A Texas judge grants a pregnant woman permission to get an abortion despite the state’s ban

originally posted by: Annee

Separation of Church and State has been defined by lawsuits won.

Unfortunately, we are currently combating Chrisitan Nationalism/Dominionism.

In every case, it was based on the argument of the Government selecting one church over another. Such as having a nativity scene and not allowing a satanic scene.

Show me one that was based on the morals of an elected official.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

WOW! Ken Paxton is a bigger douche bag than I thought! Kate Cox fled to Florida, to be in a medically safe place where the doctors weren't being threatened with life in prison and eternal vigilante lawsuits for helping her, while waiting for their case to be judicated.

WOW! Did you miss reading the part that said if the doctor said she needs it now then the court was not needed?

All Kate Cox doctor, Dr. Kamla Karsan(a woman) had to do was attest to her patient needing an abortion to save her life yet she would not. If Dr. Karsan, in her expert medical opinion, thought her patient needed an abortion due to Kate’s risk of death, she could have given her one without even asking anybody. The court order is easy to read and it would clear up many fallacies rolling around in this thread.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Xtrozero

Plaintiffs’ claim that “Kate Cox needs an abortion, and she needs it now” through relief from this Court is demonstrably false. Pls.’ Pet. ¶ 1. The Cox’s purport to be Dallas residents seeking to obtain an abortion in Houston. Id. at ¶ 6. Yet, at this very moment, they reside in Florida.

WOW! Ken Paxton is a bigger douche bag than I thought! Kate Cox fled to Florida, to be in a medically safe place where the doctors weren't being threatened with life in prison and eternal vigilante lawsuits for helping her, while waiting for their case to be judicated.

Keep trying to lay blame where none is due.
Their case never need to be adjudicated.

Kate’s doctor could have performed her abortion in Texas without anybody’s permission, as laid out very clearly in the court documents. There has been dozens of Texas abortions since roe got kicked.
Seems your problem is with her doctor who chose not to provide the abortion.

She chose not to.

a reply to: Xtrozero

If someone has morals based on religious doctrine how is that removed from their decision-making process...

That's exactly why SCOTUS overturned Roe V Wade, the religious doctrine of the majority of the court.

What's next? Should "stick-up their ass," holier than thou, moral prudes outlaw birth control for unwed women? Outlaw LGBT public displays of affection and same sex marriage? I mean, it's their religion, right? Is that what you advocate for America's future?

How about people that break the 1st Commandment, and don't believe in the Judeo Christian God? What should the punishment be? You know, based on religious doctrine?

a reply to: Vermilion

Their case never need to be adjudicated.

Then why did the Texas Supreme Court reverse the lower court's ruling? Why did Paxton threaten her doctors with life in prison and endless vigilante lawsuits?

originally posted by: Annee

Frankly, I am not interested in your opinion on this. It is not an issue you personally are facing.

As you express your opinions over and over...got it...

A potential human is NOT a human.

Did you invent this description to feel better? There is no potential it might be human about it... The only potential is being born alive and not aborted.

I will tell you what, I'll stop replying to your posts since my opinion is worthless to you.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

That's exactly why SCOTUS overturned Roe V Wade, the religious doctrine of the majority of the court.

No, it isn't... It was a horrible decision based on the political pressure of the day. It isn't something for the SC to do and that is why it was overturned. The SC had no right to do it in the first place, let's call it a popular decision but made in the wrong venue. If the SC had said all abortions are illegal and the mother will be put to death, would you just say OK the SC said it, so it must be right.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Vermilion

Their case never need to be adjudicated.

Then why did the Texas Supreme Court reverse the lower court's ruling? Why did Paxton threaten her doctors with life in prison and endless vigilante lawsuits?

Good questions.
The reasons are right there in the court filing.

The reason they reversed to the lower courts decision was because the judge made a bad decision contrary to the law.
In the petition to the court, her doctor said it was life and death yet when they were actually in court the doctor didn’t validate that claim.
The judge ruled poorly based on the petition only and not what was said in court.
That judge is clearly compromised as evidenced, and suspected.

Paxton reminded the hospitals what the consequences are if they assisted that doctor in providing an illegal abortion, which is what it would have been considering the doctor herself wouldn’t testify it meeting the legal standard.

a reply to: Xtrozero

WOW! Did you miss reading the part that said if the doctor said she needs it now then the court was not needed?

Right. The doctor said she needed it then, to save her reproductive ability. That wasn't in line with Texas law, according to Paxton and the Texas Supreme Court.

They made the [deliberate] mistake of claiming the fetus was non-viable anyway, and the timing necessary to save Kate's health was more important than the fetal heartbeat. They asked for an exception to the Texas law, based on the federal standard of loss of a bodily function. Kate was at risk, but not immediately threatened with uterine rupture, so the Supreme Court upheld the Texas law, ignoring the federal law. Even though she had been to the emergency room several tomes in a week.

It's matter of priority for Texas, and that priority is the fetus' life, not the woman's health. That's backwards from federal law. Paxton is fighting for the priorities to remain fetus first, woman second. Actually, woman third, doctor's interest second, maybe even first. That's the way the law is written.

originally posted by: Annee

We need to let the woman and her doctor decide.

PERIOD!

OK, zero abortions unless the doctor says it is needed due to a health risk, got it. I think that is what was done in this case, but her doctor wouldn't call it a health risk, and that is why the court came into it all. If the doctor up front said she needs it then no court would be needed.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Xtrozero

Plaintiffs’ claim that “Kate Cox needs an abortion, and she needs it now” through relief from this Court is demonstrably false. Pls.’ Pet. ¶ 1. The Cox’s purport to be Dallas residents seeking to obtain an abortion in Houston. Id. at ¶ 6. Yet, at this very moment, they reside in Florida.

WOW! Ken Paxton is a bigger douche bag than I thought! Kate Cox fled to Florida, to be in a medically safe place where the doctors weren't being threatened with life in prison and eternal vigilante lawsuits for helping her, while waiting for their case to be judicated.

And then they're making it illegal to flee.

But, Hey! Less government.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Annee

We need to let the woman and her doctor decide.

PERIOD!

OK, zero abortions unless the doctor says it is needed due to a health risk, got it. I think that is what was done in this case, but her doctor wouldn't call it a health risk, and that is why the court came into it all. If the doctor up front said she needs it then no court would be needed.

Any reason for abortion.

ANY

No one's business except woman's and her doctor.

a reply to: Annee

And the father

But I guess you would have to know who it is first

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: Annee

And the father

But I guess you would have to know who it is first

If he picked the right woman -- she'll consider him.

If not -- his fault.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Right. The doctor said she needed it then, to save her reproductive ability.

So many what-ifs in this story to the point the doctor backed down in court. The words..."there is a possibility" are used over and over. The child could come out fine, and the mother could have zero issues, but there are possibilities. We were not there in court, but I bet there are reasons the doctor didn't come out directly and say the abortion was needed due to the high risk to the mother.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Xtrozero

Plaintiffs’ claim that “Kate Cox needs an abortion, and she needs it now” through relief from this Court is demonstrably false. Pls.’ Pet. ¶ 1. The Cox’s purport to be Dallas residents seeking to obtain an abortion in Houston. Id. at ¶ 6. Yet, at this very moment, they reside in Florida.

WOW! Ken Paxton is a bigger douche bag than I thought! Kate Cox fled to Florida, to be in a medically safe place where the doctors weren't being threatened with life in prison and eternal vigilante lawsuits for helping her, while waiting for their case to be judicated.

And then they're making it illegal to flee.

But, Hey! Less government.

Leaving Texas to have an abortion is LEGAL.
Look this stuff up if you have no clue.

a reply to: Annee

Maybe she should have thought about that before spreading her legs.......


She picked him enough to have sex and make a baby with him

a reply to: Vermilion

Nah. I'm not buying a single word of the BS you just posted.

From the original pleading:

Because Ms. Cox has had two prior cesarean surgeries (“C-sections”), continuing the pregnancy puts her at high risk for severe complications threatening her life and future fertility, including uterine rupture and hysterectomy.

Continuing her pregnancy puts her at high risk, so she isn't in danger NOW! That's what Paxton was saying.

Yet because of Texas’s abortion bans, Ms. Cox’s physicians have informed her that their “hands are tied” and she will have to wait until her baby dies inside her or carry the pregnancy to term, at which point she will be forced to have a third C- section, only to watch her baby suffer until death.

www.documentcloud.org...

See their mistake? They put Ms. Cox's health above the fetus' life. So what if her feelings are stressed out and body is compromised, she's not close enough to death or impairment for Texas!

Fetus 1st, women..."Later, Felicia"

a reply to: Xtrozero

Exactly, the "what-ifs".

Texas can't be bothered. Does the embryo or fetus has a heartbeat? Who cares that you're 56 years old and have hypertension and will probably experience life threatening risks. To many what-ifs to abort! Who cares if your fetus doesn't have a brain, it has a heartbeat! You're healthy, suck it up and deliver that fetus, and then pay for its burial!

That's life in Texas!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

All the facts I’ve posted came from the court records themselves.
Kate’s doctor is the sole reason why Kate didn’t have an abortion in Texas.