A Bill for 17-Year-Old Capital Murderers Died in the Pile-Up Behind Wendy Davis' Filibuster

Jun 26, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Dallas Observer

Last night, Sen. Wendy Davis' epic filibuster against an antediluvian piece of abortion legislation was ended because Roe v Wade apparently isn't "germane."

Comments
21 - 40 of 41 Comments Last updated Jul 8, 2013
Ocean56

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Morgana 9 wrote:
WRONG AGAIN, KayLayLousy, the post you addressed was to Ocean. Poor KayLayLousy, can't fathom any logical argument except Ocean and I hate men.
Exactly, Morgana. It's rather scary to see how far BACKWARD Kaykay's mind is.

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
Since this is a PUBLIC message board, Kaykay, it really doesn't matter whether Dan was "speaking to her" or not. Neither Morgana nor I are, as you so stupidly put it, "man haters."
I can't speak for Morgana, but I have nothing but CONTEMPT for misogynistic guys like Rick Perry and Ted Cruz, who think women are too stupid to make medical decisions for ourselves so they "should" make them for us. If you want to call that being a "man hater," knock yourself out.
KayLayLousy seems to adore misogynist men, the ones who deem her incapable of making her own decisions, men who equate her to subservient and submissive. She is free to participate, but she seems to think all women should do so mandatorily. She obviously is very insecure.
Ocean56

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Morgana 9 wrote:
KayLayLousy seems to adore misogynist men, the ones who deem her incapable of making her own decisions, men who equate her to subservient and submissive. She is free to participate, but she seems to think all women should do so mandatorily. She obviously is very insecure.
Agreed. She's another Phyllis Schlafly type...you know, the kind of backward woman who thinks "women shouldn't talk back to men" or something equally stupid.

Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Jul 1, 2013
 
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
You can play the semantics game all you want, Dan. I'm not interested.
It doesn't change the fact that the anti-choice agenda is to DENY women access to abortion and even some forms of contraception. Since the anti-choice Republican politicians can't reverse Roe v. Wade, they are doing the best they can in their states to restrict abortion to such an extent that many women will be DENIED access to it. If women can't get access to abortion or contraception, they don't HAVE choice.
But, you started the "semantics game" here, Ocean-

"FORCING women to gestate pregnancies they never wanted in the first place by banning abortion...."

You said it. I just wanted a citation of where abortion was to be banned.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
The bill sought to raises standards so high, that no other medical facility actually had them. It was a sneaky way of robbing a woman her right to choose, in the guise of protecting them from harm.
Broseph-

Are these standards unable to be met by the current facilities? Can they not upgrade?
Broseph

Newark, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Jul 1, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Broseph-
Are these standards unable to be met by the current facilities? Can they not upgrade?
No. They can't be met by the vast majority of facilities because they're too extensive. That's the point. It's a sneaky way to get rid of abortion in Texas, in the guise of protecting women.

Since: Sep 08

Neon City Oh.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Jul 1, 2013
 
So instead of important legislation the GOP wants to waste time on abortion.
The GOP are pathetic leeches.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Jul 1, 2013
 
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
No. They can't be met by the vast majority of facilities because they're too extensive. That's the point. It's a sneaky way to get rid of abortion in Texas, in the guise of protecting women.
It's only as "extensive" as all other ambulatory surgical centers have to be.

As of 6/20/13, there are 420 ambulatory surgical centers in Texas, and some PP facilities are among them, so it's not as if they cannot meet these standards.

I'm not sure how upgrading facilities to meet state standards ISN'T protecting women who are patients.
Broseph

Newark, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
It's only as "extensive" as all other ambulatory surgical centers have to be.
As of 6/20/13, there are 420 ambulatory surgical centers in Texas, and some PP facilities are among them, so it's not as if they cannot meet these standards.
I'm not sure how upgrading facilities to meet state standards ISN'T protecting women who are patients.
Only 4 actual centers within the entire state of Texas can make these standards, so that's not really true. Also, abortions are incredibly safe to get. You have .5% chance to get any complications. Your'e 10 times more likely to die from childbirth than from getting an abortion. There's no point. This was simply designed to kill legal abortion in Texas. Even some Texas republicans admit it had nothing to do with women.
Broseph

Newark, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Jul 1, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
It's only as "extensive" as all other ambulatory surgical centers have to be.
As of 6/20/13, there are 420 ambulatory surgical centers in Texas, and some PP facilities are among them, so it's not as if they cannot meet these standards.
I'm not sure how upgrading facilities to meet state standards ISN'T protecting women who are patients.
Even the medical community thinks it's BS.

"Anti-abortion groups said the measures would increase safety for women. But the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the main professional group for OB/GYNs, said neither measure makes sense, and the American Medical Association said it deferred to ACOG's position on both issues.

"The regulations set forth [in the Texas bill] require additional standards that are not necessary," said Lisa Hollier, chair of the Texas district of ACOG, which says abortion clinics should have a plan in place for emergency services instead of transferring patients elsewhere for emergency treatment. "The regulations are much more stringent than for other surgical procedures at similar risk, such as a colonoscopy."

Ambulatory surgical centers, which provide outpatient surgeries, often deal with procedures that require a high level of anesthesia, which is not required in a typical abortion. In a statement on its website, ACOG said it also opposed the provision in the bill that would have required abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles. "ACOG opposes legislation or other requirements that single out abortion services from other outpatient procedures," it said."

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/06/2...
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Jul 1, 2013
 
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Only 4 actual centers within the entire state of Texas can make these standards, so that's not really true. Also, abortions are incredibly safe to get. You have .5% chance to get any complications. Your'e 10 times more likely to die from childbirth than from getting an abortion. There's no point. This was simply designed to kill legal abortion in Texas. Even some Texas republicans admit it had nothing to do with women.
There are only 4 of the 420 ambulatory surgical centers listed that meet state standard of concern in this legislation, or four PP locations?

Many surgical procedures are safe to the point that they could be labeled "routine", many of which, I'm sure, are performed by these 420 places in Texas.

Abortion IS a surgical procedure. You seem to think that they should be treated differently by the state of Texas, as if they aren't ambulatory surgical procedures. Why? All these other places have to comply with state standards.

Broseph

Newark, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Jul 1, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
There are only 4 of the 420 ambulatory surgical centers listed that meet state standard of concern in this legislation, or four PP locations?
Many surgical procedures are safe to the point that they could be labeled "routine", many of which, I'm sure, are performed by these 420 places in Texas.
Abortion IS a surgical procedure. You seem to think that they should be treated differently by the state of Texas, as if they aren't ambulatory surgical procedures. Why? All these other places have to comply with state standards.
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
There are only 4 of the 420 ambulatory surgical centers listed that meet state standard of concern in this legislation, or four PP locations?
Many surgical procedures are safe to the point that they could be labeled "routine", many of which, I'm sure, are performed by these 420 places in Texas.
Abortion IS a surgical procedure. You seem to think that they should be treated differently by the state of Texas, as if they aren't ambulatory surgical procedures. Why? All these other places have to comply with state standards.
Did you not see what the actual medical professionals stated? These standards are not placed in because they're no way necessary. Not all surgeries require the same standards. These surgical center standards are for incredibly serious surgeries that actually require heavy amounts of anesthesia. Abortions are incredibly safe procedures that almost never require anesthesia.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Jul 1, 2013
 
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Even the medical community thinks it's BS.
"Anti-abortion groups said the measures would increase safety for women. But the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the main professional group for OB/GYNs, said neither measure makes sense, and the American Medical Association said it deferred to ACOG's position on both issues.
"The regulations set forth [in the Texas bill] require additional standards that are not necessary," said Lisa Hollier, chair of the Texas district of ACOG, which says abortion clinics should have a plan in place for emergency services instead of transferring patients elsewhere for emergency treatment. "The regulations are much more stringent than for other surgical procedures at similar risk, such as a colonoscopy."
Ambulatory surgical centers, which provide outpatient surgeries, often deal with procedures that require a high level of anesthesia, which is not required in a typical abortion. In a statement on its website, ACOG said it also opposed the provision in the bill that would have required abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles. "ACOG opposes legislation or other requirements that single out abortion services from other outpatient procedures," it said."
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/06/2...
Thanks for the link.

I'm not terribly surprised that this body would object to restrictions being visited upon their members.
Broseph

Newark, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Jul 1, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the link.
I'm not terribly surprised that this body would object to restrictions being visited upon their members.
Oh, c'mon. The standards aren't necessary, and people that are for them are the same kinds of people who think a rape kit stops a woman from needing an abortion.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Jul 1, 2013
 
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, c'mon. The standards aren't necessary, and people that are for them are the same kinds of people who think a rape kit stops a woman from needing an abortion.
I don't think all proponents of this bill hold that ill-informed idea RE: rape kits.

If the state of Texas says they're necessary, then-they're necessary.
Broseph

Newark, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think all proponents of this bill hold that ill-informed idea RE: rape kits.
If the state of Texas says they're necessary, then-they're necessary.
You don't think they do? Texas republicans are as far-right as it gets. C'mon/ Also, the majority of Texas republicans =/= The state of Texas. And they're not necessary. The medical community doesn't think they're necessary, so they're not necessary.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Jul 1, 2013
 
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't think they do? Texas republicans are as far-right as it gets. C'mon/ Also, the majority of Texas republicans =/= The state of Texas. And they're not necessary. The medical community doesn't think they're necessary, so they're not necessary.
No, I don't think that all Texans who support this measure think that rape kits prevent the need for an abortion. To believe otherwise is incredibly na´ve.

The medical community =/= the State of Texas. Texas decides state law in Texas. They declare what's "necessary".
Broseph

New Castle, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Jul 7, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I don't think that all Texans who support this measure think that rape kits prevent the need for an abortion. To believe otherwise is incredibly na´ve.
The medical community =/= the State of Texas. Texas decides state law in Texas. They declare what's "necessary".
Why would it be naive, when Texas itself is among the lowest test-scoring states in the union and voted for a man that supports abstinence, a failed plan that just ends up with more kids with STDs and kids they can't take care of? Also, simply because more people know what they think is necessary doesn't mean the majority actually know what is necessary. I'm glad this event has energized the libertarian and liberal parts of Texas.

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Jul 8, 2013
 
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Did you not see what the actual medical professionals stated? These standards are not placed in because they're no way necessary. Not all surgeries require the same standards. These surgical center standards are for incredibly serious surgeries that actually require heavy amounts of anesthesia. Abortions are incredibly safe procedures that almost never require anesthesia.
You need to understand that Dan cares deeply about women and simply wants to make sure they are OK...thats all. He expressed enormous amounts of relief and jubilation when I told him that my abortion was performed at a non-surgical clinic and that I had the best of care and all went well!

He is not objected to abortion at all......:O)
Broseph

New Castle, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Jul 8, 2013
 
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to understand that Dan cares deeply about women and simply wants to make sure they are OK...thats all. He expressed enormous amounts of relief and jubilation when I told him that my abortion was performed at a non-surgical clinic and that I had the best of care and all went well!
He is not objected to abortion at all......:O)
That's very sweet of him.:)

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••