ABORTION PILL RULING: Judge SUSPENDS FDA Approval of Mifepristone

Proof that AG Garland can move quickly when it suits him.

 

If you get rid of the FDA, every snake oil charlatan will be able to put any combination of crap (even literally) in a capsule and sell it to you as a cure for cancer.

The FDA is far from perfect, but they are the only agency protecting us from false advertising of drugs or concoctions that could be dangerous to our health.

 

23 years later?

Accountability by whom? For what crime or misdeed?

 

Drugs far more dangerous are killing people. Mifepristone is 99% safe and effective. It doesn't get any better than that. Tylenol is more dangerous.

 

what did the morons of the radical pro-abortion establishment expect? every year over a million unborn americans are killed, many simply because their creators are inconvenienced or simply too stupid to take precautions. at the same time those same pro-abortionists have been pushing to expand abortion protocols to include late term and even partial birth abortions into their agenda. did they really think that no one would push back? i'll admit that some of the proposals are over the top, but this is only to be expected. myriad forms of birth control are readily available, often entirely free of charge, and still we have droves of folks violently avoiding the consequences of their actions for the sake of a few moments of pleasure.

at the core of classical liberalism and modern conservatism is the concept of individual rights and responsibilities. to claim that being pro-life is all about controlling women's bodies is disingenuous at best. we are talking about true innocence, the most vulnerable and pure example of the human species and the pro-abortion crowd is speaking of them as dispensable and calling them mere parasites. did anyone think that this inhumanity would go unnoticed?

i've always been torn on the subject of abortion, i can see the necessity and also recognize its inhumanity, but it is the rabid pro-abortionists that are the real embarrassment here.

 

As a conservative, I disagree with this ruling. In fact, I've always been pro-choice and stated such. If we are going to make abortion illegal in some areas, this pill was an alternative. This was a stupid ruling.

 

Yes, 23 yrs later. However, if you had read the case you would understand why so many years later.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...on-invalidating-approval-of-mifepristone.html

The FDA violated the law of "180 days of receipt of the petition" and it should be held accountable. Or does the chant "no one is above the law" only apply to people like Trump and his organization?

 

Well I was scrolling through this thread and still have not found a link to the actual ruling, so I don't know if the ruling made sense legally or not.

Politically however, yes it is damaging to the GOP. But that doesn't mean the ruling was wrong in a legal sense.

 

Sorry but how can a defendant “stonewall” a petition? Isn’t it up to the courts whether or not to proceed and I would suggest that RvW precluded this going to court

 

There is no such thing as pro- abortion

Lol. None of that changes the efficacy of the drug for the last 23 years. Even the Right USSC will laugh at this joke ruling from a clearly incompetent judge.

 

LOL, at the lameness of your straw man arguments, calling my OP a "straw man," without ever explaining how that is the case-- because "both Parties have their foibles?" LOL, some more. You should join the "party" of those who know how to look up words, before misusing them.

BTW, it is particularly comical that you foist upon me, the obligation of going to talk to Liz Cheney, supposedly, in order to reject your argument. Rather, it is a ridiculous, and baseless, contention you make, that she would be in favor of the banning of this pill (which is what you seem to be trying to say). This was done by a judge, not by the Republican House members. A judge, elevated to that position, by Donald Trump. So it is laughable, albeit true to the Trump brand, that you are trying to absolve Trump of any responsibility for this action, and are instead essentially laying the blame on Liz Cheney, as a scape goat.

In fact, not a single one of your purported arguments, can be supported with fact, and are all bogus-- besides not proving my OP be a straw man, even if there had been any truth to them.


Yours is probably, by a nose, the worst argument I have seen, in some time.

 

What is "radical pro-abortion "

I don't know anyone who is "pro-abortion"...
I know plenty who are Anti-Women's rights...they laughingly call themselves "pro-life" except for women's "life".....

Conservatives make an exception to that for women...NO individual rights for them !!

What TF else would it be?

Uh, either it's a necessity or it's not....are you confused?

 

This drug has been proven, over 23 years of use among Americans, and longer, among Europeans, to be safer than the FDA could even possibly have determined, regardless of if they had crossed every "t" and dotted every "i," of the requisite studies. So the central point, obviously, is that his action, is a non sequitur, insensible response. He is clearly just trying to use some technicality, to serve his own personal agenda-- despite the harm that would do, to other citizens. It is nothing short of despicable; amazing that you seem to support the move. He deserves to be impeached.

 

Clueless! This is judicial malpractice.

 

A) no such thing as “pro abortion”.
b) These are only “American” in potentia as many pregnancies that are aborted would have terminated naturally (look up the stats)
C) the so called “partial birth” abortions have not even been begun to be discussed since the Bush era and THEN they were for deceased foetuses who had foetal abnormality incompatible with life
D) WHERE is the same level of concern for the living?

https://www.americashealthrankings.org/learn/reports/2019-annual-report/international-comparison
America is almost the bottom ranked country amongst OECD countries with Mississippi having a higher infant mortality rate than Chile

And don’t even go there with the Maternal Mortality rate.

How about concentrating on the living

 

There's no such thing as a "rabid pro-abortionist." What we are is pro-choice. Every woman has a different reason for choosing to end a pregnancy. Very few are cavalier about it. Sometimes it's financially infeasible. Sometimes it's a very young woman or girl who is unprepared for motherhood and need to grow up themselves. Sometimes it's because there's an issue with the health of the fetus. Sometimes it's the health risk to the pregnant woman.

Pregnancy is a medical condition that carries a lot of risk for the woman. Once upon a time, many women died in childbirth, or the child was stillborn for causes unknown. Today, tests can be done at different times during gestation that will show a birth defect or a major risk to the woman if she tries to carry the fetus to birth.

You're argument seems based purely on emotion, and also seems very misogynistic. After all, a man can always walk away from an unwanted pregnancy, but a woman has to deal with it. It should be her choice, and that choice should be private. The government should stay the hell out of it, in accordance with Amendment IV, Section 1, and Amendment XIV, Section 1.

As for available contraceptives, see #44.

 

I keep posting this but it is ignored. If they were really interested in lowering the abortion rate then they would put in place things like paid maternity leave, child support, and family tax breaks

 

the usual suspects keep on coming up with this "there is no such thing as a pro-abortionist". i call bullshit on this disingenuous crap. anyone who is willing to consider a fetus as nothing more than a parasite is a pro-abortionist. anyone who sees who sees abortion as some positive social phenomenon is a pro-abortionist. anyone who doesn't feel like weeping for the millions of aborted humans is a pro-abortionist. those of you who insist on defending the abortion industry by claiming that some of these fetuses may not be viable or may be a danger to the mother's health, get over yourselves - you are pro-abortionists. your heroes among the ruling class have been pressing ever forward on this subject and you've applauded at every step.

as i've said several times, i am torn on this subject. i seldom engage in these conversations because i actually find them painful, but someone must stand up for the enlightened version of humanity to which we all should aspire. when anyone starts to claim that it isn't a person until it takes that first breath, then they have admitted that they are an enemy of the very enlightenment that would take us to the next level of our ethical evolution. you people play word games, move goal posts and invent new definitions, but you should all be embarrassed by your total lack of empathy for the world's most vulnerable denizens. how many of you are more concerned with the living conditions of chickens and pigs destined for slaughter than with the millions of potential human being both created and destroyed by the inhumane humans responsible for their very potential? how many of you protest the violent end of violent people, but celebrate the violent end of people who never asked to enter the fray in the first place? quite frankly, you disgust me, just as i am disgusted by the side of me that agrees abortion is sometimes a viable solution. at least i am enough of a human being to detest my own lack of ethics. what's your excuse?

 

It's spelled out in the Court's ruling. Didn't you take the time to read it?

 

No, I am not. I am pro equal rights for women which you are obviously against, radically..

Nope , never have but it is a benefit to society ...especially to the righties who whine about how much supporting CHILDREN on Welfare costs

No, it's not evil. Taking away the rights of born people is evil.

People like you deny the humanity of women and think they are nothing but broodstock

Your self centered attitude demands women lose thier rights and DENY THEM THE RESPONSIBILTY OF DECIDING FOR THEMSELVES HOW TO HANDLE A PREGNANCY.....
YOU want to take away their responsibility.

,

Oh? And when is that?

When YOU decide it is?

Who TF are YOU to decide on other's lives ?

Give an example of "absolutely necessity" ... SHOW where all of a sudden it's OK with you

Looks like it from here....abortion is "evil" but if YOU approve it's not "evil" ???? What TF ?

Yup , about 10,000 years...think it will go away soon??

SO WHAT?

AND, a woman who has an abortion of a kid she doesn't want and/or can't afford IS taking responsibility.

You seem to be one of those who think if you buy a car and it turns out to be a lemon you have to keep it forever ...ya know, take responsibility for your actions...

Uh, no, that would be you.....sex is for fun, relaxation, tension release and humans do it because (here's a shocker for you) it's very pleasurable and a VERY HUMAN thing to do!

For some it is...but, and here's another shocker for you, people do it every day of the week.....sad you missed out.

Only for some....and YOU don't get to dictate that it is.

Again, so what ?!!!!

Says you?

If a fetus has rights with our rights come restrictions we all have...we canNOT use another's body to sustain our lives without their consent...why do you want fetuses to have MORE RIGHTS than the woman they are in?

I am sure you find women having equal rights as disgusting...no doubt in my mind at all...

NOPE, never said that... you have devolved into insults and make believe...a sign you know you are wrong..

.

She is if her rights to it are taken away by those who think women are nothing but property, broodstock, to be controlled....

...and others don't...

Why TF should you view procreation as "sacrifice".....just that alone shows you're wrong...it shouldn't be a sacrifice....it should be a pleasure. You make it sound like a PUNISHMENT which is why you rabid Anti-Choicers want abortion banned...it's a PUNISHMENT for women having sex.

LOL "we" all wish we could be less humane ??


and never once have you considered how inhumane it is to take away a woman's right to her own body..or how inhumane it is for a child to be born to someone who doesn't want it or can't afford it..

 

LOL , she's too "enlightened" to use correct punctuation

 

You nailed it....

 

He stated that he made his ruling based on safety.

Yet, he has NO medical experience and this drug has been used by large numbers of women around the entire world for 20 years.

If there were some sort of disaster warranting ending its use, there would be CRYSTAL CLEAR EVIDENCE.

The idea that Matthew Kacsmaryk can make better decisions on medicine than can the FDA is just plain FALSE. He has NO expertise that could possibly justify that dream of his.

This guy is in the same family as those who think that cell phones cause brain damage or who claim vaccines are a lethal conspiracy.