the thing is its not that bad in DFW and Austin.

So...48,000 more unwanted babies per year for Texas? Good luck.

Christian Taliban. Jesus Akbar!

Texas doctors, you will be welcomed in other states. Let Texas rot in it's own Lord of the Flies environment. Once you leave Texas you will wonder why you were ever there.

So lets see... 1 in 4 in Texas do not have health care.. and now Texas wants to add 110,000 more using state money. Sorry 110,000 you won't be getting access to health care either.

Remember America... If you can't afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you. If you can't afford a doctor, to bad.

Sometimes I realize that in a few short years we could literally be in our own dark ages. With human overpopulation being the elephant in the living room no one wants to deal with I am amazed anyone could be against the planning of parenthood. But we are regressing toward a state of affairs similar to the state that the arabs are in now. In the 1500s they were on top of the world, leading with mathematics and astronomy. Just look at where they have de-evolved to.

I see us careening toward middle ages mentality and dark ages suspicion and lifestyle.

America is waiting for one or more retirement of US Supreme Court justices, all of whom will most likely be from aging and sickly conservative members. Obama will appoint justices that will allow challenges to every state that has anti-abortion laws and allow monetary awards to compensate clinics, staff, and clients. Perhaps Texas will have the biggest level of awards against them; they say everything in Texas is BIG. Idiocy and cash seems to be in ample supply in the Lone Star Mistake.

Even if this stands up in the Texas court system, it will never stand up once it gets to the federal level. Texas is wasting a lot of resources passing and trying to defend a policy that will no doubt be rules unconstitutional by the federal courts. Perry and the rest of the lawmakers supporting this legislation should be embarrassed to be associated with this law. I can understand not allowing state funds to be used for abortion, but this law is a clear violation of the first amendment right of free speech of the operators of the Planned Parenthood clinics. They should not be allowed to discriminate against these clinics simply because they advocate a certain position.

So I guess the next legislature will pass a law requiring burkas to be worn by the gorgeous women of Texas? Texa$$ is a joke, will always be a joke and should secede from the union. I guess stoning women in public is next.

Rather than let women get rock-bottom prices for gynecological check-ups (hey, why pay for a pap smear when you can cough out a few hundred thousand dollars for radiation and/or chemotherapy for cancer treatments, right?), or help pay to assist on pregnancy prevention through Planned Parenthood, Texas wants to pay cradle-to-grave plus the inevitable emergency-room visits for the uninsured.

Okay. We can let them secede now.

This does not make sense....

It is not as though Texas does not have the death penalty. If they did not have a death penalty then I would say no abortions is fair enough but, if you have the death penalty then abortions should be available. Just not with public money....

Chris: you seem to misunderstand the entire point of the anti-choice crowd: we can't let a fetus die until after it becomes a person. Once a person is born, then the state can kill it, even if it is mentally retarded and particularly if it is not guilty.

If ever there was a poster boy for post birth abortions, Rick "Ooops" Perry is it.

A truely planned Welfare State. It would be one thing if it were the money but it is ignorant beliefs that are 100 years old. Congrats to being complete idiots, get out a calculator and figure out the true cost.

TX, the "Iran" or "Saudi Arabia" of the US. People worry about Sharia Law (which is just a version of Mosaic Law), yet accept this crap. Planned Parenthood does very few abortions compared with all the medical procedures it offers, like cancer screening to the poor and working poor. However, facts mean nothing to the US (Christian) Taliban. Only 3% of the 5 million people who use PP each year seek an abortion, and many are due to rape, incest and health threats to the mother. 76% of all PP patients (both female and male [which grew at 105% since 200 to 210, the last full year of records])fall below the official Poverty Line. They can't go elsewhere to get cervical, breast and other cancer screenings, but that doesn't stop TX. It reminds me of a line we hear a lot at this time of year, from Dickens' A Christmas Carol - "They'd better hurry up [and die] and decrease the surplus population [of non-White, Rich males).

Source -
www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/opinion/sunday/douthat-the-medias-blinders-on-abortion.html?_r=0
www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/PP_by_the_Numbers.pdf
www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/what-planned-parenthood-actually-does/2011/04/06/AFhBPa2C_blog.html
www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/
www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/apr/08/jon-kyl/jon-kyl-says-abortion-services-are-well-over-90-pe/

Dirp: don't forget, also... the mother becomes nothing more than a vessel at the point when the fertilized egg sticks to the wall.

All her life has been a waste after that point, because the life inside her matters more than she does. All the relationships she has formed with friends and family members are null and void, because her existence is only for that child within. Forget the decades of care given to and received by her from her mother and father, sisters, brothers, cousins, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews and cousins. Years of her life spent being educated in grade school, then college, then graduate school, and the struggle to find good employment was all in vain. It's wasted time. It doesn't matter. Once pregnant, she does not have a mind and body of her own (or she won't, if anti-choice people have their way).

Ectopic pregnancy? Infection? Disease? Severe birth defects? These are nothing more than "excuses for murder"! A history of postpartum depression? PMDD? Bah, who cares about the struggles that she goes through post-pregnancy? She is a baby machine who has proven her fertility, and to hell with every accomplishment or free choice that she had before that!

Notaloser1: either you pay for the birth control or you pay more in taxes to support these children throughout their lives. What's cheaper? Making sure the nation's poor women DON'T breed or paying for their kids' well-being through welfare, unemployment as adults, and whatever other social programs they may need, all the way up to retirement some 70 years later when they're getting Social Security?

Just like you pay for road repairs with your tax dollars for the communal good, paying for birth control falls into the same category--upkeep and maintenance so a bad problem doesn't get worse.

She had to be born first.

Americans spent $10.8 billion dollars in movie tickets this year.

Frivolous entertainment where we sat on our collective fat butts for two to three hours, overpaid for popcorn, candy, hot dogs, ice cream, burgers and sodas, and threw away our money.

And yet people are complaining about providing birth control, which makes a significant real-world impact on population control and the number of people using this world's resources.

We iz dum.

I can understand not allowing state funds to be used for abortion, but this law is a clear violation of the first amendment right of free speech of the operators of the Planned Parenthood clinics. They should not be allowed to discriminate against these clinics simply because they advocate a certain position.

@JS I came here to say the exact same thing.

Dirp, I have never heard the anti-abortion/pro-death penalty paradox put more succinctly.

More like Americastan. Liberal or Conservative. Nobody wants to mind their own business. Even if they won't work together they're both doing a great job of eroding our rights.

maybe the other 49 will get lucky and Texass will secede.....

There are those who are incapable of changing their minds even when presented with general facts. The wide range of services that Planned Parenthood provides to the poor citizens of Texas is absolutely necessary. But then again, these folks are not capable of grasping basic science, either. The pill prevents pregnancy, not kill babies. Ignorance is very expensive in the long run.

Chris4132020: "This does not make sense....

It is not as though Texas does not have the death penalty. If they did not have a death penalty then I would say no abortions is fair enough but, if you have the death penalty then abortions should be available. Just not with public money...."

So you are saying that since Texas has the death penalty every fetus that is aborted is the same as an adult that has been convicted of a capital murder and that the mother is judge and jury. Interesting, but illogical. Further, I do agree with your last sentence and that is EXACTLY what this law does. Abortion is legal but tax payers do not foot the bill.

Why yes, let's continue to have babies being born to poor women and then add to welfare because, you see, no one's pressing the fathers, and there is this OTHER half who can skip on along their merry way knowing their genitals work (for now). Oh, and don't forget that there are quite a few poor women/girls who do in fact work at jobs that simply don't pay enough and don't have to provide health insurance because they are VERY careful to keep these women on 'part-time' status...and by the way you've let this happen by who you vote or don't vote for and then whine.

Of course there is a way to PREVENT unwanted pregnancies, it's called birth control, but let's not give those to these women even though, guess what, they are a whole lot cheaper to taxpayers than then having to support children of parents on welfare.

Oh wait, let's just let them shift for themselves on the side of the road, woods, desert, in brothels and just die....it's called 'road kill'.

The next time any of you get hit by a car, have a heart attack, shot by a gun, cut by a knife or just trip and fall and I happen to be the only one to see it, forget it, I'm just walking right on by because, frankly, none of you are my problem. If you can't 'stand your own ground' then just blow off.

short sighted idiocy. texistan, just south of brownbackistan.

So Texas is made, not because state money is paying for abortions, but people can get other services at the same place that can do an abortion?

Wow.

"I also want to eliminate teaching Science in schools and one other thing,...uh, what was that other thing..um... Oops!" Dick Perry

Time to move out of this State... it isn't just the state government, property taxes are crazy here too!

I'm starting to wish the South had left the union. I boggles the mind that most of the crap they vote against is against their best interests. More money flows out of the Blue states to help support a variety of problems in the Red states and yet it's the Red States that want that revenue cut off.

The most horrifying revelation about the state of the union are the South's selection of possible candidates for president. McCain - Palin, a real couple of nut jobs. Then this time around we had the biggest selection of losers in history of either party. Doesn't it seem weired that people in many states are asked to vote for rich guys responsible for them being poor, and they go for it.

2014 will be the most interesting election for congressional politicians ever. The Republican party may well disapear if they don't get back to real Conservatism. I'll also add the the Democratic party needs to be more, not less liberal.

I'm not long for this world as I'm past the average age people live to but I hate to leave until I see how this comedy works out.

@Notaloser1

Ahhhh, yes you are. But, not just a loser, a colossal loser. You are the lose that all other losers are modeled after. In the loser hall of fame you are the Losers, Loser, the King/Queen of all Losers. Unenlightened Texans wish their children could be as big a loser as you are. You are truly what other losers aspire to.

I could go on but now it's just becoming a losing proposition, so to speak.

You could not pay me to live in that backward, misogynist state.

They want to force poor women to have poor babies to grow up in poor areas so the rich can profit off their poor salaries as they continue to get rich off the backs of the poor.

Without the poor people doing all the hard labor and work, the rich would have nothing.

I say, OFF with their Heads" and it's time to take back your country.

Another local yokel judge who must be a bit bored with his life, so he essentially makes a ruling that will get him a sharp and pointed rebuke from whatever Federal District Court ends up with this in their lap.

Who opened up the gates and let all the a$$holes loose? In post #1.26, 3thirty3 criticized a post by Chris4132020 thusly:

So you are saying that since Texas has the death penalty every fetus that is aborted is the same as an adult that has been convicted of a capital murder and that the mother is judge and jury.

I have a response - NO, U nitwit mofo – Chris 4132020 had it right.

At least 13% of all people convicted and awaiting assassination on Death Row are completely INNOCENT. Another 12% are possibly innocent (DNA has deteriorated). “Convicted in a court of law” doesn’t mean anything in Texas; lots of innocent people are “convicted in a court of law”. So you can’t name me one “mother” who isn’t a far better judge or jury than any found in Texas. And since Texas prides itself on executing the mentally retarded, the folks on Death Row are hardly “adults”.

A fetus is NOT a “baby”, for Christ sakes – it’s a blastocyst, then a fish, then an amphibian, etc., and it’s not a “baby” until AFTER it is born. For god’s sake, put down the dope you’re smoking and get real.

The United States should 1) deport the entire Christian Taliban tea party to Texas, 2) don’t let them secede – evict them, and 3) nuke Texas. The world will be better off without the extra lunatics.

I truly do not GET the religious right. On the one hand, they do not want to pay a dime to support the babies of the poor. On the other, they do not want to help the poor not have babies. I can only conclude they want to have so many poor folks that there will be a return to slavery!

As cruel as it is stupid

Total bull. My condolences to the poor and young uninsured of Texas.

The judge's ruling on this is wrong.

Accroding to the article, there's a law stating that public funds can't be used for abortions. Planned Parenthood was not using those funds for abortions, they were using public funds for basic health care:

The state has long banned the use of state funds for abortion, but had continued to reimburse Planned Parenthood clinics for providing basic health care to poor women through the state's Women's Health Program. The program provides check-ups and birth control to 110,000 poor women a year, and Planned Parenthood clinics were treating 48,000 of them.

So basically all this law/ruling is doing is denying basic health care and pregnancy preventives to those who live below the poverty line.

Texas this year saw a record number of women crossing the border into Mexico for drugs that can be used as abortifacients. Such drugs, dispensed without the benefit of a pharmacist's supervision or a doctor's supervision, have proved fatal in some cases. I believe Texas is going to see a record number of these deaths due to this law.

Steve:

Come back and talk when you find out the 17 week old fetus that is the child you desperately want will be born without a brain, live three years on life support and then die.

I just dont get it, its not about the woman or her health at all...

your focus is on regulating humans

this is just YET another example of why the republican party is becoming obsolete. You (red) want to act like stupid brats and then wonder why people are losing any respect for you at all..stop being clowns..your focus is on regulating humans....do you really think that is going to keep you afloat with new generations? hardly, your already laughable...now your just getting drunk on stupidity. You want billions of red neck kids to pay for via welfare, have fun!

I know without a shadow of a doubt this is some more monkey poo flinging from the GOP because they didnt get their way....babies....id say it about the dems too, only they actually make sense right now and dont act like they are bipolar

How many lives have been saved by the early detection of cancer by planned parenthood doctors????? of woman with small kids to take care of NOW....

Hello....idiots

Amanda-2017567- Well I guess I've been told! that justifies the death of 43 million children! That must be an academic or something to have that many with incurable deformities!

Rape, incest, murder or the health of the mother are all sound reasons and yes perhaps with modern medicine a unrecoverable deformity! If it has happened to you, you have my condolences! But forty three million!

The commander and thief is using the horrific slaughter that happened in Newton to try and extinguishes the second Amendment of the Constitution! Now I hear reports that this guy and his cronies want to scrap the entire Constitution and they will right up another one!

If our compassion for our children is going to be used against us to try to rewrite our countries legacy, we should examine all aspect of our of children dieing!

If the death of twenty becomes the means to rewrite our constitution then surely the death of millions of our unborn should a least raise an eyebrow or two, don't you think?

The sickly, elderly judge is leftist Ginsburg. LOL

Ginsburg has been dead for years. That's just her shriveled, stuffed carcas they prop up to maintain their liberal seat.

Anyone notice that the republicans are always, and I mean always, at opposite ends of their own arguments? NO for Choice, yes for death penalty; NO for a social safety net, yes for more babies; NO for increased taxes on the Haves, NO for sane regulations, NO for Unions, NO for minimum wage increase, NO for Obamacare. It appears the repub/tparty are still sniffing the turd trying to learn which end stinks.

At every election, whether local or state, vote straight Democratic. Give the republicans time to clean their party; give other political parties a chance to develop a sane approach to governing. In the meantime, vote Democratic for equality in this country. Prez Obama said, Yes, WE can. That's us. Stay involved.

The Republican Taliban is alive and well, but not for long! When they are all voted out of office in the next two elections, we will change every archaic law they made and bring the states into the 21st Century! You can't care about the unborn more than the living and expect anyone to agree with you! This right wing nonsense IS a WAR ON WOMEN!! It's ridiculous!

Steve: fallacious argument, and Second Amendment rights have nothing to do with the topic at hand.

This State of TX ruling cutting off funding for Planned Parenthood is NOT cutting off public funding for abortions because that law was already passed, long ago. This law cuts off funding for basic care and birth control to prevent an abortion becoming necessary; cuts off funding for birth control that might not be taken to prevent pregnancy but to alleviate symptoms of PMDD and painful menstrual cycles. Birth control also allows women to regulate how often and when they have their periods--women serving in the military, for instance, sometimes get birth control so that they aren't having periods in the middle of a combat zone when it could be inconvenient or even dangerous to the unit they are 'supporting'.

Planned Parenthood also teaches about all forms of birth control--something I personally had never known anything about because I went to very strict Catholic schools and my parents were devout Irish Catholics and I never had a sex-ed course. It was only later when a friend went to Planed Parenthood and took me along with her that I learned about the rhythm method, how to properly put on a condom on a male partner, learned about IUDs and found out that I had a mild form of PMDD and that birth control pills would alleviate the symptoms and keep me from turning into a wreck once a month (Dad and Mom still wouldn't let me have them though.) PP were also the ones who sterilized me after I had my kids--my regular doctor refused to tie my tubes after my first child, said I was too young to make that decision and to give it a few years . When I went back for my three month checkup after having my oldest, my doctor told me I was pregnant again. My children were born only eleven months apart--and my youngest is autistic and I will have to take care of him for the rest of my life, then cross my fingers and hope his brother will take care of him after me and my husband are both gone. I have seen public services for the mentally disabled and it makes me want to cry just thinking about my little guy stuck in that system. He already has so much trouble in school, I can see he's trying but it's so frustrating for him when he tries to do what the teacher wants and he simply can't.

I went to Planned Parenthood after my second was born and they sterilized me at my request where my doctor would not--I didn't want to take a risk that any other children I may have could be impaired, possibly even more so than my youngest is. My husband and I wanted a girl, but we decided the risks of having another baby with special needs would be too great. There has never been an instance of physical or mental disabilities in my husband's family, but we don't know what is in my genetic history--I was abandoned as an infant so I don't even know exactly how old I am, much less who my birth parents were or what is in their genetic history.

This isn't about abortion. This is about basic birth control.

Texas just saved 10s of thousands of females from being aborted. Sorry boys, you don't get the same protection.

I would say pay for the first abortion only if the mother is in danger or in the case of rape.Then continue to provide birth control and if a second pregnancy occurs do the abortion but at the same time do a sterilization. We can not continue to pay for poor choices made by people of little of no means. If they won't take reponsibility then someone else must.

they have a valid point the government should not use tax dollars to pay for someones mistake. a tax payer should not be forced to be a accomplice to murder and that is what abortion is, if a person cannot afford to pay the consequences of their actions then they should not engage in that activity. people need to be responsible for their own actions not the rest of us, its this attitude that will destroy the nation, besides we can find homes for these babies and stop importing them from around the world, you don't know what your dragging into this country when you purchase a foreign made child. now if you people disagree then set up a charityand you pay for it. maybe now Planed Parenthood will stop promoting sex to children that have no business having sex in the first place. if you cant use tax money to promote good then you should not use tax money to promote evil.

I do not want my tax dollars to pay for the murder of babies.

But murdering everyone else the State deems worthy is perfectly acceptable. (Total sarcasm intended.)

they have a valid point the government should not use tax dollars to pay for someones mistake.

Then the government shouldn't pay for executions ("someones mistake") either.

Here are the wide range of services provided by PP:

The abortion organization posted that Planned Parenthood did 329,445 abortions in 2010 while it provided prenatal care to only 31,098 women and referred only 841 women to adoption agencies.

(reference 2009- 2010 PPFA budget release)

Wow! Prejudice much?! Unfortunately, much of what you say is ill-informed. The most obvious is that PP promotes "sex to children". Ridiculous. You need to check into the services that PP really provides.

Texas voted NOT to pay for abortion. Want one? Pay for it yourself. It's really that simple. Planned Parenthood is the leading advocate for keping abortion cheap, legal, and on the public's dime. We, the People, do not want to pay for them, and shouldn't have to. I don't like abortion, but i support it for medical necessity and in rapes and incest. As birth control, not so much. But under no circumstances do I want taxpayer funds to pay for abortions. or ANY medical care not directly related to military service. I want an end to Medicare and Medicaid (phased in so as not to inure those already on them), not an increase of any of them.

Taxpayer funding of abortion was outlawed a long time ago. Planned Parenthood saves the lives of thousands of women every year through screenings for cancer and other medical conditions that might not be found. Poor women, but who are not poor enough for state assistance, go there. It's the only place they can go. Planned Parenthoods total abortion rate is 3% and is NOT funded through ANY tax dollars. The whole point is, you should NOT cut off your nose to spite your face!! What is wrong with IT"S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS what a woman does with her body? It IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!! Tax dollars are not spent on abortion.

Holy crap! Do you people read what you post?

The gist of what the vast majority of you are saying is, "These poor women shouldn't have babies anyway, so we're glad to kill 'em! We're doing society a favor!"

I believe that abortion is necessary in certain circumstances, but it should never be used as birth control. Except in the case of rape, incest or when the life of the mother or child would otherwise be threatened, the "Choice" happens at the point you commit the act. We don't let drunk drivers say, "Well, I didn't really mean to kill that person, and I was drunk," so why do we let women say, "Well, I didn't really mean to create that person," when just like everyone knows that driving drunk might result in an accident, everyone knows that having sex might result in an accident?

I don't see or hear of any of the anti abortion bunch jumping up and yelling that they will adopt and raise all of these future babies that they save by banning abortions.

Are you willing to do that? I didn't hear anything but crickets.

Since I'm not in a position to be able to read the minds nor have I been close enough to any of the women that need or want abortions, I can not judge them. Therefore I WANT my taxes to pay for abortions done under clean and sanitary conditions by trained medical professionals rather than in an alley by a grade school dropout whose only knowledge of anatomy is from seeing the outside of reproduction organs.

To all the people that want to sprout the same liberal nonsense, I have one question: what part of a woman's reproductive system is a fetus? Oh that's right? it isn't one. You don't just wake up one morning pregnant, It's a natural occurrence that results from having sex. No contraceptive is 100% effective, all they basically do is make pregnancy more difficult or trick a woman's body into thinking it's already pregnant. Abortion isn't health care and being with child isn't a disease. A minute percentage of abortions happen because of rape or to preserve the life of the mother; a majority happen for social reasons. If you're not ready to bring a life into the world; best practice is keep your legs closed.

lu: Do you believe that women should have access to birth control?

Planned Parenthood is the only affordable source for birth control that many women have and texas wants to stop that!!!

Fleet Enema..............INSERT!

HAPPY HOLIDAYS! on this 9th Day of Christmas (9 Ladies dancing???); and 7th Day of Kwanzaa!!!! (Imani,...FAITH)

Got to get to a New Year's Day Gig.......but really hope to be able to get back later and read some comments!

The way I see it is that the doctors can still get their funding if they disassociate themselves from Abortion Central. If public monies go to doctors with a back-and-forth flow of money with Abortion Central, then they are effectively putting public money into abortion. Now, I realize that a lot of pro-abortion people like that arrangement.

The simplest way to handle this would be to split the organization in two. One of the new organizations would handle abortions only and would get no public funding. The other organization, with access to public funds, could take care of "all the other things Planned Parenthood does." But you won't see Theresa arguing for that. She knows full well that public money is funding abortions. There is just a shell game going on to pretend that isn't the case.

Amanda:

This State of TX ruling cutting off funding for Planned Parenthood is NOT cutting off public funding for abortions because that law was already passed, long ago.

But that only accounts for direct funding. Money is fungible and is finding its way to be public money funding abortions. This new policy just states that the money can have no path to abortions. That is, instead of a nominal prohibition, it will become a genuine prohibition.

Hdrider:

I don't see or hear of any of the anti abortion bunch jumping up and yelling that they will adopt and raise all of these future babies that they save by banning abortions.

I don't see people opposed to parents' murdering their 5-year-old children offering to adopt and raise them either. What's your point? Are you saying that parents should be allowed to slit the throats of their 5-year-old children? You're not offering to take over for those that might be so inclined. If you do not believe that parents should have the right to kill their 5-year-old children and you are not offering to take over yourself all those children that the parents decided (after they were born) were unwanted, then your criticism is a hypocrisy.

Boy am I looking forward to some FEDERAL JUDGE rebuking TEXAS as some backwards HOLE in the ground. Maybe ALL FEDERAL DOLLARS should be removed from Texas. Remove all the ICE patrols at the border, and let Texas handle it at the state level. Reposition all border guards from Texas along the CA, AZ, and NM border, as well as along the OK, ARK, and LA state lines. Texas is a black hole that ONLY getting bigger. Looking forward to the next mass shooting in Texas.

This is one of the programs I actually support them spending my tax dollars on. Prevention is always better than dealing with the aftermath. Too bad we need to wait till it hits the Federal level for it to be overturned.

It doesn't matter what people say ... a stand for morality is ALWAYS the correct stand to take.

The "progressive" mind is really scary....according to them on this thread, if we have too many people, just kill them off before they are able to defend themselves....and make the moral folks pay for the slaughter with their tax dollars. If we have too many people, why don't you "progressives" personally help the problem by committing suicide?

The 'far' right either doesn't realize or doesn't care that they have become a problem for the Republican Party. The unborn are not protected by the 14th Amendment because to do so would immediately remove constitutionally protected rights of the pregnant citizen. Unlike Ireland, we don't do that here. Continue trying to remove this Individual Liberty from American women, and you will continue to lose elections. Time to dump the TeaParty overboard.

Well, Spider...all women have a Constitutional right to have an abortion for any reason whatsoever. You right wingers think the only part of the Constitution that matters is the second amendment. Maybe you should follow your own advice - conservatives should use their widdle guns to commit suicide.

Too many posters are using straw men. On both sides of the argument.

Here are the "Facts":
A Fetus is 'alive' by medical definition (detectable heartbeat and brain activity) as early as 17 weeks.

There is no 'Ontogeny follwing phylogeny' in the womb. (i.e., we start out as amoebas, then fish, then amphibians etc. What makes a human a human? Our DNA. When do we get our DNA? at coception. So a conceived egg is a human. Whether or not they are 'alive' or a 'person', is where the debate should take place. Not about whether or not a fetus is 'human'.

The VAST majority of abortions in this country are by choice (hence the moniker 'Pro-Choice movement". They are not medically necessary, but are done for reasons of convenience, midguided 'population control', fear of raising a child in 'bad' circumstances, etc.

There is not a worldwide overpopulation problem. There are thousands of acres of uninhabited land. There are areas (huge metropolises) where people are overpopulated. However, even some of that could be remedied by repurposing some lands and structures. How many vacant buildings do you see driving around your city? Some of those could be turned in to affordable housing. If you say that there is not enough food, I beg to differ. Farmers in America are paid, (yes PAID), not to plant crops because there is so much of it, that the price would be too low if everyone produced everything they were capable of producing. There are areas in the world that experience famine and hunger, but many of them are because of brutal militant elements that steal from the people. We throw away more food in a day than many countries eat. That does not include All-you-can-eat-buffets, and ridiculous gorging proportions that many people consume. The United States is about 3.5million square miles in size. You could build a 1,000 square foot aparment for every person in the world in 250,000 square miles. Ironically that is just a little smaller than the State of Texas itself. (I know there would have to be roads, and businesses, and logistics for food etc. You also would not build 1 story apartments for everyone, and 1,000 square feet is more than most people need. Our house is 1,800 square feet and there are 5 of us.)

To provide some background. I am a father of three. My wife and I had a child before them that had a physically deformed heart. This was discovered during the 2nd trimester. After she was born we took her to a heart specialist to see if repairs could be made. There was a procedure that could be done, and the life expentancy was 25-30 years if successful. Since the life expectancy was less than a year in her current condition we elected to try the surgery. Her lungs had not developed enough to withstand the strain of surgery and she died at 7 weeks of age. After having three more kids, we decided that we were done having natural-born children. Part of this was to do with my wife's health during the last pregnancy. I chose a permanent birth control solution for myself to prevent any further pregnancies. I said all the above to say this; I am not some academic philospher, or an unexperienced individual. I have been there and had to make some hard decisions. I would choose the same way again. A child's life is too precious to waste on convenience. I have two younger brothers who are adopted, and my wife and I have considered adopting ourselves. We have also contributed to Crisis Pregnancy centers who help women with healthcare needs, adoption services, and childcare options.

Abortion is an emotional topic, but it can be rationally discussed. It is just seldom done. Just because I hold the life of an unborn child sacred, does not mean I am calloused to innocent people being executed. Just because I think a 12 year old should have to have a parents consent, or at the least have to notify them, before she gets an abortion, does not mean I want millions of orphaned or abandoned children roaming the country. Just because I have a moral problem and do not want my tax money funding something I oppose, does not mean that I want poor women to die from cancer and other diseases.

How about we stop yelling obsenities and insults across the picket lines and actually work together to solve these problems. I have no problem with providing health screenings to underpriviledged people. I have not problem with assisting families in need. I have no problem with providing a safe, loving home for every child born in this country. I just may differ from others on the best way to provide these things.

I hope my comments will actually be read and my facts searched out. Unfortunately I fear that many will see "I disagree with abortion" and ignore all else.

Just my #.02

My reading of the Constitution does not indicate a right to an abortion. There is nothing in there that is meaningfully interpretable as a right to an abortion. That was constructed out of whole cloth by judges who (for whatever reason) liked the idea of abortion. And I support the whole Constitution (save the 18th Amendment, which has since been redacted.) The Supreme Court at the time made a ruling that was not based on law or the Constitution. If it were based on the Constitution, people would be pointing out the specific Articles or Amendments involved. G-Dog knows that the argument is that the 14th Amendment should be protecting the unborn. He says that would run counter to some nebulous "constitutional right" for the pregnant woman. But he can't find where that "right" is listed.

That right has been found to exist in the Constitution by the U.S. Supreme Court. Ever heard of the judicial concept of 'stare decisis'? Nothing nebulous about it, it's the Law of the Land. You would force American women to undergo pregnancy and childbirth against their will simply because they had sex? You would remove this constitutional protection and give government power it does not (and should not) have. Upon what would you base this decision? Your personal feelings do not govern the feelings, or the rights, of others.

G-Dog:

If that right exists in the Constitution, then point it out. Don't say "the Supreme Court ruled...." Point out exactly where you think it says it in the Constitution. If it's not there in the writing, it's nebulous.

Upon what would you base this decision?

I would base it on the right of the child. It is an instance of murder. Now, murder is unlawful by statute, not by Constitutional provision. It would take me a bit longer to look that one up. But I don't think there is any disagreement that there are provisions in the federal law and in the laws of the fifty individual states that prohibit murder.

You would force American women to undergo pregnancy and childbirth against their will simply because they had sex?

I would require that they cannot kill any child that comes to be as a result of that sex. I would not forcibly impregnate anyone who happens not to become pregnant. You would force a child to die a horrible painful death because the mother feels like an abortion. And you are asserting that personal feelings govern the rights of the child. That makes your claim that my feelings form no basis very hollow indeed. Apparently you decide that feelings only count when they produce the dead babies you want.

If that right exists in the Constitution, then point it out. Don't say "the Supreme Court ruled...." Point out exactly where you think it says it in the Constitution. If it's not there in the writing, it's nebulous.

The Supreme Court is the body defined in the Constitution to decide what it means in practical everyday American life. If that is nebulous, then so is every ruling of law not specifically addressed word for word in the document. Surely our government has the right to raise and deploy an Air Force - yet you won't find those words in the Constitution, not exactly. Neither does it "say" corporations should be considered as possessing certain rights reserved for "People"...is the Citizens United Ruling nebulous in the way it is applied in our society? Not at all.

I would base it on the right of the child.

But the unborn child doesn't possess the right under our supreme law of the land, so what provides this "right" the unborn child over the law?

It is an instance of murder.

This is also subject to legal definition which is all derived from and subject to the Constitution. The legal definition of murder involves the unlawful taking of life...hence, abortion is not murder by definition. You may attempt to change the definition of words, but it makes communication difficult.

I would require that they cannot kill any child that comes to be as a result of that sex.

Then you would give government power it does not currently possess. Perhaps you can show me in the Constitution where it says government has power over and individual citizens right of self determination concerning this medical/physical condition? No. They do that in Ireland, and it got a girl dead recently. Your feelings are valid only for you, and you are granted equal legal protection. I do not want dead babies, I want to allow women in this country to receive consult/treatment for a medical condition; while you wish to force people into pregnancy and childbirth against their will. I'm sorry you don't understand, but it really doesn't matter - because you aren't going to change things. Bye now.

pvblivs

Planned Parenthood already has separate facilities for their operations. It's already completely separate! It doesn't matter. You wouldn't see the truth if it was held in front of you by God! The whole point is, ABORTION IS LEGAL!!! IT IS LEGAL!! It should not be restricted on a whim because you believe differently! Women's health should not be bartered for political gain! Women are not yours to command. Women can make up their own minds! AND, if the decide to terminate a pregnancy, it's THEIR business! NOT YOURS! Tax payer money does NOT go to abortions! You obviously have NO clue.

Theresa:

It is not completely separate. The organization has a general fund and everything can flow back and forth between that general fund. I have yet to meet any god. But you're still playing a shell game where you can say nominally that the public money went to X, Y, and Z and it just "freed up" some money from the general fund to go to abortion. Well, that's still taxpayer money funding abortion. If it were completely separate, money couldn't be freed up for abortion.

G-Dog:

The Supreme Court is the body defined in the Constitution to decide what it means in practical everyday American life.

That would be more meaningful if the Supreme Court had identified some Article in the Constitution that supposedly created the "right." It is not provided in the Constitution that the Supreme Court should invent laws or Constitutional Protections. That is the job of Congress. It is possible for them to act in an unconstitutional manner. And, in this case, they have. That's why you can't point to anything other than a ruling where they invented a right that doesn't exist.

This isn't a requirement of "word for word" like you suggest. This is a requirement that something actually be there that supports the ruling. And there is nothing -- no Amendment, no combination of Amendments, nothing. If there were an actual provision that was being interpreted as a right to an abortion, your claim would have merit. But they just drew it out of the air.

Surely our government has the right to raise and deploy an Air Force - yet you won't find those words in the Constitution, not exactly.

No, you won't find exact words to that effect. An army is explicitly mentioned. That provision is being interpreted to imply an Air Force as well. But that provision is in the text. I didn't challenge you to find a provision that said verbatim "a woman shall have the right to an abortion." I challenged you to find some provision, actually there, that was being interpreted to include that effect. You couldn't find one because there aren't any.

Neither does it "say" corporations should be considered as possessing certain rights reserved for "People"...is the Citizens United Ruling nebulous in the way it is applied in our society? Not at all.

Actually it is. That was also a case of "legislating from the bench." I realize that you don't believe in the separation of powers specified by the Constitution. But Congress is supposed to write the laws. The Supreme Court isn't.

Then you would give government power it does not currently possess.

Not at all. The government has the power (through Congress) to pass laws [Article 1 Section 7.] The several states also have the right to pass their laws [10th Amendment.] Laws against arson and bank-robbery are also adverse to some people's "self-determination." But we grant that the government has the power to pass such laws.

I do not want dead babies,

Then don't advocate for abortion rights. That is the intended purpose of abortions. Very few are done out of any medical need. Most are done for the sheer convenience of the woman. The reality is that you support abortion because you want dead babies.

you wish to force people into pregnancy and childbirth against their will.

No, I do not advocate forcing anyone to become pregnant. I just oppose killing someone to get out of it. The fact that you close your eyes and call them "unpeople" does not change the fact. Far too many have gone for wholesale slaughter of "undesirables."

Our Constitution has been interpreted, misinterpreted and reinterpreted depending on which way the political climate blows and who's in office.

For example, the 2nd Amendment clearly states the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Has there ever been another amendment giving the federal government or the states the right to infringe, or regulate, that amendment? If not, how has that been allowed to occur?

Yes, like I've said before in other posts, it only takes 51% of the population to decide they could be murderers for murder to become legal.

tmac9182 (post #1.75) says

There is no 'Ontogeny follwing phylogeny' in the womb. (i.e., we start out as amoebas, then fish, then amphibians etc. What makes a human a human? Our DNA. When do we get our DNA? at coception.

I must correct this.

“Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny” is more properly referred to by its real moniker - recapitulation theory. Recapitulation theory is used widely in many sciences including anthropology, education theory, glottology (study of the origins of language), developmental psychology, and biology, where it is called “embryological parallelism”. A 2012 study of embryonic stages by embryologists showed that molecular features of ancestral organisms do exist. Embryos definitely “undergo a period where their morphology is strongly shaped by their phylogenetic position, rather than selective pressures.” (Kalinka, A. T.; Tomancak, P. (2012). "The evolution of early animal embryos: Conservation or divergence?". Trends in Ecology & Evolution.)

If we consider a blastocyst “fully human” because it has human DNA, then every sperm cell and egg cell is also “fully human” since they are composed of human DNA. Yet I would not call a sperm cell a “baby” or even a “human”. If termination of pregnancy is “murdering a baby” because of DNA, then every woman who has ever menstruated and every man who has ever masturbated are guilty of mass murder. And that’s ridiculous.

Pvblivs (post #1.76) says

My reading of the Constitution does not indicate a right to an abortion. There is nothing in there that is meaningfully interpretable as a right to an abortion.

Try reading the Establishment Clause in First Amendment, If someone‘s faith allows them to have an abortion, no law may interfere with that right. The SCOTUS made the right decision.

Jim-3113363 (post#1.84)

I know about recapitulation theory. I have written papers including the topic. For every "study" one can reference, another "study" can be produced that produces the opposite. In the preceding article, Dr. Keith Thompson, Biology Professor at Yale is quoted saying that it was taken out of most serious textbooks in the 50s and has been extinct as a theory since the 20s. The supposed "gill slits" are actually bones of the inner ear, if I remember correctly. The "tail" is actually the cocyx, an anchor point for many muscles in the posterior end. It is a process of a "human" growing from one cell to multitudes of cells, with many functioning organs. If they are not "human" until born, why are we using embryonic stem cells to treat diseases? We understand that the embryonic stem cells are used to develop human parts, (or more correctly the cells that make them up), but we refuse to acknowledge that the collection of cells itself is "human".

As to you second paragraph, You are biologically mistaken. sperm cells and eggs do not contain a full strand of human DNA, only half of one. It takes the DNA from one of each to make a full strand of unique human DNA. Hence why many state that "life" begins at conception. If unborn fetuses (I will use a "scientific" term) are not considered human and okay to "terminate", why is it illegal to smash the egg of a protected bird? They aren't really a until they hatch, right? at least following your logic to it's inevitable conclusion.

Thank you for replying in a rational intelligent manner. I do enjoy debating as long as the debates are civil. Even if heated at times. :-)

Just my $.02

Jim:

That would be an interesting twist. But we don't say that someone's "faith" can authorize drive-by shootings. Abortions are not a necessary part of anyone's religion. And laws against abortion are secular laws, not religious ones.

I'm sorry, but if that were accepted, people would start saying that paying taxes was against their religion. The Supreme Court didn't identify any part of the Constitution precisely because they were making up a "right" that didn't exist.

I am not religious. And I do not see the need to allow abortion as one of the "protected rituals" of any religion.

tmac -

I read your comments with interest. All research I have seen is that the single most effective way to decrease abortions is the cheap or free and easy access to contraception. I have found that most people who are anti-abortion are also opposed to contraception, or at least to easy access to it.

It would seem that, if people are sincere about decreasing abortion, they woud want to encourage use of contraception. And that would include encouraging proper sex education (to include something more than abstinence or putting an aspirin between your knees!) and access to birth control at all ages.

I do have to take exception with your comments on over-population. It sounds as if the only issues you have listed are availability of food and living space. While necessary, we need a lot more to have proper quality of life, and we need to leave a lot of living space free an available for other species.

I think, to me, the real question is "What is the point of more people??" Why would we want even more of us around, how does that enhance our planet, our experience, our existence?? Surely we can be a tiny bit prudent, hold down our reproduction, and allow some space and resources for diversity and biodiversity??

I wonder why the Republicans don't consider a more reasonable method of ensuring that abortion doesn't occur. How about castration? I don't think we'll have a lot of babies if males are routinely castrated. (This is of course me being extremely sarcastic.)

Seriously - republicans don't want women to have access to abortion (some even in the case of rape or incest) and then they don't want women to have access to birth control. Maybe, instead of trying to control women's behavior and bodies, they should focus on controlling men's behavior and bodies? Why is the onus only on women?

I know that on my income tax form I can elect to send part of my tax monies to political parties and election funds. Maybe we should have an option so that people who want to donate their tax to organizations such as Planned Parenthood can. That way - republicans don't have to worry about their tax dollars going to abortion clinics. Oh wait - republicans probably don't want that. How can they create anti-abortion ads and support politician election funds for morons who think that women's cannot conceive if they are raped? (again sarcasm)

tmac9182 do you know what it is like to be a unmarried pregant woman in oman ' Look up the death rate. Is that what you seriously want— Mandatory vasectomies should be administered to all males by the age of 9. That would protect those innocent unborn children just as easily.

The good news is that the Right says only the Left uses these social programs, so by that logic the Left is going to have a sharp rise in births. Follow that logic 18 years down the road and Texas becomes a Blue State.

Welcome to Texas, where we'll fund churches but not planned parenthood.

YEEEHAAW!

i'm sorry..... :(

Doug, feel free to move anytime :)

Why would you hate a state that is leading the way in social issues? Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the nation. That alone is reason enough to deny funding for ANY of its programs. The money being cut off may not have anything to do with abortions, but did provide PP with a cloak of respectability.

The funding previously provided to PP can be re-routed to other social service agencies and the clients will still be served.

Then leave. Period.

The funding previously provided to PP can be re-routed to other social service agencies and the clients will still be served.

I sincerely doubt that it will be. I think that the women (and men) who were getting their health services at PP before will see those services curtailed.

ElkMeadow: Exactly.

LittleBoyBlue: Didn't you catch this line in the article?

On Friday, HHSC officials acknowledged they are unsure whether the new doctors can pick up Planned Parenthood's caseload in all parts of the state.

They have 3500 state-approved doctors ready to take the clients Planned Parenthood used to see. But since Planned parenthood saw 48,000 people--you think 3500 doctors can take 48,000 new patients in addition to the ones they already have? And depending on the geographic location of those doctors, women in far-flung, rural areas may not live close enough to one of the new state-approved doctors.

If these doctors see a poor woman with a life-threatening pregnancy, they'll be more reluctant to perform any medically-necessary abortions for fear they'll lose state funding. Added to that, the process whereby a doctor gets reimbursed for the services they provide through State funding is tedious and time-consuming. How many doctors might sign up for this now thinking they'll expand their patient base, and then drop out a year from now because the state has been slow about paying? Thereby leaving the PP patients out a health-care provider?

Amanda

Do I think 3500 MD's can see 48,000 more patients? Yes I do. The math suggests 14 new patients a year, slightly more than one a month. Also, some of the personal who worked at a PP facility may seek employmenmt at one of these better health care services clinic, so the 3500 number will increase.

You are correct when you say there are some areas in the state that are underserved when it comes to health care. Texas will have to address that problem on an area-by-area basis. Most if not all counties have public hospitals, and that will likely be where these patients will go.

As far as the reimbursement issue, once again you are correct when you say the delay in payments will discourage some, but these doctors also put up with the delay whan it comes to Medicare/Medicaid/ Social Security and every other type of 3rd payer system. Even private insurance can take a year to process a claim. I don't think this will be a major issue.

Guess everything is bigger in Texas, especially the D bag judges. Hope they have plans to fund all the unwanted and soon to be neglected kids.

Doug, it obviously has a terible education system.

But because of the ruling against PP, these clinics may not be willing to hire a doctor who has worked for PP.

In my municipality few people go to a hospital for routine care. You walk into a hospital for emergency care only, and you still get stuck waiting many hours. Few people seeking routine care will spend hours and hours waiting for a doctor to get done seeing emergencies so they can see non-emergency cases. That's what routine care is for, to prevent having to go to a hospital.

In any case, what happens will happen, the lawmakers have spoken and if the people of TX don;t like what they said, then the option is therr to protest and/or vote them out in the next election. Nothing you or I can say will change whatever will happen--the people of Texas will have to decide for themselves what they want and elect officials accordingly.

I doubt planned parenthood has clinics in the most remote parts of the state either.

Amanda @2.12

It is true that some people do not have a private doctor and use the ER for major health concerns. Perhaps another court ruling is needed to force PP to communicate with their former clients where the nearest new health care facility is to be found for the kind of care that PP used to provide.

The people of Texas have already spoken as to the kind of officials they want. I doubt if that will change in the next election.

Texas is ambitious, don't you know. I suspect they have plans to return to 13,000 BC. Gets 'em closer to White Jesus and all that.

Do the math, me. 13,000 BC to Jesus birth is about 13000 years. 2013 to Jesus birth is about 2000 years. 2000 years is still less than 13,000 years in my universe so 2013 is closer to Jesus. Now the guy with ED is getting closer in the six century.

me=mediocre education.

Honestly, is the GOP really this stupid? Everything that they do is another nail in the coffin.

Zannie, one of my favorite movie lines explains the Repubs perfectly. In Gettysburg, Tom Berenger's Gen. Longstreet, telling the English emissary Fremantle how the Confederates "should have freed the slaves, then fired on Fort Sumter," says "We'd rather lose the war than admit to the mistake"...

I will have to go back and watch Gettysburg again, thanks

Sounds a lot like the Sharia Law they are so against with muslims living in the country. Hypocrisy from conservatives/christians... who would have ever thought?!

They just hate Sharia law because they see it as competition.

Not much complaining about 'activist judges,' is there?

in fairness to actual conservatives--of which there might be five left in the US--these people are radicals, not conservatives. Christo-Fascist revolutionaries who ought to be shot into effing space.

nightwalker... women, take your shoes off, get pregnant and get in the kitchen where the bible says you belong.

Where specifically does the bible say that?

Time to change the batteries...what you're using is not too bright.

Move and take austin with you.

Yo Bob. You should be embarrassed as well.

No John, I am proud of Texas. If I were not than I would man up and go someplace else instead of whining like some people on this board. Ain't that right axlecat?

texasbob=retard

marto=brainwashed liberal

See? It can easily go both ways.

The state never did pay for abortions. Just as the federal government does not pay for abortions by law. What they are cutting off funding to is family planning, breast cancer screenings, and other potentially life-saving care to low-income women. It's not about paying for abortion, it's about punishing Planned Parenthood for making the option available even though they receive no state funds for them.

AxlCat, no one is asking the state to pay for abortions. This state or any other state does not pay for abortions. But they do pay for health care for those that need it. No state money has ever or will ever pay for abortions. So get your facts straight.

The state wasn't paying for that in the first place. The article states that they cut off funding for checkups and birth control at planned parenthood because planned parenthood isn't anti-abortion. They then lost funding from the fed govt because of that. Then they had to set up a program funding health care for poor women (using state money instead of fed) at places other than planned parenthood, which they admit won't have enough capacity to care for everyone. In what world does that make sense?

Money is fungible.

In what world does that make sense?

Let's see, in what state did this happen?

Forget "Like a Whole Other Country"--Texastan's new tourism motto should be "Texas--Where it Doesn't Have to Make Sense"...

I tried to reply to a specific comment but cannot so I will not comment.

Thanks for sharing....

Money is fungible

And, yet, the right sees no problem in paying churches to provide social services and allowing school vouchers to be used as parochial schools. They claim that those activities aren't funding religion. If churches can keep those funds separate, then Planned Parenthood can, too.

KennyVee , Planned Parenthood has neither the license nor the machines to do breast screening. The most these abortion clinics have ever done is refer women to outside mammogram providers. There's simply no profit in providing mammograms which is why they don't provide that service.

Bottom line, it's all about not using tax payers' money to pay for abortions but rather redirecting their money to true health care providers.

I think that Women should have access to Medical care such as Pap Smears, Mammograms, and if you chose birth control in the form of IUD, Pills, Norplant and Depo. I am Pro-life and i do not believe in Abortion, however there are some cases such as the risk to the mother such as death, Incest and rape. I myself became pregnant due to Rape and i chose to keep the baby due to my beliefs. I do not at all believe that Abortion should ever be used as a form of birth control. If you are worried about over population or having a child because your poor. Then close your legs or use a preventive birth control measure and not an abortion as a Birth control. A majority of women that use abortion for that reason are just irresponsible. So open your eyes,noone should be forced to pay for someone elses abortion if that is against their beliefs. If you feel so strongly about a women having an abortion and it should be funded. Then a website of willing payers such as pro-choice people should be gathered where these women can contact to have their abortions paid by you personally since your so for it.

TishMM - You agree that in cases like your's, women should have the choice. Congratulations, you are actually "pro-choice"! You have a non-abortion preference, but you are none-the-less in favor of choice under some circumstances.

FYI - PP does NOT use fedral or state funds to pay for abortions. That would be illegal. The funds come from elsewhere. Since YOU are not paying for them, it's none of your business who does. That's between the patient and the doctor.

Tish -

AMEN to that! Liberals are very good at spending the money of others, but when asked to pony up the money themselves backtrack and call names.

It's much less expensive to help folks be better parents and maybe even help them to limit children to one . . . maybe two. Otherwise the state will pick up the tab for welfare babies popping out one a year until her fertility runs out. By then we have a dynasty of welfare people. Well a new dynasty. There are plenty of old dynasties doing very well on welfare as things stand.

Do you plan to raise minimum wage to allow that to happen? When employers refuse to pay a living wage, it's not so easy to just "pay up" with money that isn't there.

Most people without access to health insurance do work. Their employers do not provide health insurance or the premiums are so high it would take up most of the paycheck. Texas was not paying for abortions before. They were, with the help of federal money, paying for well care visits, family planning, PAP tests, routine screenings and referrals to specialist if there was a problem. They contracted some of those services to Planned Parenthood which already had clinics and doctors on staff and operating. Now Texas gets to pay for all that, including start up of new clinics and expansion of exisiting ones and they get to do it without federal assistance. Now that is what I call federal deficit reduction and the holier than thou Texas legislature can just come up with the state funds to pay for it.

The disagreement is not over who pays for abortions. This Texas law bans funding for general health care if the health care provider believes in abortions. And Texas women are the victims. I agree with others above, the Republican party is self destructing. Please, hurry up!

I wonder if the doctors being recruited by Texas to fill this gap are being required to answer a questionaire about their religious beliefs like "do you believe in a woman's right to choose?" If they answer yes, are they disqualified from receiving state funds also, whether they perform abortions or not?

ignorant

Old Computer Dude...victims? 10s of millions of males and females killed...that sounds like victims.

Hey Bill. Like your name. I hope you can flip the bill when it comes to providing welfare for poor families who have to go to the emergency room just to have routine service. PP helps prevent unwanted child birth by controlling the cycle. People are human and make mistakes that's why they put erasers on pencils. My family grew up on welfare because my parents didn't have birth control other then being responsible, which they weren't. So the state ended up paying for all of us to be raised. That means you flipped the bill my friend. People, who are against preventitive health care, remind me of stubborn children refusing to accept the medicine that's best for them. Don't mind them theives that jump your fence at night, they may be the very people you helped stay on this god forsaken planet.

NStiz, what about people that land up unemployed through no fault of their own? About 6 years ago, my son was on unemployment and living at home (his place of employment closed). We were looking into healthcare policies for him. He could not afford a policy on his unemployment checks; the cheapest policy was $500 a month more than what he was getting on unemployment. He was fortunate not to get sick and to be able to find a job after several months and have medical coverage.

Texas is not for rent, but hell is all yours. Enjoy.

Yo Bob you're on of hell's gatekeepers in your backward state. Enjoy!

Hell is a lot cooler in the summer than Texas.

Enjoy the airconditioning in hell dirp, I will enjoy Texas.

for now bob. for now.

HEY, HEY, thats enough. I am the "Gate Keeper of Hell" and no TEXANS are wanted here either. Next they'll think!

They also sterilized those they found undesirable and inconvenient. The abortionists are the nazis.

If abortionists are nazis, then republicans are idiots.

I guess that Texas is looking for a way to get more Federal monies. That is why they seem to want to have more welfare children. They do realize that the Federal money will stop if they secede from the US, don't they? Or do they think they will become a protectorate and still receive their money?

Texas is where hell dumps it's waste products.

Republicans even want a pipeline to move oil sand (better known as SLUDGE) to Texas.

So true Jemma. Sounds hypocritical to me. Can't wait until the "old" pubs go away. If anyone has noticed most of the issues are caused by old white men from the South. They are stuck in their ways-you can't teach a cow new tricks. Vote them out and let's get on with rebuilding this country. The Pubs are going down in flames and they are too stupid to grab a fire extinguisher to put the flames out. I have no idea why Planned Parenthood is being attacked-Capn. Jan from Arizona also dumped PP. As far as I can see they need more money for their fancy offices, cars and plane fairs to far off places-Capn. Jan went to Afganistan about 2 months ago (who paid?)why?. This is going to be a huge upcoming issue. Pubs, for some reason, are hell bent on 'offing' their constituents.

With the way republicans gerrymandered the districts in Texas I don't expect to see any changes until 50.1 percent don't vote republican. And that is only if none of those 50.1% vote for someone like Ron Paul, the phoney libertarian, who wants the government to do nothing, except ban abortions. We will, however, keep the current 48% in our thoughts.

Missy,

All of Texas may not be Taliban conservatives, but all those in positions of power, are...

Haven't you noticed how Texas and other southern states use the word aggravated to turn petty, misdemeanor crimes into felonies which disqualifies mostly minorities the right to vote. If it were known, there are probably many more democrats than republicans in Texas, however, only half as many with a right to vote.............And that is how the American Taliban want to keep it.

So the 3% of abortions far outweighs the health care of the 97% ?

txasbob: apparently. Because Texas wants to cut off the funding for health care for 97%, just to spite the 3%. You see, in Texas, they don't need no figurin', they gots their own way of doin' math.

dirp, if you want to send your money to planned parant hood go for it. The Texas Department of State Health Services helps fund nearly 150 clinic sites across the state.

If you read the article. Family planning options are still available as well as exams at other clinics and through other providers but just no money to the the clinics that support abortion. Planned parenthood can afford not to have the state funding. If you believe abortion is right....than go ahead and donate to planned parenthood. I for one support a local clinic in my state that offers all the services except killing the unborn. This is a good start for babies rights. Afterall, if we find a cell on another planet.....we do call it "life".

Perhaps the rest of the country should thank Texas. Since Texas turned down federal money for non-abortion services and is using its own funds for women's services, that just leaves more for the rest of us.

texasbob..you've made a good point. All in favor of funding planned parenthood put your money where mouth is; send your money to the nearest PP clinic.

The reason, Republicans are against Abortions is it takes away those poor kids that they like to send to WAR so those Rich Oil boys don't have to go, right George. George went to Alabama, not Vietnam like the rest of his Unit, way to go DADDY!!!!

No. Murdering 1 million plus babies per year because they're inconvenient sounds like a demonazi concept.

The SCOTUS has decided that it is not murder, so no matter how many of you nuts claim that it is murder the law says otherwise. If this is murder so is the death penalty and you know all republicans support the death penalty.

The Nazi courts decided putting Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals in ovens wasn't murder either.

Republicans don't believe in an active government unless it supports their beliefs so there you have it. The modern day republican party "the American Taliban". Another example of republicans wanting to control and demean women especially the poor.

Thank goodness killing females (and males) is not demeaning if they're aborted.

LOL texas.

So true-leftofcenter. Keep Planned Parenthood in place to "AVOID" unwanted pregnancies, keep the healthcare going for the kids and families. What the F--is Texas thinking? This is a women's issue-men stay out of it. If I don't want another child I have the right to that choice and that does not mean "abortion". It means birth control. Texas is in for a lot of grief as Arizona will. Capn. Jan only has a year or two-then she's out. She thinks she's going to win-when she's gone hopefully we can fund Planned Parenthood as we did before. We are talking humans not money/revenues.

Alls Arizona is is just another Texass.

So righty, I guess you're ok with a woman being raped and making her bear the child?

John please don't bring the rape bogeyman into this discussion. How many terminated pregnancies are the result of rape. I would think a woman who was raped has a legitimate reason for having an abortion. By the way I'm an agnostic. Demographics is destiny.

I'm ashamed to be in a country that breeds morons like you. Celebrate killing? Who do you think you are?

What a dirtbag

Gregor my IQ is twice yours.

leftsux... hmm

with such a large intellectual capacity you so eloquently display post after witty post, I find it ALMOST inconceivable A)- that you're an agnostic, and B) you bother to "entertain" us small folks by gracing us with your mere appearance on this blog!

Please, by all means, and due haste- take leave of us dear sir, and return to your SICK DEMENTED inter-world where you, and you alone call the shots....where you rule with an iron fist.....PUFF- Mom just called down from the kitchen to you in the basement- time for dinner loser!!!

Let's see the truth is not all babies are blessings from God. I believe, an evil act as rape ...if a baby results....it is the devil's baby. God would not do such a thing. Humans just don't want to be responsible for producing babies or many of their cruel behaviors. It's easier to blame an invisible God. Humans have over populated the world and humans continue to treated other humans cruely. Don't blame it on God.

Linda...Now we blame the devil? God allows things to happen; otherwise there would be no such thing as free will. People choose to do horrible things to each. However, I have a problem with those who feel that a wanted baby is a blessing from God and has a right to be born, whereas a child conceived through an act of violence is determined by us to have lesser value because of the circumstances surrounding its conception, and therefore its life will not be missed.

I believe in the morning after pill...If it prevents adherence of a fertilized egg to the uterine wall it is passed and no one knows it existed anyway.

Reminds me of the RC church that funded many vaccine programs for undeveloped, poverty-stricken areas in remote Africa. When it was learned that condoms were to be given out to prevent the epidemic of orphaned children born to AIDS infected parents, the whole program was pulled out by the church. Hmmm....What would Jesus do? I believe he would give out the condoms, himself.

Also why should my unborn baby get the death penalty for the action of the man that raped me. The person that should get the death penality is the Rapist. Think about it people.

leftsux - they need a sacrament.

Tish - don't you understand that the rapist is the victim. The unborn is the sacrament; they can't defend themselves.