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

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

In It to Win It

(12,653 posts)
Tue Dec 13, 2022, 10:51 AM Dec 2022

A notorious Trump judge just fired the first shot against birth control [View all]

Vox

Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee to a federal court in Texas, spent much of his career trying to interfere with other people’s sexuality.

A former lawyer at a religious conservative litigation shop, Kacsmaryk denounced, in a 2015 article, a so-called “Sexual Revolution” that began in the 1960s and 1970s, and which “sought public affirmation of the lie that the human person is an autonomous blob of Silly Putty unconstrained by nature or biology, and that marriage, sexuality, gender identity, and even the unborn child must yield to the erotic desires of liberated adults.”

So, in retrospect, it’s unsurprising that Kacsmaryk would be the first federal judge to embrace a challenge to the federal right to birth control after the Supreme Court’s June decision eliminating the right to an abortion.

Last week, Kacsmaryk issued an opinion in Deanda v. Becerra that attacks Title X, a federal program that offers grants to health providers that fund voluntary and confidential family planning services to patients. Federal law requires the Title X program to include “services for adolescents.”

The plaintiff in Deanda is a father who says he is “raising each of his daughters in accordance with Christian teaching on matters of sexuality, which requires unmarried children to "practice abstinence and refrain from sexual intercourse until marriage.” He claims that the program must cease all grants to health providers who do not require patients under age 18 to “obtain parental consent” before receiving Title X-funded medical care.



31 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I would like to fire one back----go to H..l katmondoo Dec 2022 #1
So, the SOB wants to raise everyone's daughters in his crazy ass religion. sinkingfeeling Dec 2022 #2
Because somebody, somewhere is having too much fun localroger Dec 2022 #4
Definition of a Puritan: Scottie Mom Dec 2022 #21
I know. Freedom of religion is part of the very 1st Amendment. I know this judge... brush Dec 2022 #7
Mind their own business? markodochartaigh Dec 2022 #26
No one is denying his right for him to indoctrinate his daughter Freethinker65 Dec 2022 #3
the parents who believe in this "religion" DBoon Dec 2022 #5
Or disappeared Corgigal Dec 2022 #30
He can go **** himself. Chainfire Dec 2022 #6
THIS! YoshidaYui Dec 2022 #23
Government by judicial fiat, from extremist judges groomed and selected by the Fascist Society dalton99a Dec 2022 #8
And people will only wake up, the day they go to the condom aisle, and see a sign that says: peppertree Dec 2022 #28
How does a guy who is 45 years old grow up to be such an insufferable tightass? A HERETIC I AM Dec 2022 #9
And how did he manage to have kids? colorado_ufo Dec 2022 #10
Immaculate deception Orrex Dec 2022 #14
He obviously hated every second of the boffing. A HERETIC I AM Dec 2022 #16
My guess is he may be a closeted homosexual. Nothing wrong with that - it's his issue to deal with. Tommymac Dec 2022 #27
Imagine a world without billionaires funding extremist agendas as their hobby. harumph Dec 2022 #11
There is no problem in the world Orrex Dec 2022 #15
It seems money is not enough treestar Dec 2022 #25
Maybe someone should send him a copy of Ghost of Tom Joad Dec 2022 #12
Before I clicked to open this OP I knew it was Kacsmaryk blogslug Dec 2022 #13
It's almost always In It to Win It Dec 2022 #19
He's a Texas Republican. They're all incredibly awful people. Lonestarblue Dec 2022 #20
The republicans got their judicial carve out, Corgigal Dec 2022 #31
These skulking feudal lizards need to crawl back under their rock. Martin68 Dec 2022 #17
Is there any verses quoted Old Crank Dec 2022 #18
BS. Judges are not supposed to be legislating from the bench. onetexan Dec 2022 #22
I feel for the lawyers that have to work in front of him sharp_stick Dec 2022 #24
He really wants to punish people for sex Warpy Dec 2022 #29
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A notorious Trump judge j...