There's still hope for the USA

Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 12893
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
There's still hope for the USA

One major and one semi major political victory in the US in a single day. Awesome.

Anti gay marriage law struck down.
Landmark day for same-sex marriage in US following Supreme Court rulings

Anti-choice fillibuster successful.
Filibuster, Chaos Stop Texas Abortion Bill In Its Tracks


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5402
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
http://www.supremecourt.gov/o

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_g2bh.pdf

The opinion in the DOMA case is above. I haven't had time to read the whole thing, but based on summaries it looks like they used both the argument that defining marriage is the state's prerogative and equal protection arguments.  

 

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-144_8ok0.pdf

The second gay marriage decision regarding the ban in California was sidestepped by the Court. They ruled that the parties which appealed the decision did not have standing. The law at question was a State Constitutional Amendment which bans gay marriage. The amendment was ruled unconstitutional at the district court level. The government refused to appeal that decision, so a group of citizens appealed it and the court of appeals ruled that the ban was constitutional. The Court basically ruled that the citizens don't have a right to appeal and that once a law is struck down it is up to the government to appeal or not appeal. They completely ignored the question of whether or not it is constitutional to ban gay marriage. 

So while striking down DOMA is a victory for gay marriage supporters and a partial victory for states rights, the gay marriage debate is hardly over. The Court will almost certainly be addressing the issue again next term, most likely in a case coming from from Nevada, Sevcik v. Sandoval, which will bring up the questions of whether or not a state can ban gay marriage and whether or not a state must recognize gay marriages that were legally done in other states. That should be an interesting case because currently all states recognize by default a marriage legally recognized in any other state, even if the marriage would not have been legal inside that state. (For example, some states allow first cousins to marry, many do not, some allow marriage at 17, others do not etc. but there has never been a problem with a state not recognizing one of those marriages) The only time states refused to recognize marriages historically were interracial marriages but none of those cases ever made it to the Supreme Court, so there is no real precedence. 

This will bring Article IV Section 1 of the Constitution into the argument.

Quote:

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

A clause that hasn't received a lot of attention at the Supreme Court level. 

 

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5402
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Anti-choice

Vastet wrote:
Anti-choice fillibuster successful. Filibuster, Chaos Stop Texas Abortion Bill In Its Tracks

I thought you were against abortion.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
That is my understanding, BS

Not that you need my blessings. This is just the first step in a long battle similar to the equally long one over interracial marriages. I still have not figured out how two people of the same sex being married is going to affect me and my relationships any more than any other married couple.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 12893
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Vastet

Beyond Saving wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Anti-choice fillibuster successful. Filibuster, Chaos Stop Texas Abortion Bill In Its Tracks

I thought you were against abortion.

I am, conditionally. The conditions aren't right for me to be standing against it though.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


RobbyPants
atheist
RobbyPants's picture
Posts: 148
Joined: 2011-11-30
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:One major and

Vastet wrote:
One major and one semi major political victory in the US in a single day. Awesome. Anti gay marriage law struck down. Landmark day for same-sex marriage in US following Supreme Court rulings

Yeah, I was super geeked about that yesterday. I'll admit getting a bit too gleeful from the Schadenfreude of all the conservatives freaking out. Especially Michele Bachmann.

 

Vastet wrote:
Anti-choice fillibuster successful. Filibuster, Chaos Stop Texas Abortion Bill In Its Tracks

Sadly, this might only be a temporary victory


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15462
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:One major and

Vastet wrote:
One major and one semi major political victory in the US in a single day. Awesome. Anti gay marriage law struck down. Landmark day for same-sex marriage in US following Supreme Court rulings Anti-choice fillibuster successful. Filibuster, Chaos Stop Texas Abortion Bill In Its Tracks

Citizens United makes the bones SCOTUS throws mute. Ok, so slave wages are fine as long as the people who cant pay their bills are diverse. Wow, that is sooooo fucking cool.  I don't have to worry about about my co worker, gay or black or atheist sweat shop worker getting fired, who cares as long as the race to the bottom is diverse.

LOOK OUT INDIA AND CHINA, OUR INDENTURED SLAVES ARE MORE DIVERSE THAN YOURS!

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
atheist
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

cj wrote:
Not that you need my blessings. This is just the first step in a long battle similar to the equally long one over interracial marriages. I still have not figured out how two people of the same sex being married is going to affect me and my relationships any more than any other married couple.

Frankly having been part of a couple in both married and unmarried relationships the only things I have found to be an issue are the purely legal ones. And as to purely legal most of them can be handled by other legal forms such as wills and designated next-of-kin and medical decision assignments such as living wills. Legal family is merely a default assumption in the absense of formal designation.

The major financial issue has been the IRS. FWIW, in my time I have seen marriage go from lower to higher and back to lower taxes. It isn't much of a serious issue and one that bite the married in the ass in the future.

 

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3682
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Beyond Saving

Vastet wrote:
Beyond Saving wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Anti-choice fillibuster successful. Filibuster, Chaos Stop Texas Abortion Bill In Its Tracks

I thought you were against abortion.

I am, conditionally. The conditions aren't right for me to be standing against it though.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Karalalpani
Posts: 1
Joined: 2012-10-28
User is offlineOffline
*Spam deleted*

*Spam deleted*


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5402
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 http://www.npr.org/2013/07/

 http://www.npr.org/2013/07/13/201669663/texas-senate-sends-sweeping-abortion-restrictions-to-governor

The Texas abortion law passed. I read it, and am a little perplexed why everyone is up in arms. http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/832/billtext/pdf/HB00002I.pdf#navpanes=0

Feel free to read it yourself but the cliff notes version is that it bans abortions past 20 weeks into the pregnancy except in cases where the doctor judges the life of the mother is at risk. Sure, a blow to the pro-abortion in any situation types, but relatively minor, very few abortions occur that late. 

It requires that abortions are performed in a center that conforms to the Health and Safety Code standards for ambulatory surgical centers... ok, that requirement is already in place for every other type of surgery you could possibly get. While personally, I am anti-regulation and have no problem with surgeries being conducted in an alley if a doctor wants to set up shop, I don't see why abortion should be treated any differently than any other surgery. It is against the law for example to get lasik surgery at a center that does not conform to ASC standards. It also requires that the doctor have admitting privileges to a hospital within 30 miles and be "on call" for 24 hours so that he/she can be there if there are any complications that arise. 

And that is the provision that has planned parenthood up in arms because apparently, most abortion clinics are apparently not up to snuff on their standards. Currently, abortions in Texas are being done in places that don't live up to our wonderful governments protective regulations. Why it is ANARCHY! AHHHHHHH! It is ironic that those who so rush to create all these regulations for other medical procedures are suddenly on my side when the procedure is abortion. 

It doesn't ban abortions, it regulates them like any other outpatient procedure is regulated. And as regulations tend to do with any business, it adds expense to make sure that everything is up to code and some places will no doubt not have enough money to do so and go out of business. It is a reality I and all small business owners deal with every single day when our government passes shit like Obamacare. 

I agree with the Democrats, Texas shouldn't have passed this law, and while we are at it, lets repeal the regulations for all other outpatient procedures too. All those abortion clinics that apparently worked fine in Texas without government regulation are proof that we don't need all those regulations. As usual the media is making a big deal out of a law they didn't read. They are breathlessly reporting that only 6! abortion clinics are going to survive. Unlikely as the clinics have a year to get up to code and many certainly will. Abortions are still going to happen in Texas at the same rate they would have anyway. The only real difference is that the clinics are going to have to do more paperwork to satisfy the government goobs and women getting abortions will have the dubious reassurance that the facility they go to is meeting government standards. 

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
BS, the problem is a

BS, the problem is a combination with the 24 hour wait. You have to drive to the clinic, speak with the counselor, wait 24 hours, and then have the abortion. If you have to drive 8 hours or more (it takes a couple of days to drive across Texas) to the clinic, you are going to have to stay over night somewhere. The law is not that big of a deal except Texas is so large and the ASC clinics are so few. This pretty much means many women will not be able to get to a clinic for an abortion. If you have other children, if you are working hourly wages, if you don't have a car (hard to believe in Texas) or gas money (more believable), if you don't have a place to stay over night, etc. all adds up to desperation for some women.

Texas also recently cut funds for birth control.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-11/flea-market-abortions-thrive-as-texas-may-close-clinics.html wrote:

The pills, which are known by the brand name Cytotec and require a prescription in the U.S., are designed to prevent stomach ulcers. They can also induce abortion. Until recently, obtaining them meant a trip across the border to Mexican towns such as Nuevo Progreso, where pharmacies can legally sell them without a prescription.

Underground imports have brought the trade stateside. Whether it’s the actual Pfizer Inc. (PFE) medication or a generic, side effects include premature birth and uterine rupture. The drug isn’t typically on display at flea markets. All you need to do is ask, residents said.

And so it begins. The drug of choice was quinine when I was in high school and abortions were illegal. If you knew the right pharmacist.....

As for the limit of 20 weeks except life of the mother - it still isn't anybody's business except the mother and the doctor. All it means is you have to find a doctor willing to stretch the true a little.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5402
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
cj wrote:BS, the problem is

cj wrote:

BS, the problem is a combination with the 24 hour wait. You have to drive to the clinic, speak with the counselor, wait 24 hours, and then have the abortion. If you have to drive 8 hours or more (it takes a couple of days to drive across Texas) to the clinic, you are going to have to stay over night somewhere. The law is not that big of a deal except Texas is so large and the ASC clinics are so few. This pretty much means many women will not be able to get to a clinic for an abortion. If you have other children, if you are working hourly wages, if you don't have a car (hard to believe in Texas) or gas money (more believable), if you don't have a place to stay over night, etc. all adds up to desperation for some women.

Is it common for abortion clinics to perform same day abortions? I really have no clue, but if it is that is more evidence of the worthlessness of government regulations. I can't get any other surgery the same day, short of an emergency you are going to wait well more than 24 hours. It really boils down to whether ASC regulations are actually important. Do they really make our medical system safer as the people who passed all of them claim? Or do they just limit our options for all of those other surgeries making them more expensive? If they really make it safer, why shouldn't women getting abortions be worth protecting as much as someone getting a different surgery? If they don't, then why don't we deregulate the whole medical industry to make outpatient surgeries cheaper and faster for all those other surgeries? Why do you have to go to an ASC facility to get a colonoscopy but not an abortion? Abortion is a pretty safe procedure, but there are rare complications and every year a handful of women die due to abortion related complications. 

And the only reason there are so few ASC clinics is because they were not required to be ASC before. Now that they are, I imagine most will bring themselves up to standards. The fear mongering from the media that all these clinics are going to disappear is absurd. They are not any more than I am going to close my business down because I currently don't comply with Obamacare regulations (even though when I am in a whiny mood I might threaten to do just that). That is what government regulations do, they make things more expensive and make it a pain in the ass for businesses to meet whatever arbitrary standards they create. People tell me that they are necessary for some greater good. Now those same people who want to regulate everything I do are bitching about it when something they want to be cheap and readily available gets regulated in a manner that is fairly consistent with how everything else in our lives is regulated. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for abortion clinics on however many corners the market can bear with instant abortions on demand. I just want the same thing when I have to go to the doctor for some minor surgery, or in my personal case I frequently have to go to the doctor to get antibiotics for pneumonia even though I get it regularly and I know what it is, my doctor knows and the doctors job is basically "Hi, got pneumonia again? Here is a prescription, $100 please." No reason I couldn't get that done at CVS or Walgreens and pick up the prescription at the same location for $40 except for ridiculous regulations that I am assured keep me safer and whenever I whine about them people roll their eyes and call me a crazy libertarian. I think this is a valuable moment to look and see if all the similar regulations on other medical procedures are needed.

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Is it

Beyond Saving wrote:

Is it common for abortion clinics to perform same day abortions? I really have no clue, but if it is that is more evidence of the worthlessness of government regulations. I can't get any other surgery the same day, short of an emergency you are going to wait well more than 24 hours.

 

Sure, you see the doctor, you (or your doctor, depending) calls and make an appointment at the clinic. You don't then go to the clinic, get a lecture and have to wait an additional 24 hours for the procedure. Yes, people can walk into an abortion clinic for immediate counseling. But unless there is serious bleeding or other complications - and in that case you should be in the emergency room not in an abortion clinic - as far as I know, it isn't common to get a same day abortion. Like any other procedure, you call and make an appointment. That should be counted as your waiting period. And it often isn't. It may have changed since the last time I checked to where you can walk in and get a non-emergency abortion on the same day. Most of the time, you have to call ahead for an appointment which isn't going to be on the same day.

 

Beyond Saving wrote:

It really boils down to whether ASC regulations are actually important. Do they really make our medical system safer as the people who passed all of them claim? Or do they just limit our options for all of those other surgeries making them more expensive? If they really make it safer, why shouldn't women getting abortions be worth protecting as much as someone getting a different surgery? If they don't, then why don't we deregulate the whole medical industry to make outpatient surgeries cheaper and faster for all those other surgeries? Why do you have to go to an ASC facility to get a colonoscopy but not an abortion? Abortion is a pretty safe procedure, but there are rare complications and every year a handful of women die due to abortion related complications. 

 

Every year people die at ASC clinics as well. I don't have the numbers off the top of my head, so I don't know the answer. There is a difference in procedures as usually an ACS clinic is required if an incision is necessary for the procedure. But there are physicians who will perform small procedures in their office. Should you be required to go to a ASC clinic for a mole removal? There is no incision necessary for an abortion, so there is less risk than if someone is cutting through your skin.

 

Beyond Saving wrote:

And the only reason there are so few ASC clinics is because they were not required to be ASC before. Now that they are, I imagine most will bring themselves up to standards. The fear mongering from the media that all these clinics are going to disappear is absurd. They are not any more than I am going to close my business down because I currently don't comply with Obamacare regulations (even though when I am in a whiny mood I might threaten to do just that). That is what government regulations do, they make things more expensive and make it a pain in the ass for businesses to meet whatever arbitrary standards they create. People tell me that they are necessary for some greater good. Now those same people who want to regulate everything I do are bitching about it when something they want to be cheap and readily available gets regulated in a manner that is fairly consistent with how everything else in our lives is regulated. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for abortion clinics on however many corners the market can bear with instant abortions on demand. I just want the same thing when I have to go to the doctor for some minor surgery, or in my personal case I frequently have to go to the doctor to get antibiotics for pneumonia even though I get it regularly and I know what it is, my doctor knows and the doctors job is basically "Hi, got pneumonia again? Here is a prescription, $100 please." No reason I couldn't get that done at CVS or Walgreens and pick up the prescription at the same location for $40 except for ridiculous regulations that I am assured keep me safer and whenever I whine about them people roll their eyes and call me a crazy libertarian. I think this is a valuable moment to look and see if all the similar regulations on other medical procedures are needed.

 

I have no idea if the requirement for ASC will have an impact or not as I don't know how much is involved. There is the cost of bringing everything up to code, and the yearly cost for certification. Will that increase the costs? Likely.

Yeah, my main beefs are "second opinion" and "physician referral." If my primary care physician does not do minor surgery - such as mole removal - under any circumstances and I know she will refer me to a dermatologist, why do I need to make an appointment with her first when I know she will just refer me on? It is an extra visit for no good reason. "Yeah, that should come off. Call the dermatologist." How does that save anyone money? And the dermatologist asks for my primary care physician all over again when I see him, and sends the info about the procedure back to her so she is fully informed.

Stop smoking and get the pneumonia shot. That should take care of the problem.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.