Supreme Court deals blow to two states' attempts to cut Planned Parenthood funding

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Mkay
Thanks for the discussion.

a reply to: shooterbrody
"right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness"
right to privacy,
right to the bodily integrity and the right to decide just what is the proper medical care for you.
right to protect oneself???

a reply to: dawnstar

How did that work out for dr jack k?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Mkay
Thanks for the discussion.

No worries, I'll be appearing here all century.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You being ai would explain a lot.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Wardaddy454

first, planned parenthood doesn't just serve the medicaid community, they also serve the uninsured using a sliding scale, which sometimes slides all the way to being free!! how many of those primary doctors are willing to provide these services at no cost, heck, alot of them don't even want to take the medicaid patients! can you guarantee that all those medicaid patients will go to those primary caregivers or are they still gonna show up at the planned parenthood clinic only, they will just say they are uninsured and be getting the services under title x, or using that sliding scale and getting steep discounts or free services? some have even suggested that hey, they get plenty of money, they can just provide free services to the poor.... well, that describes many of the healthcare providers today, some of which make much more than planned parenthood, why don't they all just start providing free services to the poor and eating the costs, or what is more likely, raising the rates for those who can pay!!
alot of doctors, hospitals, and other providers get caught committing medicaid fraud. some for far more than $28 million.
one pp clinic shouldn't be a reason to close refuse all of them medicaid participation. heck can you prove that your local hospital ain't performing needless surgeries just to collect medicaid money? or heck, not performing the surgeries but just charging for them.... because this happens also!!!

Are you suggesting that Planned Parenthood is a accomplice to fraud?

That's what I got from your wall of text.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Wardaddy454

ETA: I do see many women of different ages from time to time. I wonder why they don't go to Planned Parenthood, my wait times would be significantly shorter.

planned parenthood doesn't provide the healthcare they need at the moment? they have good insurance and wouldn't benefit from planned parenthood's sliding scale. they can afford a better quality of healthcare? there isn't a planned parenthood that is as close to them as your doctor's office? they like to have all their medical records in one place and not spread around?
does you doctor even take medicaid patients???

Or maybe they just don't need an abortion.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: shooterbrody
they do have a law that prevents federal funds from being used for abortion with certain exemptions as far health of mother, baby, incest, rape, ect. and they enforce that law. can't help it if some just desire to ignore reality!

How?

Planned parenthood has refused to report abuse and so on when performing an abortion for victims.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: shooterbrody

it is the original legislation
interesting how all those other amendments got added some even got taken away, that is how legislation works

It's not legislation, which is passed by Congress and signed by the President. This was ratified by the States. Again, you fail to understand how our government functions.

it is sorely needed, our judicial was not intended to legislate

It's not, it's ruling on the Constitutionality of legislation. Again, failure to understand our government.

interesting you bring this up
I happen to back the side of a womans choice
That has nothing to do with a court ruling vs a law from congress
All congress has to do is pass a law, interesting in this day and age they do not have the stones or backing to do so

Congress doesn't need to pass a law, the Supreme Court ruled the Constitution, ratified by the States, makes this protected.

So it isn't legislation or it is...

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: SR1TX

originally posted by: headorheart
Link

In February, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that states have broad – but not unlimited – authority to regulate Medicaid healthcare providers. "States may not terminate providers from their Medicaid program for any reason they see fit," the court said in its majority opinion, "especially when that reason is unrelated to the provider’s competence and the quality of the healthcare it provides."

Three of the court's conservatives – Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch- said the court should have taken up the issue. John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh did not agree.

I'm quite happy with this. One, I agree that a state shouldn't be able to terminate Medicaid health care for any reason they see fit. Especially since these laws seem to have been enacted after the videos surfaced of Planned Parenthood selling fetus tissue, which turned out later to be wildly disproven. Two, the now conservative leaning Supreme Court did not make this about abortion simply because Planned Parenthood was involved. Specially Kavanaugh. There was a lot of concern he was being nominated for the sole purpose of reversing Roe v. Wade (which I don't even understand how that is a question in 2018). That is why Trump could not simply "pick a different conservative" when the sexual accusations came out. It seems to me if he was, he would vote to stir up trouble for Planned Parenthood no matter what the cause.

Either way, nice to see some bi-partisanship voting these days.

So you like tax payer funded murder of innocence. Got it.

It's ridiculous that the right cares so mush for unborn babies but cares very little for them after they are born.

It doesn't matter if the woman who is pregnant is a drug addict who lives on the street, by God she is going to have that baby. But when she doesn't have enough money to feed that child, well that's her problem. When her boyfriend beats the crap out of that kid, well that's her fault too. When that kid then grows into an angry teenager and robs and murders someone the right will just shrug.

If you are going to claim the sanctimony of life as your reason to outlaw abortion, you damn well better keep that same logic going to when they are born. That means more social welfare to help pay for these poor kids born into horrible situations that they themselves have zero control over. These kids have no ability to change the behaviour of their parents and they are completely innocent.

Bottom line is if you are going to force people to have children you better be ready to pay more in taxes to help take care of those children when they are born. Otherwise you are a hypocrite of the highest order by claiming to care about the value of life but only before they are born.

Adoption. I think they made a movie about it. Juno.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
Didn't stop the fear mongering over roe v wade now did it.

Not my concern.

Ok, Phage.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
So it isn't legislation or it is...

You asking me to explain basic civics to you?

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
Ok, Phage.

I'd be insulted if I didn't think Phage was normally right on nearly every topic.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

no, I am suggesting that if planned parenthood were to stop taking medicaid patients, then some of those patients would just not let on that they have medicaid and still go to their clinics through the title x program or through the sliding scale.
if that would be considered fraud, then more than likely it would be fraud against planned parenthood if they are needlessly shifting their resources over for the care of patients that really have medicaid as an alternative.

if they decide to take the title x route, if they can, if the paperwork for that doesn't ask if they have insurance or other means to pay, then all you would be doing is shifting the money around to a different gov't program paying the tab. but what that would do would increase, and possibly run a deficit in the title x program.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

I have had three kids!!! planned parenthood was the first clinic I went to when I thought I was pregnant.
they did the pregnancy test, they did blood work to assure there wasn't any indication of problems such as diabetes, rh factors, ect, they gave me my first few months of prenatal vitamins. and, they found me an ob/gyn that would work with us as far as the bill goes because we were dirt poor and had no insurance!!! They helped ALOT, then after the baby was born, they supplied birth control for me..
would I have preferred to have my own primary doctor who had the experience of treating me years before I became pregnant and had a better understanding of my general health, sure...
but we were just rich enough to help support that fine, best in the world healthcare system, we couldn't afford to take full advantage of it, we had to settle for less!!!
so we settled!!! heck we paid our pediatrician by doing odd jobs around her office!!!

a reply to: Wardaddy454

www.adoptuskids.org...

here's 14 pages of kids in virginia who need a home, some might even be adoptable.

In the end there are a good number of unwanted and unable to support pregnancies never coming to term. I can't say this is a bad thing for society as the cost would be a hell of a lot more than the abortion. If we want to argue the point of when a embryo becomes human and thus represents a murder, good luck.

We can say the use of birth control is murder

We can say the second a sperm enters a egg

We can say 8 weeks or less, at 8 weeks the embryo weighs .04 oz

We can say 13 weeks or less with 91% of all abortions happen prior to 13 weeks while in the first trimester.

I think the vast majority feel that late pregnancy abortions cross the line unless the mother is at risk, but in the end the debate can go on forever...

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Congress can still pass laws.
That is their primary task.
An actual law on this would end the roe v wade bs.
Is it so hard to pass an actual law?

That's wrong. The supreme court has been striking down state laws hindering access to abortions because they've declared those laws to be unconstitutional. If the US congress passed such a law, they would strike it down for the same reason.

a reply to: andrewh7

Scotus would strike down a bill protecting women's choice?
I have heard it all today.
The constitution is not legislation.
The civil rights act was needed but a women's rights act is not.
What a day.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
So it isn't legislation or it is...

You asking me to explain basic civics to you?

Just wondering how it fits in with the commerce clause.