Another judge blocks Trump's abortion gag rule “This is madness.’’

essentialsaltes said:

McShane pointed to Congress’ direction that all “pregnancy counseling be non-directive’’ and found the government’s “gag rule’’ represents the essence of counseling that is directed, meaning it steers or directs a patient toward a particular option over another.

Under the rule, a health care provider would have to refer a woman who doesn’t want to continue her pregnancy to either prenatal care or an adoption agency.

“One would expect to find such a process not in a federal program serving millions of clients, but in a Kafka novel,’’ McShane wrote. “This is madness.’’

Click to expand...

Thanks for the article.

The part I am scratching my head on though...
quote:"“The government has no place in conversations between women and their doctors, and I am pleased that a federal judge agreed that the Trump administration’s reckless rule should be blocked,” Brown said in a statement."

Okay I suppose I agree, but people opening themselves up for pregnancy "they didn't want" doesn't entitle them to my money from taxes. They made the "mistake", they can pay for it themselves. Why should I be responsible for their irresponsibility?

That's just one of my gripes to keep any "moral"/etc gripes out of this.

Don't want people to tell you how to go about your body, then pay for it yourself. Thank you, I'm outta here.

The Romans make a desert and call it peace.

Madness that unborn children can't be killed in silence, and subsidised? Abortions. Population and 'welfare' control. As well as the blood money for the organs.

Unless the structure of society changes, the soil, is not currently a sustainable resource. Fallen world, or Thomas Jefferson's Agrarianism would have been followed. Perhaps too optimistic. Another recent post on voluntarism, @essentialsaltes and that Lovecraft quote is all to stark.

essentialsaltes said:

It's hard for me to tell just what your complaint is

Click to expand...

You had just put it in quotes. So, I believe maybe you did know?

essentialsaltes said:

What about a pregnancy the person did want? Should the state (i.e. taxpayers) help pay for prenatal care to ensure that babies are born healthy? Or do you not want to pay for this, because you weren't consulted when the mother decided to have a baby. It's none of your business?

Click to expand...

I didn't complain about that. My complaint was with those who "didn't want" that.

I was merely just griping about that. No serious conversation needed =)

essentialsaltes said:

McShane pointed to Congress’ direction that all “pregnancy counseling be non-directive’’ and found the government’s “gag rule’’ represents the essence of counseling that is directed, meaning it steers or directs a patient toward a particular option over another.

Under the rule, a health care provider would have to refer a woman who doesn’t want to continue her pregnancy to either prenatal care or an adoption agency.

“One would expect to find such a process not in a federal program serving millions of clients, but in a Kafka novel,’’ McShane wrote. “This is madness.’’

Click to expand...

I read this opinion in the wee hours...whoever tried to promulgate this “Final Rule” obviously decided to disregard specific instruction from Congress, but tried to “redefine” what “nondirectives” were.

Acts2:38 said:

Thanks for the article.

The part I am scratching my head on though...
quote:"“The government has no place in conversations between women and their doctors, and I am pleased that a federal judge agreed that the Trump administration’s reckless rule should be blocked,” Brown said in a statement."

Okay I suppose I agree, but people opening themselves up for pregnancy "they didn't want" doesn't entitle them to my money from taxes. They made the "mistake", they can pay for it themselves. Why should I be responsible for their irresponsibility?

That's just one of my gripes to keep any "moral"/etc gripes out of this.

Don't want people to tell you how to go about your body, then pay for it yourself. Thank you, I'm outta here.

Click to expand...

No Title X monies go to abortions. Period.
This “Final Rule” would have required that not only that grantees that provide “abortion services” keep detailed financial records to make sure that no taxpayer monies are used to provide abortion, (which is the status quo), but also separate physical venues, (offices with separate entrances, or even separate buildings).

The “Hyde Amendment” still controls, besides.

Pommer said:

No Title X monies go to abortions. Period.
This “Final Rule” would have required that not only that grantees that provide “abortion services” keep detailed financial records to make sure that no taxpayer monies are used to provide abortion, (which is the status quo), but also separate physical venues, (offices with separate entrances, or even separate buildings).

The “Hyde Amendment” still controls, besides.

Click to expand...

Then I have just been educated. I should go study up on the specifics more then.

essentialsaltes said:

McShane pointed to Congress’ direction that all “pregnancy counseling be non-directive’’ and found the government’s “gag rule’’ represents the essence of counseling that is directed, meaning it steers or directs a patient toward a particular option over another.

Under the rule, a health care provider would have to refer a woman who doesn’t want to continue her pregnancy to either prenatal care or an adoption agency.

“One would expect to find such a process not in a federal program serving millions of clients, but in a Kafka novel,’’ McShane wrote. “This is madness.’’

Click to expand...

I have class coming up in three minutes so this is a very brief response. I wanted to point out the that global gag rule has been wildly counterproductive, actually increasing abortions, as well as exacerbating suffering, and stimulating the rate of tuberculosis and HIV transmission. It's pro-life rhetoric, and anti-life in practicality. I took an independent research class last autumn specifically studying the ramifications of the global gag rule in South Africa (I spent six weeks there in August-September as part of the studies), and how it generated a surge of illegal abortion providers.

One of my professors has studied this extensively for years. Gtg, you can Google Dr. Eran Bendavid, Stanford.

Acts2:38 said:

Then I have just been educated. I should go study up on the specifics more then.

Click to expand...

The opinion has a wealth of information in it, and at 32 pages not a slough to get through, I advise you read it for yourself to see the “arbitrary and capricious” nature of the “Final Rule”.
http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/04/29/ama.pdf

Can't we just replace "a woman and her doctor" with anything we want in order to justify anything we want?

For all of his late night tweeting, President Trump's morality is far more developed than that of any judge trying to block his actions against the abortion regime.

Acts2:38 said:

Okay I suppose I agree, but people opening themselves up for pregnancy "they didn't want" doesn't entitle them to my money from taxes. They made the "mistake", they can pay for it themselves. Why should I be responsible for their irresponsibility?.

Click to expand...

Why not? You do it with car insurance don't you?

rambot said:

Why not? You do it with car insurance don't you?

Click to expand...

Sorry, I dont understand. I pay my own car insurance, no one else does. When I hit someone, the money that I have been paying the insurance company for is then used to cover it. Who is paying for me?

Acts2:38 said:

Sorry, I dont understand. I pay my own car insurance, no one else does. When I hit someone, the money that I have been paying the insurance company for is then used to cover it. Who is paying for me?

Click to expand...

Incorrect. The money you pay is used to cover OTHER people's accident. It's not a savings plan; it's insurance.

Did you think your insurance was a bank account? Caaaause no.

I find it insane that women were screaming in joy, like a bunch of nut-jobs, when abortion in Ireland was legalised.

The money has to come from somewhere either it's baby parts, or money out of the economy affecting taxpayers. I can't imagine them doing it for free! or less than a Teacher's salary, I watched on an undercover video it was something like $50,000 PLUS BONUSES!(organs for the Chinese). The specifics are Bull [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], just like Roadtax in the UK.

Women don't want to deal with the shame and potential guilt of getting an abortion. So the other option leads to darker paths, the costs go somewhere. For a Judge to call it madness, if the USA were still partially aristocratic, he'd be run through or off.

Major infanticide in Antiquity, I remember watch a documentary that had a Roman Bathhouse in Syria, full of infant skeletons.

For Christians to talk of it as insurance, disgusting.

essentialsaltes said:

McShane pointed to Congress’ direction that all “pregnancy counseling be non-directive’’ and found the government’s “gag rule’’ represents the essence of counseling that is directed, meaning it steers or directs a patient toward a particular option over another.

Under the rule, a health care provider would have to refer a woman who doesn’t want to continue her pregnancy to either prenatal care or an adoption agency.

“One would expect to find such a process not in a federal program serving millions of clients, but in a Kafka novel,’’ McShane wrote. “This is madness.’’

Click to expand...

I agree, it's a limit on freedom of speech that is unacceptable. We aren't asking people to pay for abortions at taxpayer expense, but accepting government money doesn't mean people don't have the right to talk about a legal medical procedure.

rambot said:

Incorrect. The money you pay is used to cover OTHER people's accident. It's not a savings plan; it's insurance.

Did you think your insurance was a bank account? Caaaause no.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, my insurance would cover me, or the other. I asked, Ive experienced it, as far as bank account, of course its not. However, I pay into it, I get the protection from myself and others. Key word is, I am paying for it (see that?), and no one else is.

Acts2:38 said:

On the contrary, my insurance would cover me, or the other. I asked, Ive experienced it, as far as bank account, of course its not. However, I pay into it, I get the protection from myself and others. Key word is, I am paying for it (see that?), and no one else is.

Click to expand...

How is that any different than taxes that cover social services? You (along with a group of other people) pay into a pool of money held by an entity - that entity then distributes that money as needed among those covered by the entity.

When it comes to abortion services, the argument is moot because the government does not pay for or subsidize abortion, but this can be applied to all other services that might apply in the case of an unplanned pregnancy - medical care (if the woman is covered by Medicare or Medicaid), food stamps, housing assistance, etc.

TuxAme said:

Can't we just replace "a woman and her doctor" with anything we want in order to justify anything we want?

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, are you claiming that government involvement is OK in all situations? If not then I fail to see what your claim here means. I thought most people recognized that we as Americans had a right to be free from government interference in certain areas of our lives. Certainly this has been a defining conservative cause for as long as I can remember.

TuxAme said:

For all of his late night tweeting, President Trump's morality is far more developed than that of any judge trying to block his actions against the abortion regime.

Click to expand...