State troopers no longer confiscating tampons in Texas Senate

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Have you ever gotten a tampon in the eye? Ouch man. And then it feels itchy and irritated for minutes...

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Last I checked abortion statistics (Rueters Poll, March 2013), it was 49% in favor, 48% against. So that would make YOUR side a minority.

You forget, 3%. Silent Majority.

Look, we all know that women are terribly emotional creatures who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a voting booth, let alone inside a government administrative building. This is just ensuring those women who are more emotional than others, on their periods, are not allowed in to the room during political debate.

.
.
.

This is sarcasm, by the way. I hope I didn't need to point that out.

Abomination:
This is sarcasm, by the way. I hope I didn't need to point that out.

I think it might have been wise to do so. Hell, can you come up with a more logical reason for this ruling?

thaluikhain:

Abomination:
This is sarcasm, by the way. I hope I didn't need to point that out.

I think it might have been wise to do so. Hell, can you come up with a more logical reason for this ruling?

I hope some republican senators don't see my post... they might agree with me.

Was this because of the symbolism of tampons and their relationship to femininity/fertility? Sounds like it's not due to their being used as potential missiles, but to prevent them being thrown by the masses in some form of symbolic protest. If it was because of their potential as weapons I'm sure guns would've been temporarily forbidden too (tho it is Texas, so one never knows).

"Okay, you get to keep the tampons, as long as we take away your right to an abortion. Deal? D-do we have a deal?"

dversion:
"Okay, you get to keep the tampons, as long as we take away your right to an abortion. Deal? D-do we have a deal?"

Genius!

image

Seriously though, isn't the most reasonable explanation here that the organisers had reason to believe that some members of the audience were planning on throwing tampons in protest and pre-empted that by confiscating them? I gather they also confiscated condoms so it can't be said to be a purely anti-woman statement. In the UK, many shops decline to sell eggs to children and teenagers around the 5th of November - not because there's some shadowy anti-child plot going on, but because there's a track record of kids playing disruptive pranks like egging cars and houses. Refusing to sell them ammunition is therefore the commonsense solution.

To the people wondering why tampons are banned but guns are permitted - well, surely it's obvious that chucking tampons would be disruptive but the worst they could do is ask the thrower to leave, whereas pulling out a gun would get the jackass arrested and/or shot. (But hey, I expect people of a certain inclination are already weaving this into a narrative about the Patriarchy allowing phallic weapons but denying impure accoutrements of femininity, or something like that...)

[edit]

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Bring them into compliance? To do so would require far more money than is feasible to run the business. It's like saying you can only keep your car if you pay $5,000,000. Yeah, you COULD pay the money to keep the car, but it isn't financially reasonable.

It isn't an appeal to scare tactics. It is a realistic choice a woman will be forced to make for YOUR beliefs.

The law had nothing to do with Gosnell, and everything to do with forcing an agenda through. Which is exactly why the law WILL be struck down.

Last I checked abortion statistics (Rueters Poll, March 2013), it was 49% in favor, 48% against. So that would make YOUR side a minority.

It is a surgical procedure. What's wrong about subjecting it to the same rules as botox clinics?

Yes, it is scare tactics. That argument is all that ever was.

Gosnell was terrible. Awful. No good. Very bad. I live in PA. People were just flabbergasted that that kind of shit could possibly happen anywhere.

"Will be" struck down? Doubtful. It will always be appealed. We need another SCOTUS decision to deal with the aftermath of the Casey decision. Clear things up as it were.

You have to ask the question broken down by trimester. First trimester abortions still have majority approval, but second and third trimester abortions do not.

Big_Willie_Styles:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Bring them into compliance? To do so would require far more money than is feasible to run the business. It's like saying you can only keep your car if you pay $5,000,000. Yeah, you COULD pay the money to keep the car, but it isn't financially reasonable.

It isn't an appeal to scare tactics. It is a realistic choice a woman will be forced to make for YOUR beliefs.

The law had nothing to do with Gosnell, and everything to do with forcing an agenda through. Which is exactly why the law WILL be struck down.

Last I checked abortion statistics (Rueters Poll, March 2013), it was 49% in favor, 48% against. So that would make YOUR side a minority.

It is a surgical procedure. What's wrong about subjecting it to the same rules as botox clinics?

Yes, it is scare tactics. That argument is all that ever was.

Gosnell was terrible. Awful. No good. Very bad. I live in PA. People were just flabbergasted that that kind of shit could possibly happen anywhere.

"Will be" struck down? Doubtful. It will always be appealed. We need another SCOTUS decision to deal with the aftermath of the Casey decision. Clear things up as it were.

You have to ask the question broken down by trimester. First trimester abortions still have majority approval, but second and third trimester abortions do not.

A botox clinic doesn't need a doctor to be a resident in a hospital within 30 miles in the second largest state in the US.

This isn't about 1st, 2nd, or 3rd trimester abortions. This bill effectively makes it illegal to have one in the state of Texas. It's a Poll Tax, pure and simple: making the effort to get an abortion so costly and unreasonable that people don't get one.

If a woman needs an abortion, and can't get one legally, what do you think she does? Cry about it and move on?

NameIsRobertPaulson:

A botox clinic doesn't need a doctor to be a resident in a hospital within 30 miles in the second largest state in the US.

This isn't about 1st, 2nd, or 3rd trimester abortions. This bill effectively makes it illegal to have one in the state of Texas. It's a Poll Tax, pure and simple: making the effort to get an abortion so costly and unreasonable that people don't get one.

If a woman needs an abortion, and can't get one legally, what do you think she does? Cry about it and move on?

All ambulatory centers do, actually. That's the point.

It won't close that many abortion clinics. Everybody knows that. We'll see what happens when the law is put into effect and enforcement starts. Until then, your argument is invalid because you have no evidence to support it. Bringing up the ugly history of poll taxes just reinforces my earlier point about your argument being simply emotion and scare tactics. I'm no pushover and have heard these arguments before. They're unconvincing.

A woman "needing" an abortion is a rare case. These are the exceptions rape, incest, and death of mother that every reasonable person agrees with (which are built into the bill, by the way.) You're using the rare cases to justify all of them.

Big_Willie_Styles:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

A botox clinic doesn't need a doctor to be a resident in a hospital within 30 miles in the second largest state in the US.

This isn't about 1st, 2nd, or 3rd trimester abortions. This bill effectively makes it illegal to have one in the state of Texas. It's a Poll Tax, pure and simple: making the effort to get an abortion so costly and unreasonable that people don't get one.

If a woman needs an abortion, and can't get one legally, what do you think she does? Cry about it and move on?

All ambulatory centers do, actually. That's the point.

It won't close that many abortion clinics. Everybody knows that. We'll see what happens when the law is put into effect and enforcement starts. Until then, your argument is invalid because you have no evidence to support it. Bringing up the ugly history of poll taxes just reinforces my earlier point about your argument being simply emotion and scare tactics. I'm no pushover and have heard these arguments before. They're unconvincing.

A woman "needing" an abortion is a rare case. These are the exceptions rape, incest, and death of mother that every reasonable person agrees with (which are built into the bill, by the way.) You're using the rare cases to justify all of them.

What about ectopic pregnancies?

Doesn't seem like a massive deal, in realty if they NEED it they can go to another state. But it is a bit stupid. Are they going to ban Vasectomies or tubal ligations too?

If I was a female protester, I'd make sure to throw articles typically associated with males then. If they want to start confiscating particular items again in the future rather than enforcing a stop on throwing in general, well...

Skeleon:
If I was a female protester, I'd make sure to throw articles typically associated with males then. If they want to start confiscating particular items again in the future rather than enforcing a stop on throwing in general, well...

They confiscated bottles of urine and feces, soiled diapers, and bricks as well. The issue was these people were planning on throwing biohazards and they either had to shield the officials or take the crap away. I don't think this was aimed at " female only products" as much as it was at trying to keep anything disgusting from being hurled at the officials. It is difficult to stop someone from throwing something once they get close enough to do so with it.

They already do not allow things to be thrown, and anyone carrying around bottles of urine, feces do not really seem to care if they are arrested or not after the fact.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Big_Willie_Styles:

NameIsRobertPaulson:
Except that the bill effectively closes every single abortion clinic in the state of Texas. Forget 20 weeks, with this bill a woman's options are

A) Cross state lines
B) Use a coat hanger or other back alley method

Terrific options.

Also, may I remind you that abortion is LEGAL in the United States, and has been for a while. The minority are the people removing rights from women because their magical being in the sky said so.

Except that's bullshit. 40 of the 45 (or whatever number people are peddling today) abortion clinics in Texas would not be in compliance with this law. That doesn't mean they close immediately. They just have to come into compliance. This law was passed explicitly because of the Gosnell horror show. PA passed one in 2011 after Gosnell was arrested.

Nice emotional argument and scare tactics there. Try using facts.

Abortion is legal in the United States up to a point. And considering Roe v. Wade is still the most controversial SCOTUS decision of the last 50 years and abortion is the most divisive social issue in the country shows the issue ain't settled.

The minority? You mean 50% of the country or more? I suggest you look up the definition of "minority."

Also, abortion is not a right. The right to life is one. Because the government does not grant rights. It grants privileges.

Bring them into compliance? To do so would require far more money than is feasible to run the business. It's like saying you can only keep your car if you pay $5,000,000. Yeah, you COULD pay the money to keep the car, but it isn't financially reasonable.

It isn't an appeal to scare tactics. It is a realistic choice a woman will be forced to make for YOUR beliefs.

The law had nothing to do with Gosnell, and everything to do with forcing an agenda through. Which is exactly why the law WILL be struck down.

Last I checked abortion statistics (Rueters Poll, March 2013), it was 49% in favor, 48% against. So that would make YOUR side a minority.

This is exactly what Obamacare is doing. Driving the cost of healthcare so high that doctors are forced to close. You may not be sensitive to it but many private clinics around texas are closing. Even those unrelated to abortion. Doctors are "retiring" and letting go of entire staffs.

Republicans are making a move right out Obama's playbook and claiming its to protect women, just like when Barak said his law would protect the 27 million uninsured Americans. Its to protect yourself from... yourself.

If you supported the Affordable Patient Care Act these measures logically should not offend you. Government knows best people nothing here to see.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Big_Willie_Styles:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Bring them into compliance? To do so would require far more money than is feasible to run the business. It's like saying you can only keep your car if you pay $5,000,000. Yeah, you COULD pay the money to keep the car, but it isn't financially reasonable.

It isn't an appeal to scare tactics. It is a realistic choice a woman will be forced to make for YOUR beliefs.

The law had nothing to do with Gosnell, and everything to do with forcing an agenda through. Which is exactly why the law WILL be struck down.

Last I checked abortion statistics (Rueters Poll, March 2013), it was 49% in favor, 48% against. So that would make YOUR side a minority.

It is a surgical procedure. What's wrong about subjecting it to the same rules as botox clinics?

Yes, it is scare tactics. That argument is all that ever was.

Gosnell was terrible. Awful. No good. Very bad. I live in PA. People were just flabbergasted that that kind of shit could possibly happen anywhere.

"Will be" struck down? Doubtful. It will always be appealed. We need another SCOTUS decision to deal with the aftermath of the Casey decision. Clear things up as it were.

You have to ask the question broken down by trimester. First trimester abortions still have majority approval, but second and third trimester abortions do not.

A botox clinic doesn't need a doctor to be a resident in a hospital within 30 miles in the second largest state in the US.

This isn't about 1st, 2nd, or 3rd trimester abortions. This bill effectively makes it illegal to have one in the state of Texas.

? while I am pro-choice your statement here is a bit extreme. It may make it slightly harder to get an abortion (especially in the rural areas), it does not make it illegal. Even the rural areas will have to undergo a...what...3 hour drive to get to one? That is an inconvenience. In this day and age, most Americans have a 30 minute commute to work, with a growing population experiencing a 45-60 minute commute to work. Let alone the large segment of Americans who travel for the holidays from across the entire nation. A 3 hour drive one time is nothing honestly.

My father had to get sent halfway across the country to find someone qualified to do his hip surgery (from NY to Colorado). Hell, people looking for work outside of their town/state are more inconvenienced.

EDIT: Don't get me wrong, its the typical nickel and dime approach politicians of both stripes use to force their agenda over a long period of time when they know they do not have the support or legally can not just make the changes they really want. I really wish this wasn't a popular tactic in US politics, but unfortunately here we are.

Lil devils x:
They confiscated bottles of urine and feces, soiled diapers, and bricks as well. The issue was these people were planning on throwing biohazards and they either had to shield the officials or take the crap away. I don't think this was aimed at " female only products" as much as it was at trying to keep anything disgusting from being hurled at the officials. It is difficult to stop someone from throwing something once they get close enough to do so with it.

That's very different unless we're talking about used tampons. There's no reasonable use for urine and feces to be carried around, but there's all the reason in the world to carry tampons or other hygiene products.

They already do not allow things to be thrown,...

Of course they don't, that's my point. Why single out tampons then?

Skeleon:

Lil devils x:
They confiscated bottles of urine and feces, soiled diapers, and bricks as well. The issue was these people were planning on throwing biohazards and they either had to shield the officials or take the crap away. I don't think this was aimed at " female only products" as much as it was at trying to keep anything disgusting from being hurled at the officials. It is difficult to stop someone from throwing something once they get close enough to do so with it.

That's very different unless we're talking about used tampons. There's no reasonable use for urine and feces to be carried around, but there's all the reason in the world to carry tampons or other hygiene products.

They already do not allow things to be thrown,...

Of course they don't, that's my point. Why single out tampons then?

They didn't single out tampons. The people who were carrying urine and feces had large quantities of tampons as well. When people are carrying an abnormal quantity of tampons into a protest along with feces and urine, it is apparent that they are not going to be used for their intended purpose. Security responded according to the situation and also lifted the ban after the threat was over.

Typically one tampon lasts 4-6 hours. The most I ever carry with me are 6, and that is just in case someone else needs one as well. There is no point in carrying around boxes of 72 tampons. That is just absurd to begin with. Now when you have one person carrying in many boxes, along with urine and feces, how else do you expect security to respond?

If they had singled out tampons, they would not have confiscated the urine, feces, soiled diapers and bricks as well. I am not seeing that they were singled out at all, just one of many things they confiscated that day.

Police confiscate TP all the time from teenagers wrapping houses in the middle of the night as well. That does not mean they are singling out hygiene products, that means they are trying to prevent a mess. It matters not if they were used if they are going to be dipping them in urine and feces and paint before they hurl them.

Edit: DPS also said that this was a third party group responsible, and not Planned parenthood, the prolife or prochoice activists. That it was another group that appeared to not be with the others that were planning to throw the projectiles. Security was just trying to protect everyone involved.

Lil devils x:
Typically one tampon lasts 4-6 hours. The most I ever carry with me are 6, and that is just in case someone else needs one as well. There is no point in carrying around boxes of 72 tampons. That is just absurd to begin with. Now when you have one person carrying in many boxes, along with urine and feces, how else do you expect security to respond?

That would only make sense if they had been confiscating tampons in excess of, say, 10 tampons per person.
While the article may simply be wrong on this, they made it quite clear that no tampons or maxipads were allowed. I don't see how that's not targetting such items.

psijac:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Big_Willie_Styles:

Except that's bullshit. 40 of the 45 (or whatever number people are peddling today) abortion clinics in Texas would not be in compliance with this law. That doesn't mean they close immediately. They just have to come into compliance. This law was passed explicitly because of the Gosnell horror show. PA passed one in 2011 after Gosnell was arrested.

Nice emotional argument and scare tactics there. Try using facts.

Abortion is legal in the United States up to a point. And considering Roe v. Wade is still the most controversial SCOTUS decision of the last 50 years and abortion is the most divisive social issue in the country shows the issue ain't settled.

The minority? You mean 50% of the country or more? I suggest you look up the definition of "minority."

Also, abortion is not a right. The right to life is one. Because the government does not grant rights. It grants privileges.

Bring them into compliance? To do so would require far more money than is feasible to run the business. It's like saying you can only keep your car if you pay $5,000,000. Yeah, you COULD pay the money to keep the car, but it isn't financially reasonable.

It isn't an appeal to scare tactics. It is a realistic choice a woman will be forced to make for YOUR beliefs.

The law had nothing to do with Gosnell, and everything to do with forcing an agenda through. Which is exactly why the law WILL be struck down.

Last I checked abortion statistics (Rueters Poll, March 2013), it was 49% in favor, 48% against. So that would make YOUR side a minority.

This is exactly what Obamacare is doing. Driving the cost of healthcare so high that doctors are forced to close. You may not be sensitive to it but many private clinics around texas are closing. Even those unrelated to abortion. Doctors are "retiring" and letting go of entire staffs.

Republicans are making a move right out Obama's playbook and claiming its to protect women, just like when Barak said his law would protect the 27 million uninsured Americans. Its to protect yourself from... yourself.

If you supported the Affordable Patient Care Act these measures logically should not offend you. Government knows best people nothing here to see.

Obamacare has literally ZERO to do with this in any way, shape, or form. The clinics are being forced to close because many of the measures are intended to be impossible to attain so that they have no choice but to close.

Skeleon:

Lil devils x:
Typically one tampon lasts 4-6 hours. The most I ever carry with me are 6, and that is just in case someone else needs one as well. There is no point in carrying around boxes of 72 tampons. That is just absurd to begin with. Now when you have one person carrying in many boxes, along with urine and feces, how else do you expect security to respond?

That would only make sense if they had been confiscating tampons in excess of, say, 10 tampons per person.
While the article may simply be wrong on this, they made it quite clear that no tampons or maxipads were allowed. I don't see how that's not targetting such items.

They didn't confiscate tampons or pads people were wearing. LOL
In fact, since there were no restrooms inside the area they restricted them from, if they needed to go to the restroom, they could come get them prior to doing so. It isn't like they could change them in the area they barred them from. The people in the outer noisy area where you actually had restroom access were allowed to keep theirs.

They didn't even allow glitter inside the area where the vote was taking place, were told ahead of time they would be thrown out if they were disruptive and they removed the women who handcuffed themselves to the railings. This was by no means an attack on tampons. That is just silly. They just didn't allow them along with a whole slew of items into the area where they wouldn't be able to use them anyhow.

As for the articles being wrong, most of the articles I have read have been wrong about much, or just outright omitting the information. From the Texas Ranger I spoke to on this, He told me they confiscated MUCH more than has been reported.

EDIT: Just a few of the items they also confiscated:
Pencils, pens, confetti, paper, scissors, perfume, hairspray, cosmetics, glue, rulers...
This was not aimed at tampons. This was aimed at anything that could be used to damage the area, persons or be disruptive with.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

psijac:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Bring them into compliance? To do so would require far more money than is feasible to run the business. It's like saying you can only keep your car if you pay $5,000,000. Yeah, you COULD pay the money to keep the car, but it isn't financially reasonable.

It isn't an appeal to scare tactics. It is a realistic choice a woman will be forced to make for YOUR beliefs.

The law had nothing to do with Gosnell, and everything to do with forcing an agenda through. Which is exactly why the law WILL be struck down.

Last I checked abortion statistics (Rueters Poll, March 2013), it was 49% in favor, 48% against. So that would make YOUR side a minority.

This is exactly what Obamacare is doing. Driving the cost of healthcare so high that doctors are forced to close. You may not be sensitive to it but many private clinics around texas are closing. Even those unrelated to abortion. Doctors are "retiring" and letting go of entire staffs.

Republicans are making a move right out Obama's playbook and claiming its to protect women, just like when Barak said his law would protect the 27 million uninsured Americans. Its to protect yourself from... yourself.

If you supported the Affordable Patient Care Act these measures logically should not offend you. Government knows best people nothing here to see.

Obamacare has literally ZERO to do with this in any way, shape, or form. The clinics are being forced to close because many of the measures are intended to be impossible to attain so that they have no choice but to close.

I disagree they are impossible to attain. The problem is we need to fund them. The big issue here is the segregation of facilities for the wealthy and the poor and until that is addressed we will not be able to have facilities that are safe, sanitary and available to all. Since Taxes in Texas are not going to pay to keep them open, we should fund them directly to bring them up to standard.

We can continue to make excuses and segregate the wealthy from the poor or we can make it so they use the same facilities. I only see the quality issue getting worse here until they do.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked