It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

PolitiFact Blasts Kamala Harris Over ‘False’ Kavanaugh Video

page: 4
39
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 11:21 AM
link   
DaaaaHaHaHa .... 😃

The gray one is in on it too !!

Mrs Donkey-Konger Tweets !!

Hillary Clinton Pushes Kamala Harris’s Debunked Kavanaugh Birth Control Smear


"Stop kicking me in the head
or I'll have you brought to heel !!"




posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 11:23 AM
link   
This sums up the Democrats at the Kavanaugh hearings.

edit on 12/9/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 03:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454


Still, Kavanaugh is wrong. Priests for Life nor the Little Sisters ever claimed that the ACA required them to facilitate "abortifacients", because it didn't. Kavanaugh was wrong in his assertion that the Priests for Life or the Little Sisters argued that the contraception requirement forced them to condone abortifacients, in their religious freedom SCOTUS case against ACA. That just was not their argument. It's Kavanaugh that is conflating the ACA contraception mandate with forcing employers to provide abortifacients. It's Kavanaugh that thinks contraception, which prevents fertilization, induces abortion.

For Priests for Life and the Little Sisters, having to provide a paper saying they were against contraception was a bridge too far, let along abortion.


This kind of accommodation is also available to religious non-profit organizations, which includes the seven plaintiffs in these cases: the Little Sisters of the Poor; a pro-life organization called Priests for Life; representatives of several Roman Catholic organizations; and Geneva College, Southern Nazarene University, and East Texas Baptist University. But these organizations say this is insufficient for a number of technical reasons, the most important being that they believe filling out the form still amounts to complicity in providing people with contraception.
www.theatlantic.com...


Which contraceptives are covered under the ACA?
The ACA covers 20 contraceptives—the full range of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved contraceptives—that all prevent fertilization2, including birth control pills, patches, rings, shots, cervical caps, contraceptive implants, diaphragms, intrauterine devices (IUDs), emergency contraception, and permanent contraceptive methods.

2. Contraceptives are not synonymous with abortifacients, though many right-wing and faith-based organizations conflate the two. The speculation that the birth control pill and similar methods are “chemical abortions” has not been observed in clinical settings; contraceptive scientists have been able to clinically substantiate that birth control drugs and devices prevent fertilization



3. Food and Drug Administration, “FDA approves Plan B One-Step emergency contraceptive for use without a prescription for all women of child-bearing potential.” (June 20, 2013).

www.fda.gov... now.org...

So, not only does the ACA not require employers to provide abortificients insurance coverage, the product in question was available over the counter, without a prescription well before the case went before SCOTUS.


So again, in summary, Brett Kavanaugh was wrong to say that the ACA contraception mandate included abortificients, it didn't, or that religious organizations claimed that it did, they didn't. The myth of abortion concealed inside the contraception mandate is all Kavanaugh, not Priests for Life nor the Little Sisters of the Poor.




Most Catholics aren't about birth control A), and B) you still gloss over the fact that Kavanaugh was referencing what priest for life said, "means that are referred to as "contraceptive" are, in reality, sometimes also abortifacient".

Way to try and weasel out of it. "Still, Kavanaugh is wrong". Only because you wish him to be.

Show me, without weasel words and fallacies, all these things you claim.

Now to the rest of what you posted:

Look up the HHS abortifacient and birth control mandate. Sure the ACA doesn't, but had this been included the ACA would never have passed. That's why it was brought to you by the HHS.




posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 04:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454


Kavanaugh is wrong because the question of the belief that birth control causes abortion, which is not true, was decided in the Hobby Lobby case. Hobby Lobby argued that contraceptives were abortion-inducing drugs, that they were morally opposed to. SCOTUS determined that it didn't matter whether or not a religious view is based in medical science, according to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The court sided with Hobby Lobby, even though their religious belief wasn't anchored in medical science, and said they didn't have to provide contraception coverage to their employees.

So, the federal government fixed the problem by allowing all religiously inclined employers to opt out of the contraception mandate by filling out a form. That way, women disenfranchised by their employer's lack of insurance coverage could go to a Title X clinic, such as Planned Parenthood.

Also, the FDA clearly defined "contraception" and excluded abortifacients from the definition, even though some still believed contraception to be abortion-inducing, their beliefs are not rooted in medical science.

And then, just to make sure women had access to emergency birth control, without their employer's permission, the FDA allowed Plan B to be sold over the counter.

Another court case was launched, on behalf of the Priests for Life, The Little Sisters of the Poor, and others, that addressed the form itself as a burden to religious freedom, especially since not filing the form carried a hefty fine. By this time, the birth control issue had been settled. The case before the court was about the form being too burdonsome, and amounted to the relgious employer condoning contraception. Not abortion or abortificients, just contraception.

The fact that the priests see abortion and birth control as two separate evils, and that they believe that some contraception harms the zygote was not considered or presented as a reason why the form was too burdensome. Just the fact that they were forced to file exemption papers signaled that they condoned contraception, which they believe is an equal but separate sin as abortion.

Kavanaugh was wrong in asserting that the plaintiffs' case hinged on the perception of the Church condoning abortion-inducing drugs. Just offering contraception that is not abortion-inducing was enough to make these Catholic Church groups file suit. The fact that Kavanaugh focused on the belief that contraception is abortion-inducing while summarizing a case that dealt with the burden of filing exemption papers infringing on religious rights, tells me that he may be obbsessed with that argument from the Hobby Lobby case, and conflated the two. It tells me that he may not believe that contraception laws are settled.

So, again. Kavanaugh was wrong. He chose his words carefully, and sent a signal to Trump's base that beliefs are more important than laws or medical science.



edit on 12-9-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

...and he will be confirmed.
regards.



posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Probably. And then we'll see who was right about Kavanaugh's promise that Roe V Wade is settled law. There are several Roe V Wade cases barreling toward the Supreme Court as we post!



posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus



These include oral contraceptives (the "Pill"), IUD, Norplant, Depo-Provera, Emergency Contraception (the "Morning-After Pill"), and anti-fertility vaccines.


OH NOES! So women are having abortions everywhere you can imagine all the time! At the bank, at the park, even the kindergarten teacher is having abortions while teaching the little ones! Watch out! The lady in front of you in line at the supermarket is probably having an abortion right there while you watch! Oh, the humanity!

We better get the Supreme Court working on that ASAP!



There was another guy on ats that used to use that silly term oh noes. I think it is on the sophomoric side myself. But I digress..... my point is not that women are having abortions..... but that the Pill is an abortifacient and that's scientific. So your entire case you just tried to make is in error. What's more is that Pro Choice advocates know this and hide the fact from women seeking counsel. Interestingly Huffpo even has an article wherein it is stated that the Hobby Lobby case was that the Mennonites who owned the company declared that some forms of birth control INCLUDING Intrauterine devices normally known as IUD prevented implantation therefore causing abortion. My post showed both the Pill and IUD as contraceptive methods which scientifically are know abortifacients. I rest my case.

Hobby Lobby, a Christian-owned craft supply chain store, and Conestoga Wood Specialties Store, a Pennsylvania wood manufacturer owned by a family of Mennonites, challenged the contraception mandate on the grounds that it violates their religious freedom by requiring them to pay for methods of contraception they find morally objectionable. The owners of those companies believe some forms of birth control — emergency contraception and intrauterine devices — are forms of abortion because they could prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

I love it when Huffpo can make my case for me.
edit on 12-9-2018 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus



There was another guy on ats that used to use that silly term oh noes.


It's a popular way to express faux outrage.



but that the Pill is an abortifacient and that's scientific. So your entire case you just tried to make is in error.



No error. The case in question didn't have anything to do with the reason why the plaintiffs didn't want to be forced to comply with the ACA contraception mandate. It was only about their assertion that filing the exemption paperwork was an unreasonable burden on their religious freedom. The reasons for not complying with the ACA, and how to accommodate religious objections was settled in another case, the Hobby Lobby case. This one was only fighting the method of accommodation, not the reason they oppose contraception.

However, to your belief that the pill is an abortifacient, the American College of Gynecologists define pregnancy at the implantation. At the time of implantation the zygote becomes an embryo.


Government agencies and American medical organizations agree that the scientific definition of pregnancy and the legal definition of pregnancy are the same: pregnancy begins upon the implantation of a fertilized egg into the lining of a woman’s uterus. This typically takes place, if at all, between 5 and 9 days after fertilization of the egg – which itself can take place over the course of several days following sexual intercourse.
www.acog.org...

Consider a woman who is using In vitro fertilization to conceive. She's injected with a fertilized egg. Is she immediately pregnant? Nope, not until the egg implants. If the egg doesn't implant, she didn't conceive. She didn't get pregnant. Her period isn't an abortion or a miscarriage, because one has to be pregnant for either of those to occur.


Miscarriage is the most common type of pregnancy loss, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).


So, failing to conceive doesn't mean that the egg didn't get fertilized, it means it failed to implant. Miscarriage and abortion are pregnancy enders. One must be pregnant first to miscarry or abort.

Yes, it's true that some hormonal contraception thins the lining of the uterus, making it difficult for the zygote to implant. That's not abortion.


a·bor·tion
Induced termination of a pregnancy with destruction of the embryo or fetus.


Notice the absence of the word zygote in the definition of the word abortion.

So, while many people believe pregnancy begins when the egg is fertilized, medically pregnancy occurs at implantation.


A pregnancy hormone known as hCG is in your blood from the time of implantation. This is the hormone detected in a pregnancy test. Usually it takes 3 to 4 weeks from the first day of your last period for the levels of hCG to be high enough to be found by the tests.

Some women notice spotting (or slight bleeding) for 1 or 2 days around the time of implantation. The lining of the uterus gets thicker and the cervix is sealed by a plug of mucus.
www.webmd.com...

Before implantation, a pregnancy test will read "Negative", even if the egg was fertilized.


edit on 12-9-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus


Hobby Lobby, a Christian-owned craft supply chain store, and Conestoga Wood Specialties Store, a Pennsylvania wood manufacturer owned by a family of Mennonites, challenged the contraception mandate on the grounds that it violates their religious freedom by requiring them to pay for methods of contraception they find morally objectionable. The owners of those companies believe some forms of birth control — emergency contraception and intrauterine devices — are forms of abortion because they could prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus.


That's what I said dear. Hobby Lobby argued that contraception violated their religious freedom. The Priests for Life and the Little Sisters of the Poor argued that filing exemption papers violated their religious freedom.

Kavanaugh was wrong.



posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 10:09 PM
link   
KAMALA HARRIS has now earned the "distinction" as USA's most DIShonest-Lying Senator.

saraacarter.com...

She honestly wants to be the President of our great nation!



posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 10:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
KAMALA HARRIS has now earned the "distinction" as USA's most DIShonest-Lying Senator.

saraacarter.com...

She honestly wants to be the President of our great nation!



Kam will make a fabulous candidate 💥😃💥



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454


Kavanaugh is wrong because the question of the belief that birth control causes abortion, which is not true, was decided in the Hobby Lobby case. Hobby Lobby argued that contraceptives were abortion-inducing drugs, that they were morally opposed to. SCOTUS determined that it didn't matter whether or not a religious view is based in medical science, according to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The court sided with Hobby Lobby, even though their religious belief wasn't anchored in medical science, and said they didn't have to provide contraception coverage to their employees.

So, the federal government fixed the problem by allowing all religiously inclined employers to opt out of the contraception mandate by filling out a form. That way, women disenfranchised by their employer's lack of insurance coverage could go to a Title X clinic, such as Planned Parenthood.

Also, the FDA clearly defined "contraception" and excluded abortifacients from the definition, even though some still believed contraception to be abortion-inducing, their beliefs are not rooted in medical science.

And then, just to make sure women had access to emergency birth control, without their employer's permission, the FDA allowed Plan B to be sold over the counter.

Another court case was launched, on behalf of the Priests for Life, The Little Sisters of the Poor, and others, that addressed the form itself as a burden to religious freedom, especially since not filing the form carried a hefty fine. By this time, the birth control issue had been settled. The case before the court was about the form being too burdonsome, and amounted to the relgious employer condoning contraception. Not abortion or abortificients, just contraception.

The fact that the priests see abortion and birth control as two separate evils, and that they believe that some contraception harms the zygote was not considered or presented as a reason why the form was too burdensome. Just the fact that they were forced to file exemption papers signaled that they condoned contraception, which they believe is an equal but separate sin as abortion.

Kavanaugh was wrong in asserting that the plaintiffs' case hinged on the perception of the Church condoning abortion-inducing drugs. Just offering contraception that is not abortion-inducing was enough to make these Catholic Church groups file suit. The fact that Kavanaugh focused on the belief that contraception is abortion-inducing while summarizing a case that dealt with the burden of filing exemption papers infringing on religious rights, tells me that he may be obbsessed with that argument from the Hobby Lobby case, and conflated the two. It tells me that he may not believe that contraception laws are settled.

So, again. Kavanaugh was wrong. He chose his words carefully, and sent a signal to Trump's base that beliefs are more important than laws or medical science.




Sounds like your main issue is with the court from a previous case, and just wanna vent against Kavanaugh.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

been away for a few days due to threats i recived from local idiots so sorry it took me so long to respond been dealing with cops handling the case for me.

www.dailywire.com...

Three days earlier, Harris had tweeted out a clearly edited clip designed to make it look like Kavanaugh himself believes birth control is synonymous with “abortion-inducing” drugs. Of course, even though the full quote makes it clear that Kavanaugh is referring to the religious group’s objection and using their terminology, Harris doubles down on her earlier claim that he used a “dog whistle” to refer to birth control generally. Harris, of course, can’t just say she was wrong to smear Kavanaugh for something he may not believe (we don’t know how he feels about birth control or “abortion-inducing” drugs). She might be running for president, and acknowledging she was wrong about a Republican nominee would certainly hurt her.


www.dailywire.com...

In a statement given to CNBC, attorney Marc Kasowitz, who has represented Donald Trump, crunched the attack on Wednesday from Senator Kamala Harris on Judge Brett Kavanaugh, dismissing claims that Kavanaugh had spoken to members of Kasowitz’s firm about the Mueller investigation. A spokesman for Kasowitz informed CNBC regarding the firm, Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP, "There have been no discussions regarding Robert Mueller's investigation between Judge Kavanaugh and anyone at our firm.” After Harris had badgered Kavanaugh on Wednesday as to whether he had spoken to someone at Kasowitz's firm about the issue, Wednesday night, while wanting to remain anonymous, aides to Harris had told CNBC they had "reason to believe that a conversation happened and are continuing to pursue it." On Thursday morning, at the hearing for his nomination to the Supreme Court, Kavanaugh said, "I don't recall any conversations of that kind with anyone at that law firm.” When confronted with the statement from Kasowitz, Harris' office would not offer comment, although Harris did respond when a CNN reporter asked her about the statement:
so yeah shes looking pretty foolish right about now
www.dailywire.com...

This is clearly deceptive, as it’s obvious this was not the beginning of one of Kavanaugh’s answers. Kavanaugh’s full sentence, which would have only required one or two extra seconds had Harris’ team started at the beginning, made it clear he was summarizing what a party in a Supreme Court case said. Kavanaugh said, "In that case, they said filling out the form would make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that they were, as a religious matter, objected to." (Emphasis added.) Kavanaugh never said anything suggesting he believes all birth control equates to “abortion-inducing drugs.” But when media outlets like CNN presented the story, they didn’t do so from an obvious fact-checking stance — they did so as if there was a legitimate debate here. There’s not. What Kavanaugh actually said and what Harris, other Democrat senators, and pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood put out is not up for debate. Kavanaugh did not — and has not — said that all birth control counts as abortion-inducing drugs. And the media wonders why people don’t trust them.
think the end of the quote speaks for its self
www.thenewamerican.com...

Post: Four Pinocchios Harris’ spokesman “challenged The Fact Checker to obtain a statement from the White House that Kavanaugh believes that the term ‘abortion-inducing drugs’ is inaccurate.” In other words, Harris supposedly wanted to know whether the judge agreed with the plaintiffs’ characterization that some birth control drugs are abortifacients. Kessler did just that, and received the expected answer: Judge Kavanaugh was asked specifically about his dissent and cited the plaintiffs’ position. The fact that critics removed the phrase ‘they said’ from his answer shows that they knew he was citing the party’s opinion and were deliberately trying to mislead the public. As Judge Kavanaugh’s opinion stated, based on the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act, it’s the court or a judge’s job to determine “only the sincerity of a plaintiff’s religious belief, not the correctness or reasonableness of that religious belief.” Again, Kessler gave Harris four Pinocchios for the whopper she tried to peddle. Here’s a better way to say it: She lied.
how many more soruces ya need?

reason.com... reason link

But the clip Harris shared as confirmation of this secret plot was deceptively edited. Asked about a case involving religious objections to the Obamacare contraception mandate, the video showed Kavanaugh responding that "filling out the form would make [Priests for Life] complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that they were, as a religious matter, objected to." Kavanaugh's use of the phrase abortion-inducing drugs is what's at issue here. The contraception mandate said that employer health-insurance plans must cover birth control, not abortion pills. Harris called Kavanaugh's answer a "dog whistle" that showed he was against not just abortion but also birth control. Other Democrats echoed her. "This is a red-alarm moment," tweeted Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley. "If you didn't believe it before, believe it now – a woman's constitutional right to abortion AND birth control are both 100% at stake." U.S. House candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tweeted: "Brett Kavanaugh doesn't even know what birth control IS. He doesn't deserve to pass a 7th grade health class, let alone a Supreme Court confirmation…. We must #CancelKavanaugh." But here's what Harris left off the start of the abortion-inducing drugs sentence in her video clip: They said. Kavanaugh's full sentence has been that "they said filling out the form would make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that they were, as a religious matter, objecting to." In other words, Kavanaugh was characterizing the positions of Priests for Life, plaintiffs in the lawsuit which he had specifically been asked about. In 2015, Kavanaugh had dissented from other U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit judges, who had denied Priests for Life's request for full-court hearing after a three-judge panel rejected their claims. In his dissent, Kavanaugh writes that the Supreme Court's ruling in the Hobby Lobby case "strongly suggests that the Government has a compelling interest in facilitating access to contraception for the employees of these religious organizations." However, "the Government need not—and therefore under RFRA [the Religious Freedom Restoration Act] may not—pursue its compelling interest in facilitating access to contraception by requiring religious nonprofit organizations to submit the form required by current federal regulations." "One final note for clarity," Kavanaugh added: The Government may of course continue to require the religious organizations' insurers to provide contraceptive coverage to the religious organizations' employees, even if the religious organizations object. As Judge Flaum correctly explained, "RFRA does not authorize religious organizations to dictate the independent actions of third-parties, even if the organization sincerely disagrees with them." When called out about the shortened clip, Harris pressed on with original criticism. "There's no question that he uncritically used the term 'abortion-inducing drugs,' which is a dog whistle term used by extreme anti-choice groups to describe birth control," she tweeted. This is a pattern with Harris—when called out on bad behavior, she doubles down. (For more Reason coverage of Harris, see here, here, here, here, and here.)



posted on Sep, 14 2018 @ 01:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454



Sounds like your main issue is with the court from a previous case, and just wanna vent against Kavanaugh.


I don't have an "issue". I'm just telling you that Kavanaugh was wrong in his summary of the Little Sister's case. He conflated it with the Hobby Lobby case. In so doing, he revealed something about himself and how he sees the issue of religious freedom vs settled law. In my opinion, he sent a "dog whistle" to Trump's base, telling them that he will put "faith" and religious beliefs above the law, and I think that's dangerous.

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

Well, thanks for the reply, however, you are only quoting from biases opinion pieces that misrepresent the issue at hand. You've presented me with walls of text, and I'm not sure exactly what you want me to see/read/grock. All I'm reading are biased misunderstandings presented as deliberate deception on Mrs Harris' part and lawyerly excuses, denials and diversions.

The fact that "They said" was omitted from the video has nothing to do with the issue Mrs Harris was trying to bring forward. Apparently, you still don't understand the breadth of the implications of what Kavanaugh let slip, and what he carefully omitted in his testimony,

Brett Kavanaugh wants to do away with legal abortion. He told us so. www.yahoo.com...



edit on 14-9-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2018 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454



Sounds like your main issue is with the court from a previous case, and just wanna vent against Kavanaugh.


I don't have an "issue". I'm just telling you that Kavanaugh was wrong in his summary of the Little Sister's case. He conflated it with the Hobby Lobby case. In so doing, he revealed something about himself and how he sees the issue of religious freedom vs settled law. In my opinion, he sent a "dog whistle" to Trump's base, telling them that he will put "faith" and religious beliefs above the law, and I think that's dangerous.


That's how you took it. I took it as he will make sure that people won't be forced to buy things by the government.




top topics



 
39
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join