Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Novara
Novara's Journal
Novara's Journal
April 10, 2022
We don't know much about the DOJ's Jan. 6 inquiry. Here are 4 things we do know.
Source: Washington Post
snip..........
First, the criticism that the Justice Department has decided not to go after defeated former president Donald Trump is, from all appearances, false. The department continues to reaffirm it has not ruled out going after anyone. A grand jury, the New York Times reports, is already “asking for records about people who organized or spoke at several pro-Trump rallies after the election,” including two events before Jan. 6. It is also seeking “records about anyone who provided security at those events and about those who were deemed to be ‘V.I.P. attendees.’ ” The grand jury has also requested evidence “about any members of the executive and legislative branches who may have taken part in planning or executing the rallies, or tried to ‘obstruct, influence, impede or delay’ the certification of the presidential election.” Ostensibly, that would include Trump and former vice president Mike Pence.
snip...........
Second, none of this means that the Justice Department is acting with a sufficient sense of urgency. The rationale that the feds have to start at the bottom and work their way up — as though this were a Mafia case — makes no sense.
Prosecutors go after foot soldiers if they have no real proof the kingpin has engaged in criminal activity. But the former president has shouted from the rooftops that he wanted Pence to overturn the election. And there is an audio recording of Trump trying to twist the Georgia secretary of state’s arm to find just enough votes to flip his state’s results. Former senior advisers have written books, blabbed in TV interviews and testified before the Jan. 6 committee concerning communications with Trump and other senior advisers.
snip..............
Third, there is one investigation of which the Justice Department is properly deferring to a state prosecutor. Fani Willis, the district attorney in Fulton County, Ga., has impaneled a grand jury to investigate Trump’s pressure campaign against secretary of state Brad Raffensperger to manipulate the Georgia’s vote totals.
snip..........
Finally, it doesn’t really matter whether the Jan. 6 committee makes a “referral” to the Justice Department suggesting criminal prosecution. A referral, although the media and lawmakers have made much ado about it, would have no real legal significance, especially because the Justice Department is already well along in its investigation.
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/04/10/doj-justice-department-investigation-jan-6-donald-trump-prosecution/
April 10, 2022
DO IT. For fuck's sake, THESE ARE POLITICAL CRIMES! It can't NOT be political.
That orange shitstain is vowing that if he wins the presidency in 2024, he WILL use the DoJ to go after his political enemies.
And the J6 committee is wringing its hands????
Jan. 6 Panel Has Evidence for Criminal Referral of Trump, but Splits on Sending
Source: NYT
WASHINGTON — The leaders of the House committee investigating the Capitol attack have grown divided over whether to make a criminal referral to the Justice Department of former President Donald J. Trump, even though they have concluded that they have enough evidence to do so, people involved in the discussions said.
The debate centers on whether making a referral — a largely symbolic act — would backfire by politically tainting the Justice Department’s expanding investigation into the Jan. 6 assault and what led up to it.
Since last summer, a team of former federal prosecutors working for the committee has focused on documenting the attack and the preceding efforts by Mr. Trump and his allies to reverse his defeat in the 2020 election. The panel plans to issue a detailed report on its findings, but in recent months it has regularly signaled that it was also weighing a criminal referral that would pressure Attorney General Merrick B. Garland to open a criminal investigation into Mr. Trump.
...
Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/10/us/politics/jan-6-trump-criminal-referral.html
DO IT. For fuck's sake, THESE ARE POLITICAL CRIMES! It can't NOT be political.
That orange shitstain is vowing that if he wins the presidency in 2024, he WILL use the DoJ to go after his political enemies.
And the J6 committee is wringing its hands????
August 28, 2015
JUNEAU, Alaska -- A state court judge in Alaska ruled Thursday that a law further defining what constitutes a medically necessary abortion for purposes of Medicaid funding is unconstitutional.
Superior Court Judge John Suddock ordered that the state be blocked from implementing the law, passed last year, and a similar regulation, finding both violated the equal protection clause of the Alaska Constitution.
"This ruling, if upheld, means as a practical matter that virtually all indigent Alaskan women seeking abortions will receive state Medicaid funding," he wrote.
The Alaska Supreme Court has held that the state must pay for medically necessary abortions if it pays for other procedures deemed medically necessary. The regulation and law sought to further define what constitutes a "medically necessary" abortion.
Supporters of the measures have said the state should not be required to pay for elective abortions.
In his decision, Suddock said an unwanted pregnancy is a crisis for any woman and for an impoverished woman without recourse to an abortion, the crisis "may be extreme," noting that indigent women often face stressors such as homelessness, addiction or domestic violence. He wrote that the added stressor of an unwanted pregnancy with no recourse to an abortion "can create clinically significant mental distress such that a Medicaid abortion is medically necessary."
Read more: http://www.adn.com/article/20150827/alaska-judge-strikes-down-law-limit-medicaid-funds-abortions
Alaska judge strikes down law to limit Medicaid funds for abortions
Alaska judge strikes down law to limit Medicaid funds for abortionsJUNEAU, Alaska -- A state court judge in Alaska ruled Thursday that a law further defining what constitutes a medically necessary abortion for purposes of Medicaid funding is unconstitutional.
Superior Court Judge John Suddock ordered that the state be blocked from implementing the law, passed last year, and a similar regulation, finding both violated the equal protection clause of the Alaska Constitution.
"This ruling, if upheld, means as a practical matter that virtually all indigent Alaskan women seeking abortions will receive state Medicaid funding," he wrote.
The Alaska Supreme Court has held that the state must pay for medically necessary abortions if it pays for other procedures deemed medically necessary. The regulation and law sought to further define what constitutes a "medically necessary" abortion.
Supporters of the measures have said the state should not be required to pay for elective abortions.
In his decision, Suddock said an unwanted pregnancy is a crisis for any woman and for an impoverished woman without recourse to an abortion, the crisis "may be extreme," noting that indigent women often face stressors such as homelessness, addiction or domestic violence. He wrote that the added stressor of an unwanted pregnancy with no recourse to an abortion "can create clinically significant mental distress such that a Medicaid abortion is medically necessary."
Read more: http://www.adn.com/article/20150827/alaska-judge-strikes-down-law-limit-medicaid-funds-abortions
August 27, 2015
It's too good to pick and choose sections to post here. It's worth the read.
Good read: Justice For Texas Teens – The Global Fight for the Rights of Children Begins at Home
Justice For Texas Teens – The Global Fight for the Rights of Children Begins at HomeIt's too good to pick and choose sections to post here. It's worth the read.
August 26, 2015
Facing a possible sex-discrimination lawsuit, a Catholic hospital in Redding reversed its position Monday and agreed to let a woman’s doctor sterilize her after she gives birth next month.
Mercy Medical Center, owned by Dignity Health of San Francisco, the state’s largest private health care company, had previously refused to allow Rachel Miller to undergo a tubal ligation, citing Catholic hospitals’ Ethical and Religious Directives against sterilization.
After attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union said they would file a discrimination suit if Miller was being denied pregnancy-based care” on religious grounds, the hospital notified her doctor that it was reconsidering based on additional information the physician had provided. On Monday, the deadline the lawyers had set for a response, the ACLU said Mercy Medical Center had agreed to the surgery.
That solves Miller’s problem, said ACLU attorney Elizabeth Gill, but it won’t avoid a future legal confrontation unless the hospital chain changes its policy.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/Catholic-hospital-backs-down-on-tubal-ligation-6463205.php
Catholic hospital backs down on tubal ligation refusal
Catholic hospital backs down on tubal ligation refusalFacing a possible sex-discrimination lawsuit, a Catholic hospital in Redding reversed its position Monday and agreed to let a woman’s doctor sterilize her after she gives birth next month.
Mercy Medical Center, owned by Dignity Health of San Francisco, the state’s largest private health care company, had previously refused to allow Rachel Miller to undergo a tubal ligation, citing Catholic hospitals’ Ethical and Religious Directives against sterilization.
After attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union said they would file a discrimination suit if Miller was being denied pregnancy-based care” on religious grounds, the hospital notified her doctor that it was reconsidering based on additional information the physician had provided. On Monday, the deadline the lawyers had set for a response, the ACLU said Mercy Medical Center had agreed to the surgery.
That solves Miller’s problem, said ACLU attorney Elizabeth Gill, but it won’t avoid a future legal confrontation unless the hospital chain changes its policy.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/Catholic-hospital-backs-down-on-tubal-ligation-6463205.php
August 26, 2015
<snip>
The legal skirmish, and others like it nationwide, reveal a quiet evolution in the nation’s abortion battle. Increasingly, abortion opponents are pursuing personal and medical information on women undergoing abortions and the doctors who perform them. They often file complaints with authorities based on what they learn.
Abortion opponents insist their tactics are generally not aimed at identifying women who have abortions but to uncover incidents involving patients who may have been harmed by poor care or underage girls who may have been sexually abused. They say they are trying to prevent situations such as the one involving Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, who was convicted in 2013 of murdering three babies after botched abortions and of involuntary manslaughter in the death of a woman.
“This is about saving the lives of women,” said Cheryl Sullenger, senior policy adviser for the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue, which is based in Wichita, Kansas. “A lot of people don’t understand that. It’s a systemic problem within the abortion industry today for abortion providers to cut corners on patient care.”
But those who support abortion rights say the ultimate aim of these activists is to reduce abortions by intimidating women and their doctors — using the loss of privacy as a weapon. They say their opponents are amassing a wealth of details that could be used to identify patients — turning women, and their doctors, into pariahs or even targets. In a New Mexico case, a woman’s initials and where she lived became public as part of an investigation triggered by a complaint from activists.
“I don’t think there’s any margin for error here,” said Laura Einstein, chief legal counsel of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands, which challenged Bloedow’s request. “These women came to a private health center to have a private health procedure, and that’s just not anybody’s business.”
In recent years, abortion opponents have become experts at accessing public records such as recordings of 911 calls, autopsy reports and documents from state health departments and medical boards, then publishing the information on their websites.
Some activists have dug through clinics’ trash to find privacy violations by abortion providers — such as patient records tossed in dumpsters — and used them to file complaints with regulators.
The fight has landed in courts nationwide as the two sides tussle over which information about abortions should be public and which should remain confidential under privacy laws.
In St. Louis, for example, an Operation Rescue staff member is suing the city’s fire department for 911 call logs and recordings from a Planned Parenthood clinic. The city says releasing the requested information would violate a federal patient privacy law.
In Louisiana, a critic of abortion sued the state last year to get data on abortions performed on minors, their ages and the ages of the listed biological fathers, as well as any complications that occurred. The state said the records were exempt from disclosure, and a judge agreed.
In Bloedow’s case, a Washington court sided with the clinics and prohibited the release of the records he sought. In May, a state appeals court upheld that injunction.
“The public has no legitimate interest in the health care or pregnancy history of any individual woman or where any particular abortion was performed,” the appeals court ruled.
Read more sickening details here: http://www.propublica.org/article/activists-pursue-private-abortion-details-using-public-records-laws
Activists Pursue Private Abortion Details Using Public Records Laws
Activists Pursue Private Abortion Details Using Public Records Laws<snip>
The legal skirmish, and others like it nationwide, reveal a quiet evolution in the nation’s abortion battle. Increasingly, abortion opponents are pursuing personal and medical information on women undergoing abortions and the doctors who perform them. They often file complaints with authorities based on what they learn.
Abortion opponents insist their tactics are generally not aimed at identifying women who have abortions but to uncover incidents involving patients who may have been harmed by poor care or underage girls who may have been sexually abused. They say they are trying to prevent situations such as the one involving Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, who was convicted in 2013 of murdering three babies after botched abortions and of involuntary manslaughter in the death of a woman.
“This is about saving the lives of women,” said Cheryl Sullenger, senior policy adviser for the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue, which is based in Wichita, Kansas. “A lot of people don’t understand that. It’s a systemic problem within the abortion industry today for abortion providers to cut corners on patient care.”
But those who support abortion rights say the ultimate aim of these activists is to reduce abortions by intimidating women and their doctors — using the loss of privacy as a weapon. They say their opponents are amassing a wealth of details that could be used to identify patients — turning women, and their doctors, into pariahs or even targets. In a New Mexico case, a woman’s initials and where she lived became public as part of an investigation triggered by a complaint from activists.
“I don’t think there’s any margin for error here,” said Laura Einstein, chief legal counsel of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands, which challenged Bloedow’s request. “These women came to a private health center to have a private health procedure, and that’s just not anybody’s business.”
In recent years, abortion opponents have become experts at accessing public records such as recordings of 911 calls, autopsy reports and documents from state health departments and medical boards, then publishing the information on their websites.
Some activists have dug through clinics’ trash to find privacy violations by abortion providers — such as patient records tossed in dumpsters — and used them to file complaints with regulators.
The fight has landed in courts nationwide as the two sides tussle over which information about abortions should be public and which should remain confidential under privacy laws.
In St. Louis, for example, an Operation Rescue staff member is suing the city’s fire department for 911 call logs and recordings from a Planned Parenthood clinic. The city says releasing the requested information would violate a federal patient privacy law.
In Louisiana, a critic of abortion sued the state last year to get data on abortions performed on minors, their ages and the ages of the listed biological fathers, as well as any complications that occurred. The state said the records were exempt from disclosure, and a judge agreed.
In Bloedow’s case, a Washington court sided with the clinics and prohibited the release of the records he sought. In May, a state appeals court upheld that injunction.
“The public has no legitimate interest in the health care or pregnancy history of any individual woman or where any particular abortion was performed,” the appeals court ruled.
Read more sickening details here: http://www.propublica.org/article/activists-pursue-private-abortion-details-using-public-records-laws
August 26, 2015
<snip>
The legal skirmish, and others like it nationwide, reveal a quiet evolution in the nation’s abortion battle. Increasingly, abortion opponents are pursuing personal and medical information on women undergoing abortions and the doctors who perform them. They often file complaints with authorities based on what they learn.
Abortion opponents insist their tactics are generally not aimed at identifying women who have abortions but to uncover incidents involving patients who may have been harmed by poor care or underage girls who may have been sexually abused. They say they are trying to prevent situations such as the one involving Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, who was convicted in 2013 of murdering three babies after botched abortions and of involuntary manslaughter in the death of a woman.
“This is about saving the lives of women,” said Cheryl Sullenger, senior policy adviser for the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue, which is based in Wichita, Kansas. “A lot of people don’t understand that. It’s a systemic problem within the abortion industry today for abortion providers to cut corners on patient care.”
But those who support abortion rights say the ultimate aim of these activists is to reduce abortions by intimidating women and their doctors — using the loss of privacy as a weapon. They say their opponents are amassing a wealth of details that could be used to identify patients — turning women, and their doctors, into pariahs or even targets. In a New Mexico case, a woman’s initials and where she lived became public as part of an investigation triggered by a complaint from activists.
“I don’t think there’s any margin for error here,” said Laura Einstein, chief legal counsel of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands, which challenged Bloedow’s request. “These women came to a private health center to have a private health procedure, and that’s just not anybody’s business.”
In recent years, abortion opponents have become experts at accessing public records such as recordings of 911 calls, autopsy reports and documents from state health departments and medical boards, then publishing the information on their websites.
Some activists have dug through clinics’ trash to find privacy violations by abortion providers — such as patient records tossed in dumpsters — and used them to file complaints with regulators.
The fight has landed in courts nationwide as the two sides tussle over which information about abortions should be public and which should remain confidential under privacy laws.
In St. Louis, for example, an Operation Rescue staff member is suing the city’s fire department for 911 call logs and recordings from a Planned Parenthood clinic. The city says releasing the requested information would violate a federal patient privacy law.
In Louisiana, a critic of abortion sued the state last year to get data on abortions performed on minors, their ages and the ages of the listed biological fathers, as well as any complications that occurred. The state said the records were exempt from disclosure, and a judge agreed.
In Bloedow’s case, a Washington court sided with the clinics and prohibited the release of the records he sought. In May, a state appeals court upheld that injunction.
“The public has no legitimate interest in the health care or pregnancy history of any individual woman or where any particular abortion was performed,” the appeals court ruled.
Read more sickening details here: http://www.propublica.org/article/activists-pursue-private-abortion-details-using-public-records-laws
Activists Pursue Private Abortion Details Using Public Records Laws
Activists Pursue Private Abortion Details Using Public Records Laws<snip>
The legal skirmish, and others like it nationwide, reveal a quiet evolution in the nation’s abortion battle. Increasingly, abortion opponents are pursuing personal and medical information on women undergoing abortions and the doctors who perform them. They often file complaints with authorities based on what they learn.
Abortion opponents insist their tactics are generally not aimed at identifying women who have abortions but to uncover incidents involving patients who may have been harmed by poor care or underage girls who may have been sexually abused. They say they are trying to prevent situations such as the one involving Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, who was convicted in 2013 of murdering three babies after botched abortions and of involuntary manslaughter in the death of a woman.
“This is about saving the lives of women,” said Cheryl Sullenger, senior policy adviser for the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue, which is based in Wichita, Kansas. “A lot of people don’t understand that. It’s a systemic problem within the abortion industry today for abortion providers to cut corners on patient care.”
But those who support abortion rights say the ultimate aim of these activists is to reduce abortions by intimidating women and their doctors — using the loss of privacy as a weapon. They say their opponents are amassing a wealth of details that could be used to identify patients — turning women, and their doctors, into pariahs or even targets. In a New Mexico case, a woman’s initials and where she lived became public as part of an investigation triggered by a complaint from activists.
“I don’t think there’s any margin for error here,” said Laura Einstein, chief legal counsel of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands, which challenged Bloedow’s request. “These women came to a private health center to have a private health procedure, and that’s just not anybody’s business.”
In recent years, abortion opponents have become experts at accessing public records such as recordings of 911 calls, autopsy reports and documents from state health departments and medical boards, then publishing the information on their websites.
Some activists have dug through clinics’ trash to find privacy violations by abortion providers — such as patient records tossed in dumpsters — and used them to file complaints with regulators.
The fight has landed in courts nationwide as the two sides tussle over which information about abortions should be public and which should remain confidential under privacy laws.
In St. Louis, for example, an Operation Rescue staff member is suing the city’s fire department for 911 call logs and recordings from a Planned Parenthood clinic. The city says releasing the requested information would violate a federal patient privacy law.
In Louisiana, a critic of abortion sued the state last year to get data on abortions performed on minors, their ages and the ages of the listed biological fathers, as well as any complications that occurred. The state said the records were exempt from disclosure, and a judge agreed.
In Bloedow’s case, a Washington court sided with the clinics and prohibited the release of the records he sought. In May, a state appeals court upheld that injunction.
“The public has no legitimate interest in the health care or pregnancy history of any individual woman or where any particular abortion was performed,” the appeals court ruled.
Read more sickening details here: http://www.propublica.org/article/activists-pursue-private-abortion-details-using-public-records-laws
August 26, 2015
<snip>
The legal skirmish, and others like it nationwide, reveal a quiet evolution in the nation’s abortion battle. Increasingly, abortion opponents are pursuing personal and medical information on women undergoing abortions and the doctors who perform them. They often file complaints with authorities based on what they learn.
Abortion opponents insist their tactics are generally not aimed at identifying women who have abortions but to uncover incidents involving patients who may have been harmed by poor care or underage girls who may have been sexually abused. They say they are trying to prevent situations such as the one involving Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, who was convicted in 2013 of murdering three babies after botched abortions and of involuntary manslaughter in the death of a woman.
“This is about saving the lives of women,” said Cheryl Sullenger, senior policy adviser for the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue, which is based in Wichita, Kansas. “A lot of people don’t understand that. It’s a systemic problem within the abortion industry today for abortion providers to cut corners on patient care.”
But those who support abortion rights say the ultimate aim of these activists is to reduce abortions by intimidating women and their doctors — using the loss of privacy as a weapon. They say their opponents are amassing a wealth of details that could be used to identify patients — turning women, and their doctors, into pariahs or even targets. In a New Mexico case, a woman’s initials and where she lived became public as part of an investigation triggered by a complaint from activists.
“I don’t think there’s any margin for error here,” said Laura Einstein, chief legal counsel of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands, which challenged Bloedow’s request. “These women came to a private health center to have a private health procedure, and that’s just not anybody’s business.”
In recent years, abortion opponents have become experts at accessing public records such as recordings of 911 calls, autopsy reports and documents from state health departments and medical boards, then publishing the information on their websites.
Some activists have dug through clinics’ trash to find privacy violations by abortion providers — such as patient records tossed in dumpsters — and used them to file complaints with regulators.
The fight has landed in courts nationwide as the two sides tussle over which information about abortions should be public and which should remain confidential under privacy laws.
In St. Louis, for example, an Operation Rescue staff member is suing the city’s fire department for 911 call logs and recordings from a Planned Parenthood clinic. The city says releasing the requested information would violate a federal patient privacy law.
In Louisiana, a critic of abortion sued the state last year to get data on abortions performed on minors, their ages and the ages of the listed biological fathers, as well as any complications that occurred. The state said the records were exempt from disclosure, and a judge agreed.
In Bloedow’s case, a Washington court sided with the clinics and prohibited the release of the records he sought. In May, a state appeals court upheld that injunction.
“The public has no legitimate interest in the health care or pregnancy history of any individual woman or where any particular abortion was performed,” the appeals court ruled.
Read more sickening details here: http://www.propublica.org/article/activists-pursue-private-abortion-details-using-public-records-laws
Activists Pursue Private Abortion Details Using Public Records Laws
Activists Pursue Private Abortion Details Using Public Records Laws<snip>
The legal skirmish, and others like it nationwide, reveal a quiet evolution in the nation’s abortion battle. Increasingly, abortion opponents are pursuing personal and medical information on women undergoing abortions and the doctors who perform them. They often file complaints with authorities based on what they learn.
Abortion opponents insist their tactics are generally not aimed at identifying women who have abortions but to uncover incidents involving patients who may have been harmed by poor care or underage girls who may have been sexually abused. They say they are trying to prevent situations such as the one involving Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, who was convicted in 2013 of murdering three babies after botched abortions and of involuntary manslaughter in the death of a woman.
“This is about saving the lives of women,” said Cheryl Sullenger, senior policy adviser for the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue, which is based in Wichita, Kansas. “A lot of people don’t understand that. It’s a systemic problem within the abortion industry today for abortion providers to cut corners on patient care.”
But those who support abortion rights say the ultimate aim of these activists is to reduce abortions by intimidating women and their doctors — using the loss of privacy as a weapon. They say their opponents are amassing a wealth of details that could be used to identify patients — turning women, and their doctors, into pariahs or even targets. In a New Mexico case, a woman’s initials and where she lived became public as part of an investigation triggered by a complaint from activists.
“I don’t think there’s any margin for error here,” said Laura Einstein, chief legal counsel of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands, which challenged Bloedow’s request. “These women came to a private health center to have a private health procedure, and that’s just not anybody’s business.”
In recent years, abortion opponents have become experts at accessing public records such as recordings of 911 calls, autopsy reports and documents from state health departments and medical boards, then publishing the information on their websites.
Some activists have dug through clinics’ trash to find privacy violations by abortion providers — such as patient records tossed in dumpsters — and used them to file complaints with regulators.
The fight has landed in courts nationwide as the two sides tussle over which information about abortions should be public and which should remain confidential under privacy laws.
In St. Louis, for example, an Operation Rescue staff member is suing the city’s fire department for 911 call logs and recordings from a Planned Parenthood clinic. The city says releasing the requested information would violate a federal patient privacy law.
In Louisiana, a critic of abortion sued the state last year to get data on abortions performed on minors, their ages and the ages of the listed biological fathers, as well as any complications that occurred. The state said the records were exempt from disclosure, and a judge agreed.
In Bloedow’s case, a Washington court sided with the clinics and prohibited the release of the records he sought. In May, a state appeals court upheld that injunction.
“The public has no legitimate interest in the health care or pregnancy history of any individual woman or where any particular abortion was performed,” the appeals court ruled.
Read more sickening details here: http://www.propublica.org/article/activists-pursue-private-abortion-details-using-public-records-laws
August 25, 2015
<snip>
Robertson delivered a diatribe against Planned Parenthood and abortion on TV’s “The 700 Club” Monday, telling viewers that God will “hold us accountable.” Planned Parenthood – known for providing reproductive health services to women – has been under fire in recent weeks over secretly recorded videos that show executives from the organization discussing the donation of fetal tissue for medical research.
“We will pay dearly as a nation for this thing going on,” Robertson said. “And possibly if we were to stop, stop all of this slaughter, the judgment of God might be lifted from us. But it’s coming, ladies and gentlemen. We just have a little taste of it in terms of the financial system. But it’s going to be shaken to its core in the next few months, years or however long it takes, and it will hurt every one of us. It’s coming down the road. But at least we could repent and try to change.”
Read more http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/pat-robertson-links-stock-market-plunge-abortion
______________________
I'm sure the wildfiires in the west are abortion's fault too.
Of course: Pat Robertson links stock market plunge to abortion
Pat Robertson links stock market plunge to abortion<snip>
Robertson delivered a diatribe against Planned Parenthood and abortion on TV’s “The 700 Club” Monday, telling viewers that God will “hold us accountable.” Planned Parenthood – known for providing reproductive health services to women – has been under fire in recent weeks over secretly recorded videos that show executives from the organization discussing the donation of fetal tissue for medical research.
“We will pay dearly as a nation for this thing going on,” Robertson said. “And possibly if we were to stop, stop all of this slaughter, the judgment of God might be lifted from us. But it’s coming, ladies and gentlemen. We just have a little taste of it in terms of the financial system. But it’s going to be shaken to its core in the next few months, years or however long it takes, and it will hurt every one of us. It’s coming down the road. But at least we could repent and try to change.”
Read more http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/pat-robertson-links-stock-market-plunge-abortion
______________________
I'm sure the wildfiires in the west are abortion's fault too.
August 21, 2015
[img]
[/img]
<snip>
The label is a result of an effort by a religious group and several board members to "present childbirth and adoption as preferred options to elective abortion" in biology textbooks, AZ Central reported last year. They defended the stance by citing state laws that say schools must encourage childbirth or adoption over abortion. In December, the board decided against all-out editing of the textbooks, however, after Superintendent Dr. Christina M. Kishimoto raised concerns about potential copyright violations and pointed out how much effort and time it would take to manually edit the books.
According to NARAL, pretty much the entire Arizona state government is anti-choice. It was the first state to pass a controversial law obligating doctors to inform patients that medication abortions are reversible, though there's no credible evidence to support that claim. (The law is now on hold.) Arizona also has a number of regulations that attempt to discourage women to get abortions, including that a woman must receive an ultrasound 24 hours before the procedure, and that she must have in-person counseling session at least 24 hours in advance of the procedure. This means that a woman will have to make at least two trips to the facility.
Irene Mahoney-Paige, the district's director of communication, told Cosmopolitan.com via email that "stickers were given to the department chairs, some schools have students putting the stickers on while other schools have students turning their books into the bookstore manager who is then putting the stickers on. The stickers are going on the inside of the back cover of all Biology books." She said, though, that "there is no punishment if students do not use the sticker."
Read more: http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/news/a45170/arizona-textbook-abstinence/
School District Puts Anti-Abortion Stickers on Textbooks
School District Puts Anti-Abortion Stickers on Textbooks[img]
[/img]
<snip>
The label is a result of an effort by a religious group and several board members to "present childbirth and adoption as preferred options to elective abortion" in biology textbooks, AZ Central reported last year. They defended the stance by citing state laws that say schools must encourage childbirth or adoption over abortion. In December, the board decided against all-out editing of the textbooks, however, after Superintendent Dr. Christina M. Kishimoto raised concerns about potential copyright violations and pointed out how much effort and time it would take to manually edit the books.
According to NARAL, pretty much the entire Arizona state government is anti-choice. It was the first state to pass a controversial law obligating doctors to inform patients that medication abortions are reversible, though there's no credible evidence to support that claim. (The law is now on hold.) Arizona also has a number of regulations that attempt to discourage women to get abortions, including that a woman must receive an ultrasound 24 hours before the procedure, and that she must have in-person counseling session at least 24 hours in advance of the procedure. This means that a woman will have to make at least two trips to the facility.
Irene Mahoney-Paige, the district's director of communication, told Cosmopolitan.com via email that "stickers were given to the department chairs, some schools have students putting the stickers on while other schools have students turning their books into the bookstore manager who is then putting the stickers on. The stickers are going on the inside of the back cover of all Biology books." She said, though, that "there is no punishment if students do not use the sticker."
Read more: http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/news/a45170/arizona-textbook-abstinence/
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Apr 10, 2015, 07:15 AMNumber of posts: 6,115