Ind. AG appeals injunction blocking a...

Ind. AG appeals injunction blocking abortion law

There are 14 comments on the WHAS11 story from Jun 28, 2011, titled Ind. AG appeals injunction blocking abortion law. In it, WHAS11 reports that:

Indiana's attorney general is appealing a judge's decision blocking part of new abortion law that took away some of the public funding for Planned Parenthood of Indiana.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WHAS11.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#1 Jun 28, 2011
Gee, zoeller, maybe you and mitch should look at the regulations concerning MCD family planning funding, which have been in force for YEARS. They clearly state that you cannot discriminate in distributing the money you get from the feds. Your choices are to forego the money altogether or distribute it impartially.

I'd also like to point out that the state has no business punishing someone for performing LEGAL medical procedures.
Parasite removal

Minneapolis, MN

#2 Jun 29, 2011
The sooner the suits reach the Supreme Court, the better. Parasitical Planned Parenthood continues to live in mortal dread of removal from its unwilling host: American taxpayers. The yank-abortionists-from-the-pub lic-trough defunding tsunami grows.

Tony Perkins writes: "... Judge Pratt cushioned the blow by acknowledging that life begins at conception, an admission that could be very significant legally. As part of the suit, Planned Parenthood was also gunning for the second half of the law, which requires abortion clinics to explain to women when human life begins. Sensing the threat that this language poses to their business, Planned Parenthood wanted that portion of the bill struck down. Pratt wouldn't bite. "...[T]he mandated statement," she writes, "states only a biological fact relating to the development of the living organism; therefore, it may be reasonably read to provide accurate, non-misleading information to the patient."

"Meanwhile, all of the controversy in Indiana hasn't scared Texas away from its pro-life agenda. Yesterday, the legislature passed a bill to strip more than $38,000,000 from their local Planned Parenthood clinics. Like Indiana, leaders changed the eligibility requirements for the state's Women's Health Program so that any organization providing abortions doesn't qualify for "family planning" dollars. Because the Texas doesn't completely drain Planned Parenthood funds, it might not face the same attacks from the abortion movement as Indiana's. But then again, Cecile Richards hasn't exactly been shying away from litigation lately. Just this week, her organization launched two new cases in Kansas and South Dakota. In Gov. Sam Brownback's state, the clinics are trying to win back taxpayer funding. In the Mount Rushmore state, they're hoping to win back customers. Starting this week, Dakota moms will have to wait 72-hours and undergo a counseling session before they can abort. Attorneys for Planned Parenthood think that puts an "undue burden" on women who want to kill their unborn children. "It's disappointing that instead of focusing on expanding family planning and sex education programs," a Planned Parenthood spokesman said, "we're once again having to spend time responding to...attacks."

"Funny, I don't think voters are disappointed at all. The longer we can tie up the organization in court, the more lives we can save. Speaking of saving, there's been plenty of it where taxpayer dollars are concerned. So far, eight states have blown an $51,403,000 hole in Planned Parenthood's budget--and counting!"

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#3 Jun 29, 2011
Something you and your PLM zombies keep lying about is the "biological fact" that life begins at conception. It does not. Scientifically, life began millennia ago and is a constant process. before the egg is fertilized, both it and the sperm are alive and are "human". Making a doctor say otherwise is the exact opposite of free speech.

Since RvW wasn't decided on the status of the fetus to begin with, this ridiculous philosophical parlor game will have no bearing at all. Whatever you consider the fetus, the RIGHTS involved are still the woman's. The woman owns her body, she takes the risks, and she makes her own medical choices.
Parasite removal wrote:
The sooner the suits reach the Supreme Court, the better. Parasitical Planned Parenthood continues to live in mortal dread of removal from its unwilling host: American taxpayers. The yank-abortionists-from-the-pub lic-trough defunding tsunami grows.
Tony Perkins writes: "... Judge Pratt cushioned the blow by acknowledging that life begins at conception, an admission that could be very significant legally. As part of the suit, Planned Parenthood was also gunning for the second half of the law, which requires abortion clinics to explain to women when human life begins. Sensing the threat that this language poses to their business, Planned Parenthood wanted that portion of the bill struck down. Pratt wouldn't bite. "...[T]he mandated statement," she writes, "states only a biological fact relating to the development of the living organism; therefore, it may be reasonably read to provide accurate, non-misleading information to the patient."
"Meanwhile, all of the controversy in Indiana hasn't scared Texas away from its pro-life agenda. Yesterday, the legislature passed a bill to strip more than $38,000,000 from their local Planned Parenthood clinics. Like Indiana, leaders changed the eligibility requirements for the state's Women's Health Program so that any organization providing abortions doesn't qualify for "family planning" dollars. Because the Texas doesn't completely drain Planned Parenthood funds, it might not face the same attacks from the abortion movement as Indiana's. But then again, Cecile Richards hasn't exactly been shying away from litigation lately. Just this week, her organization launched two new cases in Kansas and South Dakota. In Gov. Sam Brownback's state, the clinics are trying to win back taxpayer funding. In the Mount Rushmore state, they're hoping to win back customers. Starting this week, Dakota moms will have to wait 72-hours and undergo a counseling session before they can abort. Attorneys for Planned Parenthood think that puts an "undue burden" on women who want to kill their unborn children. "It's disappointing that instead of focusing on expanding family planning and sex education programs," a Planned Parenthood spokesman said, "we're once again having to spend time responding to...attacks."
"Funny, I don't think voters are disappointed at all. The longer we can tie up the organization in court, the more lives we can save. Speaking of saving, there's been plenty of it where taxpayer dollars are concerned. So far, eight states have blown an $51,403,000 hole in Planned Parenthood's budget--and counting!"
IStandWithIndian a Dot Com

Minneapolis, MN

#4 Jun 29, 2011
cpeter1313 wrote:
Something you and your PLM zombies keep lying about is the "biological fact" that life begins at conception. It does not. Scientifically, life began millennia ago and is a constant process. before the egg is fertilized, both it and the sperm are alive and are "human". Making a doctor say otherwise is the exact opposite of free speech.
Since RvW wasn't decided on the status of the fetus to begin with, this ridiculous philosophical parlor game will have no bearing at all. Whatever you consider the fetus, the RIGHTS involved are still the woman's. The woman owns her body, she takes the risks, and she makes her own medical choices.
<quoted text>
Damage control sorely needed in aisle 1. Another embarrassing revelation of truth just blindsided Proscribed Parenthood.

http://liveaction.org/blog/medicaid-misinform... -- Medicaid Misinformation: Planned Parenthood Caught on Tape Lying About Indiana Healthcare

"... Planned Parenthood staffers at all 16 [Indiana] locations admitted that Medicaid women would still have access to medical care after the defunding. Staffers suggested local health clinics or state-assigned primary care physicians for Medicaid patients:“Your primary care doctor should be able to do [a Well Woman exam,] I mean, that’s what they’re there for,” said a Planned Parenthood in Michigan City, while the Merrillville Planned Parenthood said of a local community health center,“They have the same services we have.”

“According to Planned Parenthood’s own statistics, their 28 clinics serve less than 1% of Indiana Medicaid patients, yet they do more than 50% of Indiana abortions,” notes Rose. There are over 800 other Medicaid providers available to these women in the counties with Planned Parenthood clinics alone.”

"Even Indiana doctors agree that defunding Planned Parenthood in Indiana would have little to no effect on the care and services provided to Medicaid patients.

“If Planned Parenthood only sees 1% of Medicaid patients in the state, and that’s their statistic, it doesn’t seem like they are making a big imprint in the first place,” said Dr. Geoff Cly, at the Northeast Ob/GYN Women’s Health Group in Fort Wayne, IN.“I know in our group, we currently have capacity to see more patients and I’m sure many other groups could easily take care of the 1% that’s left if Planned Parenthood no longer took care of those patients.”

&fe ature=player_embedded -- Do Women Need Planned Parenthood? Indiana PP clinics say no.

Sign the petition: http://www.istandwithindiana.com/

“Beauty on four legs”

Since: Sep 06

Location hidden

#5 Jun 29, 2011
cpeter, seriously, why are these zealots so eager to throw away Fed funding? Can your state afford to provide the services funded by the Feds now? What's wrong with those people?

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#6 Jun 29, 2011
Of course, doctors can provide these services. But will they, at MCD's rate of payment? No. Not to mention that fewer and fewer doctors are accepting medicaid patients altogether. The doctors can do these things, but they aren't going to see these patients anymore if they are going to clog up their waiting room.

The argument is not whether or not other clinics can do these things--obviously, they can. The issues here are that the state cannot legally deny PP funding, and that PP takes a huge burden off of other medical providers. Not to mention that, as their area of concentration, they are better equipped and trained to do so than many general practitioners.

BTW--other facilities have already noted that they can't take on the overflow should PP's patients be denied services there.

It' funny to watch people DEMAND that the state break the law to satisfy their own agendas.
IStandWithIndiana Dot Com wrote:
<quoted text>
Damage control sorely needed in aisle 1. Another embarrassing revelation of truth just blindsided Proscribed Parenthood.
http://liveaction.org/blog/medicaid-misinform... -- Medicaid Misinformation: Planned Parenthood Caught on Tape Lying About Indiana Healthcare
"... Planned Parenthood staffers at all 16 [Indiana] locations admitted that Medicaid women would still have access to medical care after the defunding. Staffers suggested local health clinics or state-assigned primary care physicians for Medicaid patients:“Your primary care doctor should be able to do [a Well Woman exam,] I mean, that’s what they’re there for,” said a Planned Parenthood in Michigan City, while the Merrillville Planned Parenthood said of a local community health center,“They have the same services we have.”
“According to Planned Parenthood’s own statistics, their 28 clinics serve less than 1% of Indiana Medicaid patients, yet they do more than 50% of Indiana abortions,” notes Rose. There are over 800 other Medicaid providers available to these women in the counties with Planned Parenthood clinics alone.”
"Even Indiana doctors agree that defunding Planned Parenthood in Indiana would have little to no effect on the care and services provided to Medicaid patients.
“If Planned Parenthood only sees 1% of Medicaid patients in the state, and that’s their statistic, it doesn’t seem like they are making a big imprint in the first place,” said Dr. Geoff Cly, at the Northeast Ob/GYN Women’s Health Group in Fort Wayne, IN.“I know in our group, we currently have capacity to see more patients and I’m sure many other groups could easily take care of the 1% that’s left if Planned Parenthood no longer took care of those patients.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =UqLL-v0JpY0XX&feature=pla yer_embedded -- Do Women Need Planned Parenthood? Indiana PP clinics say no.
Sign the petition: http://www.istandwithindiana.com/

“Have no fear PappaSmurf's here”

Since: Jun 11

Louisville, KY, USA, Earth

#7 Jun 29, 2011
cpeter1313 wrote:
<quoted text>Something you and your PLM zombies keep lying about is the "biological fact" that life begins at conception. It does not. Scientifically, life began millennia ago and is a constant process. before the egg is fertilized, both it and the sperm are alive and are "human". Making a doctor say otherwise is the exact opposite of free speech.

Since RvW wasn't decided on the status of the fetus to begin with, this ridiculous philosophical parlor game will have no bearing at all. Whatever you consider the fetus, the RIGHTS involved are still the woman's. The woman owns her body, she takes the risks, and she makes her own medical choices.
Ok, I normally do not get involved with these discussions. My personal beliefs are admittedly a bit hypocritical but I will say that out of all the arguments I've heard I had not heard the argument that the eggs and sperm are the actual human beginning of life, my question BASED on that assumption, would a male masterbating be a form of murder in your view?

I'm not asking to start anything, just intrigued by the line of thought.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#8 Jun 29, 2011
The answer is simple: Our state government is run by crooks and idiots. Their sole interest is in coddling the fringies who keep them in office. We cannot afford to lose this funding, but they just don't care; they think they can steamroll MCD into backing down, and that's as delusional as it gets.
pbfa wrote:
cpeter, seriously, why are these zealots so eager to throw away Fed funding? Can your state afford to provide the services funded by the Feds now? What's wrong with those people?

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#9 Jun 29, 2011
Not at all. In the scientific view, murder doesn't even exist; that's solely a legal term. Living cells have no particular claim to life; they either continue or they don't. Masturbation is healthy for the body as a whole and so the loss of cells isn't a bad thing at all. In every ejaculation, only one sperm in the multitude will reach the egg anyway (there are a few exceptions); every time you have sex you kill millions of sperm regardless of the outcome.

Scientifically speaking the concept of life refers to species from their first appearance to their extinction. Fetuses aren't considered a part of a species; only born entities are.
PappaSmurf wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, I normally do not get involved with these discussions. My personal beliefs are admittedly a bit hypocritical but I will say that out of all the arguments I've heard I had not heard the argument that the eggs and sperm are the actual human beginning of life, my question BASED on that assumption, would a male masterbating be a form of murder in your view?
I'm not asking to start anything, just intrigued by the line of thought.

“Beauty on four legs”

Since: Sep 06

Location hidden

#10 Jun 29, 2011
cpeter1313 wrote:
The answer is simple: Our state government is run by crooks and idiots. Their sole interest is in coddling the fringies who keep them in office. We cannot afford to lose this funding, but they just don't care; they think they can steamroll MCD into backing down, and that's as delusional as it gets.
<quoted text>
It looks to me as if you're correct. Pandering to the zealots will backfire, and the law of unintended consequences will apply. What will those people do then? I know they've got jobs & health coverage, but surely stripping the safety net won't serve them well. I notice they're not volunteering to live they way they demand their constituents live.

“Have no fear PappaSmurf's here”

Since: Jun 11

Louisville, KY, USA, Earth

#11 Jun 29, 2011
cpeter1313 wrote:
<quoted text>Not at all. In the scientific view, murder doesn't even exist; that's solely a legal term. Living cells have no particular claim to life; they either continue or they don't. Masturbation is healthy for the body as a whole and so the loss of cells isn't a bad thing at all. In every ejaculation, only one sperm in the multitude will reach the egg anyway (there are a few exceptions); every time you have sex you kill millions of sperm regardless of the outcome.

Scientifically speaking the concept of life refers to species from their first appearance to their extinction. Fetuses aren't considered a part of a species; only born entities are.
Ok, so based on this since murder doesn't exist in the whole scientific side is it still wrong morally? I'll leave legal out of it for now. I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Kinda have the Scooby Doo Huh!?! Going on right now.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#12 Jun 29, 2011
Unfortunately, too many people around here are frozen in the "vote like my daddy did" frame of mind, even though the only way these people benefited their daddy was if he was rich.

Our politicians, for the most part, have a very st5rong sense of entitlement. Our governor wouldn't even lower himself to live in the governor's mansion.
pbfa wrote:
<quoted text>
It looks to me as if you're correct. Pandering to the zealots will backfire, and the law of unintended consequences will apply. What will those people do then? I know they've got jobs & health coverage, but surely stripping the safety net won't serve them well. I notice they're not volunteering to live they way they demand their constituents live.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#13 Jun 29, 2011
You can't leave the legal side out of murder; murder is strictly a legal term. Killing would be the correct term otherwise. As for the morality of it, it's entirely circumstantial. If I shoot a german soldier today, I'm going to jail. If I shot one in 1944, I'd get a medal. If they blow up two towers in new york, they are terrorists; if we vaporize two japanese cities, we are trying to bring the war to an end sooner. I'm not debating the morality of these things, just pointing out how morals change over time and within context.

In terms of abortion, there aer added complications, such as the woman' rights to her own body and its resources and even whether or not you can equate a born, independent child with a connected, non-viable fetus.

It is precisely because these aer moral quandaries that abortion must remain the decision of the woman involved; otherwise, you are forcing your own opinion onto her.
PappaSmurf wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, so based on this since murder doesn't exist in the whole scientific side is it still wrong morally? I'll leave legal out of it for now. I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Kinda have the Scooby Doo Huh!?! Going on right now.

“Every Dog Has His Day”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#14 Jul 27, 2011
sixty

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Disgraced ex-Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich ... Dec 23 tomin cali 5
News Former Illinois Gov Blagojevich again appeals p... Dec '16 Card Carrying Zio... 2
News Does federal law forbid workplace discriminatio... Dec '16 Josh in New Orleans 5
News Federal court in Chicago to hear LGBT-workplace... Dec '16 Gay Peace on Earth 5
News The Latest: Court stops 'Making a Murderer' inm... Nov '16 Go Blue Forever 1
News Texas Drops Losing Fight Against Resettling Syr... Oct '16 LovePotion4470 26
News U.S. Constitution is at stake in Clinton vs. Tr... Oct '16 Responsibility 7
More from around the web