Another linguistic Jedi Mind Trick along the lines of "These aren't the droids you're looking for, move along"
bypass registration at www.bugmenot.com
What kind of sick, twisted fucks really want to put teenage girls through this moralizing meatgrinder?
The case stems from a 2003 New Hampshire law requiring teenagers to tell a parent before getting an abortion. While the law has an exception for girls who would die without the procedure, New Hampshire lawmakers omitted an exception for other non-life-threatening health problems because they felt it would render the law meaningless.
The new law has never been enforced, because two federal courts have said the lack of a health exception made it unconstitutional.
That's what ALWAYS sinks these vile bills, that lack of an exception for the mother's health, and how politicians can call themselves "Right To Life" when doing everything possible to make a woman or girl's life as miserable as possible, and all in the name of "Faith" & "Family Values", is an empty rhetoric I can't fathom how anyone believes
Jesus would be the first to personally bitchslap these political & theological whores & bullies whose version of "Christianity" is at complete odds with what Christ lived, taught & preached about, and it's about damn time that the Modern Day Pharisees, Cartoon Hating vermin like James Dobson & Jerry Falwell, UnChristian parasites like Fred Phelps, Pat Robertson, "Lucky Louie" Sheldon, William Donohue & Tony Perkins, were called out on their religious hypocrisy and excoriated in the manner of Jesus scolding the Pharisees in the temple for painting themselves as better than everyone else
And speaking of moral & ethical hypocrisy, not a surprise to see the true face of "Compassionate Conservatism" shows itself yet again to the world
The Bush administration supports the New Hampshire law, telling the court in a friend-of-the-court brief that the case "may have direct relevance" to its defense of the federal law banning the late-term procedure that its opponents refer to as "partial-birth abortion" -- a law that has been struck down by lower federal courts in rulings that the administration has asked the Supreme Court to overturn.
You know the issue is being spun when there's NO medical terminology to back the wingnuts' view about abortion, especially as there's no such term in medical journals as "Partial Birth Abortion
Thankfully, even the Supreme Court under Rehnquist's term as Chief Justice rightly rejected these laws before, most notably in striking down a Nebraska Law banning late term abortions without an exemption for the mother's health
But that hasn't stopped the wingnuts from pushing their anti-choice agenda with these absurd laws & bills that place the religious beliefs of their backers over the real-world lives of women who don't share the same socially regressive views of the Modern Day Pharisees
And the way these religious vipers are trying to set back women's rights to self-determination is through gutting the "Judicial Bypass" option most states make available to teens in a genuinely tough spot
Parental involvement laws regarding abortion are politically popular. All but six states have some form of statute that says girls under 18 must involve at least one parent or guardian in the decision to terminate a pregnancy.
As required by a 1990 Supreme Court decision, those laws generally include a "judicial bypass": Teens may avoid telling a parent if they can convince a judge that they would face abuse or that they are mature enough to make the decision on their own.
Understand that this option is used mainly by girls who have been raped, or are the victims of incest-why would ANYONE think a molesting father should be able to object to his violated daughter having an abortion, especially if there's a chance the father will pass along genetic problems to the offspring that results?
Why do the most repressive & regressive knuckledraggers, both secular & religious, get to set a harsh agenda others not of their beliefs must live by, why do they not hold themselves accountable for any of the misery their views bring on unwilling others?
New Hampshire's version would make it a crime for a doctor to perform an abortion on a minor unless the doctor has written proof that at least one parent has been notified or unless the doctor certifies the girl would die without the procedure.
But unlike the parental involvement laws in most states, the New Hampshire statute does not explicitly let a doctor proceed when, in the doctor's judgment, the girl might be about to suffer serious health consequences short of death.
Opponents of the law say that is unconstitutional because the Supreme Court has said in past cases that state regulations without health exceptions put an "undue burden" on the right to abortion. It is unrealistic, they say, to expect teens facing such pregnancy-related conditions as severe uterine bleeding or sudden spikes in blood pressure to wait for a parent or a court to let them have an abortion.
Sick, and absolutely barbaric, and it gets even more insulting and arrogant if that's possible
New Hampshire counters that such rare crises could be dealt with through the law's existing exceptions. Under the 1987 Supreme Court case, the state argues, the risks of a severe health emergency are too small to warrant invalidating the whole statute.
A brief submitted by New Hampshire legislators who back the law notes that, out of tens of thousands of abortions done on teens in six other states for which records exist going back to 1991, only 11 were "emergency health abortions."
It doesn't matter how small the size is, the fact that this policy encourages the physical harm of children, with possibly permanent damage/sterility done in the name of some weak-faithed theology absolutely goes counter to any possible "Pro-Life" claim, and if it was the female loved ones of these clearly vacuous ninnyhammers wielding the "well how bad can it be if it only damages a few girls?" argument, whose health was at issue, I suspect the bullies & thugs would be far less rigid & unyielding in their opposition to this procedure
And in that vein-so to speak
The ONLY way any anti-choice male should have any legitimacy in this cause is if he's willing to let others tell him what he can & can't do with his genitals legally
It's time to start GrandSlamDunking these evil assaults on women & girls by the Taliban US Branch & the Modern Day Pharisees, as hard and public as possible, it's the 21st Century for God's sake, women & children are no longer thought of as chattel, a view it's about time the Modern Day Pharisees finally come around and accept as inevitable despite their shrill bleatings to the contrary
bypass registration at www.bugmenot.com
What kind of sick, twisted fucks really want to put teenage girls through this moralizing meatgrinder?
The case stems from a 2003 New Hampshire law requiring teenagers to tell a parent before getting an abortion. While the law has an exception for girls who would die without the procedure, New Hampshire lawmakers omitted an exception for other non-life-threatening health problems because they felt it would render the law meaningless.
The new law has never been enforced, because two federal courts have said the lack of a health exception made it unconstitutional.
That's what ALWAYS sinks these vile bills, that lack of an exception for the mother's health, and how politicians can call themselves "Right To Life" when doing everything possible to make a woman or girl's life as miserable as possible, and all in the name of "Faith" & "Family Values", is an empty rhetoric I can't fathom how anyone believes
Jesus would be the first to personally bitchslap these political & theological whores & bullies whose version of "Christianity" is at complete odds with what Christ lived, taught & preached about, and it's about damn time that the Modern Day Pharisees, Cartoon Hating vermin like James Dobson & Jerry Falwell, UnChristian parasites like Fred Phelps, Pat Robertson, "Lucky Louie" Sheldon, William Donohue & Tony Perkins, were called out on their religious hypocrisy and excoriated in the manner of Jesus scolding the Pharisees in the temple for painting themselves as better than everyone else
And speaking of moral & ethical hypocrisy, not a surprise to see the true face of "Compassionate Conservatism" shows itself yet again to the world
The Bush administration supports the New Hampshire law, telling the court in a friend-of-the-court brief that the case "may have direct relevance" to its defense of the federal law banning the late-term procedure that its opponents refer to as "partial-birth abortion" -- a law that has been struck down by lower federal courts in rulings that the administration has asked the Supreme Court to overturn.
You know the issue is being spun when there's NO medical terminology to back the wingnuts' view about abortion, especially as there's no such term in medical journals as "Partial Birth Abortion
Thankfully, even the Supreme Court under Rehnquist's term as Chief Justice rightly rejected these laws before, most notably in striking down a Nebraska Law banning late term abortions without an exemption for the mother's health
But that hasn't stopped the wingnuts from pushing their anti-choice agenda with these absurd laws & bills that place the religious beliefs of their backers over the real-world lives of women who don't share the same socially regressive views of the Modern Day Pharisees
And the way these religious vipers are trying to set back women's rights to self-determination is through gutting the "Judicial Bypass" option most states make available to teens in a genuinely tough spot
Parental involvement laws regarding abortion are politically popular. All but six states have some form of statute that says girls under 18 must involve at least one parent or guardian in the decision to terminate a pregnancy.
As required by a 1990 Supreme Court decision, those laws generally include a "judicial bypass": Teens may avoid telling a parent if they can convince a judge that they would face abuse or that they are mature enough to make the decision on their own.
Understand that this option is used mainly by girls who have been raped, or are the victims of incest-why would ANYONE think a molesting father should be able to object to his violated daughter having an abortion, especially if there's a chance the father will pass along genetic problems to the offspring that results?
Why do the most repressive & regressive knuckledraggers, both secular & religious, get to set a harsh agenda others not of their beliefs must live by, why do they not hold themselves accountable for any of the misery their views bring on unwilling others?
New Hampshire's version would make it a crime for a doctor to perform an abortion on a minor unless the doctor has written proof that at least one parent has been notified or unless the doctor certifies the girl would die without the procedure.
But unlike the parental involvement laws in most states, the New Hampshire statute does not explicitly let a doctor proceed when, in the doctor's judgment, the girl might be about to suffer serious health consequences short of death.
Opponents of the law say that is unconstitutional because the Supreme Court has said in past cases that state regulations without health exceptions put an "undue burden" on the right to abortion. It is unrealistic, they say, to expect teens facing such pregnancy-related conditions as severe uterine bleeding or sudden spikes in blood pressure to wait for a parent or a court to let them have an abortion.
Sick, and absolutely barbaric, and it gets even more insulting and arrogant if that's possible
New Hampshire counters that such rare crises could be dealt with through the law's existing exceptions. Under the 1987 Supreme Court case, the state argues, the risks of a severe health emergency are too small to warrant invalidating the whole statute.
A brief submitted by New Hampshire legislators who back the law notes that, out of tens of thousands of abortions done on teens in six other states for which records exist going back to 1991, only 11 were "emergency health abortions."
It doesn't matter how small the size is, the fact that this policy encourages the physical harm of children, with possibly permanent damage/sterility done in the name of some weak-faithed theology absolutely goes counter to any possible "Pro-Life" claim, and if it was the female loved ones of these clearly vacuous ninnyhammers wielding the "well how bad can it be if it only damages a few girls?" argument, whose health was at issue, I suspect the bullies & thugs would be far less rigid & unyielding in their opposition to this procedure
And in that vein-so to speak
The ONLY way any anti-choice male should have any legitimacy in this cause is if he's willing to let others tell him what he can & can't do with his genitals legally
It's time to start GrandSlamDunking these evil assaults on women & girls by the Taliban US Branch & the Modern Day Pharisees, as hard and public as possible, it's the 21st Century for God's sake, women & children are no longer thought of as chattel, a view it's about time the Modern Day Pharisees finally come around and accept as inevitable despite their shrill bleatings to the contrary
posted by KingCranky II at
1:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home