What’s Good for the Goose…
Late yesterday afternoon, a Trump judge in Amarillo decided it was a really good idea to take Mifepristone off the market, a drug that has been safely used to induce medical abortions for 20 years. The lawsuit he ruled on was filed by an anti-choice group that wasn’t happy that the SCOTUS decision to take away the constitutional right to healthcare from millions of women didn’t go far enough. They wanted to take away the right to abortion from ALL women in the US. The group venue shopped, taking the case to a radical judge Amarillo and got the result they wanted; for the first time in US history, a federal judge interfered with the FDA’s authority by banning the drug. The plaintiffs lied that the drug was untested and dangerous, which is bullshit. Of course, since their case was bullshit, the judge bought it and banned it. Another judge in Washington State almost immediately issued a contradicting order, which will likely throw the case straight to the SCOTUS. Recall that the SCOTUS, which now has a 6 -3 ultraconservative majority gained by cheating, could likely generate a nationwide ban on the drug. Even though the SCOTUS threw the abortion issue to the states, I have no confidence the court will remain consistent by throwing this back to the states, since their rulings are now controlled by ideology, not the law.
Here’s a solution to the Mifepristone ban, and it’s pretty straightforward – we need a lawsuit filed that bans Viagra and all other ED treatments. If a federal judge can intervene in the FDA’s decisions over women’s healthcare, certainly another federal judge can to the same thing men’s healthcare, right? Besides protecting men’s health, banning Viagra will prevent millions of pregnancies, which is a huge side benefit.
After all, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right?
Thank you, El Jefe. Millions of women have been saying this for years.
1Or perhaps a law setting limits on the jurisdiction of federal courts to issue nation-wide injunctions. Pity the Republicans want their Federalist Society judges to enact Republican policies from the bench.
2Wish conservative women would have a Lysistrada moment or two.
3Making ED a counter-target misses one important point. No male has died because they couldn’t get ED treatment.
4Excellent point, Mel. I also want to add that women can still order the pills by mail from overseas until this mess gets straightened out. Easy to find them. Here’s one source. There are more.
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/dutch-doctor-internet-are-making-sure-americans-access-abortion-pills-rcna35630
5There’s also https://www.plancpills.org/, but who knows how long they will be active if this gets serious (seriouser?). They are based in the U.S.
If you want to plan ahead, it’s not a bad idea to get some and tuck them away somewhere for future emergencies for yourself or someone you love.
Nope, we aren’t going backwards on this.
6AK Lynne @ 5,
At the point where the courts are at the moment, I think I would make sure I obtained this medication and stored it away for my daughters, and grand daughters. If I were a woman of child bearing age, I’d make sure I had a supply for myself.
As for male judges and politicians that made/supported this decision, may they live interesting times, soon.
Mel @ 4,
I like the idea of outlawing all ED treatments and surgery, because as you said, no man ever died from ED. Let’s start public burnings at the stake for men caught wasting their sperm. I recommend male chastity belts for all the male hypocriteswho need help them controlling themselves, while they are trying so hard to control the lives females.
7This judge is a religious zealot. Don’t think he’s alone. Might even have a couple of supremes with similar tendencies. What’s next, contraceptives?
8Someone wrote an opinion article before the midterm elections saying that he thought the Republicans would win a lot of power in the midterms, but that after 2 years of Republican power, even most Republican voters would turn away. I wish I could remember who wrote the article or even how to find it. But I do hold out hope that he was right. I see small cracks opening up here and there — the new Supreme Court judge in Wisconsin, the Washington state judge in support of Mefepristone — and I have hope. “Nevertheless, [we] must persist”, right?
9Absolutely, El Jefe. Welcome aboard the bandwagon, which has been rolling for some years now, saying exactly that: “What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.” We need a counter-lawsuit, forbidding Viagra to men. Then we might find a different outcome
10There have been feeble gestures to retaliate against erectile disfunction treatments. They’ve mostly been bills introduced in state legislatures as “statements” if not outright “jokes.” They have no chance of passage.
Instead of banning ED Rxs, why not impose a 100% excise, privilege or luxury tax on them? Seriously. That might have a chance of happening.
If there were only some way to impose such a tax only on registered Republicans…..
11that other jean @ 10,
Forbid penile implants and enlargement. Forbid health insurance to cover it or for a physician to provide treatment.
12Q: Why hasn’t there been a lawsuit somewhere suing the pants off these R legislatures for practicing medicine without a license?!??!! They have absolutely NO qualifications for making medical decisions for even hang nails, why are they allowed to make deeply personal medical decisions?
13RA is right on! Have used this same argument before! Hope someone somewhere in this country will be game enough and financially fueled enough to do this!
14I keep waiting for some smart Democrat to put a bill before Congress saying all women must undergo a state paid DNA test on their fetus. All men will be required to submit their DNA at 14 so they will be contacted once paternity is known. They will have to sign a legal agreement to support the woman from that day forward (all expenses) and if a child is born support the child until an adult. I would bet that would shut more than a few yahoos up and add a big problem for all those who shame the woman but make no effort to make any male take any responsibility.
15Why not tackle the problem via money? When men are of an age to be sexually active, require a bond – say $250,000 – with the policy to be renewed and premium paid every year until they get a vasectomy and come in for testing every year to be sure there are no swimmers. And just like car insurance, if the policy has to be used by a woman, the premium gets jacked up. Men respond to money – let them put their money where their winkie is!
16It’s not just that arbitrarily banned the drug — the crux of the matter was that the judge felt the FDA had insufficiently followed the prescribed procedure for approval. So if you want to follow suit (so to speak), you’d need similar evidence showing procedural violations and a willing judge.
17I heartily condemn the judge. And, btw, banning ED pills is not a corollary to banning abortifacients. Many women are pleased and pleasured by men who do so by treating their disability.
18