see no reason to ever undergo a colonoscopy (I am now 61), since my family has zero history of such cancer. I have seen far too many cases where the claimant underwent a colonoscopy and subsequently required emergency care treatment (usually a few days after returning home from having the procedure done).
Of course, if one has a family history of such, or of really any type of cancer, then I do encourage them to undergo the procedure if advised by the physician.
Colonoscopies carry a significant higher risk than abortion procedures, it is not just a diagnostic as someone stated . A significant portion result in surgery removing polyps and cysts.
Now why didn't Texas address this in HB2 and require building that meet Ambulatory Standards.
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.
