Henry's Veto on Abortion Bills Overridden--Now Law

[guido911]

My gosh CF, what is your deal? Are you seriously suggesting that if persons in this state (or instantly our legislature) are opposed to something, they should just suck it up and deal with it because someone in DC says so? If that were the case, then we'd still be doing this whole "separate but equal" crap from 1896. The law changes, and evolves, and who's to say that one day down the road the right set of facts will come along and push the Supremes to revisit Roe, or even Casey. The Court did it with Plessy, and even Lawrence to a lesser degree.

And incidentally, take a look at this last Bar journal. You will see cases involving school vouchers still being heard in this state. Was it wrong to challenge that latest legislative effort? Saw another case where I guy got electrocuted while trying to steal copper wiring. His estate sued, and lost. Why was that case even brought? Why are any cases or controversies brought if the subject issue had been spoken to previously? Could be because certain facts or circumstances may shed new light or give new perspective on a question that may give pause to revisit old opinions. Dred Scott probably wishes his case would have been heard today.

And to be sure, I opposed abortion on religious grounds. I also oppose it on moral and legal grounds. I also oppose certain immigration policies on moral and legal grounds as well, even though many Catholics are sympathetic.

[guido911]

And to illustrate my point, right now I am writing what I consider to be the "mother" of all motions to compel discovery. I am researching all those BS objections to discovery requests that seem to appear in most answers in order to hopefully end that sort of anti-discovery practices by some. My hope is to convince courts that making petty and frivolous objections is a waste of time and money, and undo some of the strength in the Quinn and in part, Melson opinions.

[guido911]

My point illustrated perfectly.

Planned Parenthood's current contract is set to expire Dec. 31.

U.S. District Judge Stephen Friot denied Planned Parenthood's motion for a preliminary injunction that would have stopped the Oklahoma Health Department from ending its contracts with the Tulsa clinics.

Attorneys for Planned Parenthood had argued the organization's support for abortion rights played a role in the department's decision not to renew the contracts for the federal program, although state Health Commissioner Terry Cline testified last week that that was not the case.

The WIC program provides nutrition education and food vouchers for women and children.

The agency gave Planned Parenthood of Arkansas and Eastern Oklahoma notice in September that it was terminating the contract after starting the legal process to renew the contract in August, according to testimony last week.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20121224_14_0_OKLAHO791686&allcom=1#comments

Whatever ultimately happens in this instance, law is ever evolving.

[guido911]

Oklahoma Number 2:

http://www.aul.org/auls-2013-life-list/

[Townsend]

Oklahoma Number 2:

http://www.aul.org/auls-2013-life-list/

Recognizing the significance of state laws protecting women and the unborn from the negative impact of abortion, establishing legal recognition and protection of unborn children in contexts other than abortion, prohibiting the illicit use of emerging biotechnologies, in protecting those at the end of life, and affirming the First Amendment freedom of conscience of healthcare providers

Don't forget protecting the babies from getting eaten.  Please keep fetus out of our cheese spread.

[Townsend]

Most Americans No Longer Think the Abortion Debate is All That Important

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/01/17/abortion_statistics_most_americans_support_roe_v_wade_don_t_think_pro_life.html

Here's the main takeaway from a new Pew study on abortion: Most Americans have more important things to care about than the abortion debate. That being said, a majority are against overturning Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court's landmark decision that turns 40 this month.

The survey, out yesterday, marked a decline in the issue's relative importance in the eyes of most Americans. More than half (53 percent) said that the issue "is not that important compared to other issues." That's up from 32 percent who said the same in 2006, and 48 percent in 2009. Just 18 percent of Americans currently consider the abortion debate to be a "critical" issue. Most of those in the latter category are against legal abortions, Pew notes, which isn't that surprising.

[Conan71]

How many people polled know what Roe V. Wade is?

They might have thought it was asking their preference of fish eggs over a milk by-product.

[Townsend]

How many people polled know what Roe V. Wade is?

They might have thought it was asking their preference of fish eggs over a milk by-product.

The Roe V Wade question was covered later in the article:

The issue's diminished importance for Americans could partially explain another statistic headlining write-ups of the study: Only 44 percent of Americans under the age of 30 (i.e., the ever popular "milennials" category) know that Roe v. Wade has to do with abortion. By comparison, 62 percent of all Americans knew what the landmark case was about. There's also an education gap. Ninety-one percent of Americans with post-graduate education could correctly identify the SCOTUS case's topic, while only 47 percent of those with just a high school education could do the same.

[Townsend]

House panel approves anti-abortion measures

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-house-panel-approves-anti-abortion-measures/article/3754796

A legislative committee approved measures Tuesday making it harder for young women to receive an abortion without notifying a parent and expanding the state's abortion reporting law. Rep. Doug Cox, a member of the House of Representatives Public Health Committee, warned those supporting the measure and other anti-abortion proposals to back off pushing for more restrictions or they will drive abortions underground. "We keep passing stuff like this, they'll be done in back alleys with coat hangers, people," said Cox, R-Grove, an emergency room physician. Committee members voted 7-3 to approve House Bill 1588, which would eliminate a provision in state law that allows young women to obtain a judge's approval to get an abortion.