Judge Blocks State Law Defunding Planned Parenthood

[TurtleDude]

well for the ignorant, here is some help: from Wiki
Planned Parenthood has received federal funding since 1970, when President Richard Nixon signed into law the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act, amending the Public Health Service Act. Title X of that law provides funding for family planning services, including contraception and family planning information. The law had support from both Republicans and Democrats.[SUP][64][/SUP] Nixon described Title X funding as based on the premise that "no American woman should be denied access to family planning assistance because of her economic condition".[SUP][65][/SUP]

 

[Henrin]

Being a private organization is not enough to get funded. Being a private charity organization however is enough to get funded. That's the part that you're conveniently leaving out. That this is a charity organization. And by law all charity organizations are allowed to apply for federal/state funding. Denying one charity organization money simply because you don't like part of what they do is not a valid reason to deny them something that all other charity organizations get. The equal chance to apply for and get federal/state funds.

Why apply for something that you're entitled to? Just sue the state for not giving it to you by your very existence.

 

[Henrin]

well for the ignorant, here is some help: from Wiki
Planned Parenthood has received federal funding since 1970, when President Richard Nixon signed into law the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act, amending the Public Health Service Act. Title X of that law provides funding for family planning services, including contraception and family planning information. The law had support from both Republicans and Democrats.[SUP][64][/SUP] Nixon described Title X funding as based on the premise that "no American woman should be denied access to family planning assistance because of her economic condition".[SUP][65][/SUP]

You mean other than services cost money, so logically women should be denied those things they can't afford? lol.

 

[Henrin]

well for the ignorant, here is some help: from Wiki
Planned Parenthood has received federal funding since 1970, when President Richard Nixon signed into law the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act, amending the Public Health Service Act. Title X of that law provides funding for family planning services, including contraception and family planning information. The law had support from both Republicans and Democrats.[SUP][64][/SUP] Nixon described Title X funding as based on the premise that "no American woman should be denied access to family planning assistance because of her economic condition".[SUP][65][/SUP]

So what you're saying is we need to repeal Title X. Well ok then, looks like entitled gibberish anyway.

 

[Samhain]

I'd imagine that it might have something to do with "equal under the law". If the state provides funding to charities then they must provide funding to all charities that apply for it. Not JUST the ones that they agree with. It's much like religion. If the State allows a Christian Cross in the State Park then they also have to let all other religions the same opportunity to have their symbol up. And if you don't like that example then feel free to use inter-racial marriages which are based on the same 14th Amendment protection of "equal under the law".



Everyone knows that is exactly what these types of bills are designed to do. The anti-abortion side does not hide it very well.

They are grants, and the State has the discretion to award the grants as they see fit.

 

[Kal'Stang]

That's a pretty stupid application of the equal protection clause. What the government decides to fund or not to fund is there decision to make and no one is owed that treatment. If however that is the way the left wants to play, fine, lets strip all funding of charities across the board.

Not surprised by this from you. If it were up to you the only thing that the government could do was sit on its thumbs and spin or enforce draconian laws that only YOU agree with and to hell with anyone else. As such your belief here is disregarded.

So what? Are women owed a place to abort funded by the government?

No more than you are. But then that is not what this is actually about. This is about funding or not funding charity organizations. Not women and their abortions. And you asked a question. I answered it for you. I realize you don't like the answer. But... Oh well :shrug:

 

[Paleocon]

Judge blocks state law defunding Planned Parenthood | The Columbus Dispatch


U.S. District Court Judge Michael Barrett of Cincinnati on Monday barred Ohio Department of Health Director Richard Hodges from enforcing a law to strip $1.5 million from the organization. The law was to have taken effect on Monday.


Judge Barrett is a friend of mine and comes from one of Cincinnati's most prominent families. He also is a BUSH appointee to the bench and his family is a well known Roman Catholic family: most of the Barrett men have attended the prestigious Jesuit HS-Saint Xavier.

Hard for any of the anti choice types to attack Judge Barrett as they once attacked the late Judges Carl Rubin and Arthur S Spiegel who were both Jewish (one a conservative Republican, one a socially liberal Jew) who often issued orders contrary to the desires of right to life which was founded in Cincinnati.

He ought to be impeached, tried, condemned, and executed for extortion and murder.

Dirty bilge rat.

 

[Kal'Stang]

They are grants, and the State has the discretion to award the grants as they see fit.

Only with in reason. They must have a valid reason to deny funding of Title X monies. If they don't then they run afoul of the 14th Amendment.

 

[Henrin]

He ought to be impeached, tried, condemned, and executed for extortion and murder.

Dirty bilge rat.

The vast majority of judges in the country should be impeached. It would be easier however to just throw them all out and start over then work through them all one by one.

 

[joG]

Judge blocks state law defunding Planned Parenthood | The Columbus Dispatch


U.S. District Court Judge Michael Barrett of Cincinnati on Monday barred Ohio Department of Health Director Richard Hodges from enforcing a law to strip $1.5 million from the organization. The law was to have taken effect on Monday.


Judge Barrett is a friend of mine and comes from one of Cincinnati's most prominent families. He also is a BUSH appointee to the bench and his family is a well known Roman Catholic family: most of the Barrett men have attended the prestigious Jesuit HS-Saint Xavier.

Hard for any of the anti choice types to attack Judge Barrett as they once attacked the late Judges Carl Rubin and Arthur S Spiegel who were both Jewish (one a conservative Republican, one a socially liberal Jew) who often issued orders contrary to the desires of right to life which was founded in Cincinnati.

Why should it be hard to attack a man that does not like the Constitution enforced? Just because he says he is Catholic? That is no guarantee against having been infected by your peer group.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Why apply for something that you're entitled to? Just sue the state for not giving it to you by your very existence.

Except that this isn't an entitlement. It's a privilege. You know that. What you don't like is that this privilege must be applied to ALL or have a valid reason to be denied or it will run afoul of the 14th Amendment.

 

[Henrin]

Only with in reason. They must have a valid reason to deny funding of Title X monies. If they don't then they run afoul of the 14th Amendment.

"valid reason". In other words, a reason accepted by the judge. :roll:

 

[Henrin]

Except that this isn't an entitlement. It's a privilege. You know that. What you don't like is that this privilege must be applied to ALL or have a valid reason to be denied or it will run afoul of the 14th Amendment.

If they are entitled to government funds, so yes, it is an entitlement. :shrug:

 

[jmotivator]

take your argument to the sixth Circuit.

No rational defense from you then?

 

[joG]

The vast majority of judges in the country should be impeached. It would be easier however to just throw them all out and start over then work through them all one by one.

Yep! Rounded up and shot at sunrise but before the trial.

 

[Kal'Stang]

If they are entitled to government funds, so yes, it is an entitlement. :shrug:

It can be denied for valid reasons. As such, its not considered an entitlement. Try again.

 

[jmotivator]

Except that this isn't an entitlement. It's a privilege. You know that. What you don't like is that this privilege must be applied to ALL or have a valid reason to be denied or it will run afoul of the 14th Amendment.

And as a privilege you aren't entitled to it so denying funding shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Kal'Stang]

"valid reason". In other words, a reason accepted by the judge. :roll:

Yep. That's how our system works. If someone don't like something that the state makes a law about and they have standing then they can go to court about it. That's the way it is with anything and everything in this country. Don't like it? To bad. Move to a different country or get the laws changed. That's all that you can do about it. GL on either one of those.

 

[Henrin]

Yep! Rounded up and shot at sunrise but before the trial.

We can use their made up bull**** "a compelling state interest" to declare that it is "a compelling state interest" that they be put to death at sunrise. lol.

 

[Henrin]

Yep. That's how our system works. If someone don't like something that the state makes a law about and they have standing then they can go to court about it. That's the way it is with anything and everything in this country. Don't like it? To bad. Move to a different country or get the laws changed. That's all that you can do about it. GL on either one of those.

It's circular logic, you know. :lol:

 

[TurtleDude]

He ought to be impeached, tried, condemned, and executed for extortion and murder.

Dirty bilge rat.

You need some help Palecon. calling for the death of a federal judge is not something that is going to be useful even if your career choice is as an Army of God urban insurgent or anti-semitic Grand Inquisitor

 

[TurtleDude]

No rational defense from you then?

you think this hasn't been litigated at a level above a federal DISTRICT court judge?

 

[Kal'Stang]

And as a privilege you aren't entitled to it so denying funding shouldn't be a problem.

Agreed. So long as there is a valid reason for the denial. If not then there are only two things that you can do about it. Get rid of Title X or change the 14th Amendment.

Our system is designed so that discrimination between different groups is not allowed by our government. If they provide charities for private charity groups then they must do it for all types of charity groups. If you want to change that go ahead and try for it. GL on it though. I don't hold much hope of that ever changing with in my life time or my kid's kids life time.

 

[Henrin]

And as a privilege you aren't entitled to it so denying funding shouldn't be a problem.

Exactly. A privilege can be taken away at any time by the giver. An entitlement is something people are owed and can't be taken away. What people are arguing is that Planned Parenthood is entitled to government funding.

It's actually pretty funny seeing Turtledude defend a government entitlement. lol.

 

[Kal'Stang]

It's circular logic, you know. :lol:

The whole abortion debate is circular logic. :shrug: Didn't you know that?!