CA ATTORNEY GENERAL BECERRA FILES BRIEF TO DEFEND WOMEN’S HEALTH AND MEDICAL SERVICES

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version Share this

 

East County News Service

April 8, 2017 (Sacramento) -- California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, along with 15 fellow attorneys general, filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio et al v. Hodges before the Sixth Circuit United States Court of Appeals on Thursday. The amicus brief defends a woman's right to access essential healthcare services, including reproductive health services, and a qualified healthcare provider's right to participate in offering publicly-funded health services to all people.

Specifically, the brief challenges an Ohio law which excludes qualified healthcare providers that offer services to women, including abortion services, from participating in publicly-funded health programs unrelated to abortion – including breast and cervical cancer prevention programs. 

“A woman, not politicians, should decide what is in her best interest when it comes to her health. There is no rational basis for a state to deny women the right to choose among qualified health care providers,” said Attorney General Becerra. “And no arbitrary state law should exclude those qualified health care providers from offering essential services to anyone who needs them. I urge the Court to find this misguided state law unconstitutional.” 

Attorney General Becerra joined the attorneys general of New York, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai'i, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia in filing the amicus brief. 

A copy of the brief is at oag.ca.gov/news

Comments

The Constitutions "promote the general Welfare"

means what it says: promote: further the progress of (something, especially a cause, venture, or aim); support or actively encourage. Young women need help and they ought to get it, in the same sense that other cohorts (e.g. seniors) need help and get it. In this case, "The amicus brief defends a woman's right to access essential healthcare services, including reproductive health services, and a qualified healthcare provider's right to participate in offering publicly-funded health services to all people." . . .These are basic rights which should be promoted. . . right to provide and right to access.. . .and they don't depend upon you funding Planned Parenthoood, which provides many worthwhile services to young women.

The US champions human rights! USA!

The US State Department publishes annual reports on human rights in all countries except the US. Here are some excerpts from the 2016 reports, on countries not viewed favorably by the US. . . Iran Reproductive Rights: The law recognizes the basic right of married couples to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing, and timing of their children. Couples are entitled to reproductive healthcare, free from discrimination, coercion, and violence. . . Cuba Reproductive Rights: Couples and individuals have the right to decide the number, spacing, and timing of their children; manage their reproductive health; and have access to the information and means to do so, free from discrimination, coercion, and violence. . . Russia Reproductive Rights: The government recognizes the basic right of couples and individuals to decide the number, spacing, and timing of their children; manage their reproductive health; and have access to the information and means to do so.

nothing in the law prohibits reproduction rights

the idea that women in the USA do not have reproduction rights is beyond inane. just like the hobby lobby case that pushed a 100% false narrative, access is one thing, who pays for it is another.
planned parenthood does NOT do what they claim to and like too many other organizations are funded by taxpayers with ZERO Constitutional basis. do what you want, don't expect me to pay for it.

We pay for all kinds of things for other people

through heatlhcare such as paying for smokers' ailments, people who do risky sports and have injuries,  drivers who speed and get hurt in crashes, Viagra for men who are impotent, etc. So why not birth control for women?  Why this sexist attitude of only wanting to deprive women of funding for their medical needs? 

In many states and counties, women in the U.S. no longer have broad reproductive rights. In some  rural areas Planned Parenthood is the only place to go to get a Pap smear,  mammogram, or birth control.  It makes no sense to cut funding for clinics that are often the only ones providing those services.  The US already does NOT pay for abortions, so cutting the rest is just punitive to women, period.

Cutting aid to women overseas can put lives and health at risk, for instance in areas where AIDs or ZIKA are rampant, or for a woman who nearly died in childbirth and can't get birth control to prevent future pregnancies.  Inability to choose how many children to have, with access to birth control, can doom families to a lifetime of poverty.  All children should be welcome and wanted.  When they're not, and birth is forced, we wind up with tragic situations where parents in some of these countries have abandoned children in forests, sold them into slavery or killed them. 

 

money to non citizens outside

money to non citizens outside of the control of the USA does not promote the general welfare
nobody is denying women access to healthcare. again access is not who pays, to combine them is a sign of evil intentions and a desire to steal from one person to give to another. people go to jail for that as they should

The US government was established, in part,

to "promote the general Welfare." (There's your Constitutional basis here.) Treating girls and young women as baby factories (in accord with Christian belief) by legal determinations which endanger their health services is inimical to their welfare, and by extension to all of us. Planned Parenthood is a major resource for young women in various aspects, a "general Welfare" which ought to be promoted and not attacked.

So hey there, quick request:

Can you not refer to my religion as treating women as "baby factories"?  Especially during Holy Week?  Thanks.

quick answer: No

"I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing… Your desire will be for your husband and he will rule over you.” Genesis 3:16