"Life At Conception Act" too extreme, harms party

You had me all the way up until that part about the Bible... (0.00 / 0)

And heartbeat would be much better legal definition of life, consistent with death, and consistent with the Bible, and consistent with biology.

I could argue that the Bible states that life begins even before conception.  There are a number of examples of pregnancies being predicted long before anyone knew about them in the Bible.  In fact, not only were pregnancies predicted, but the character and personality of the person being born from that pregnancy were predicted.  

As a social conservative, and Christian, I believe God knows about each and every child before they are even conceived in the womb.  He knows how they will grow up, and what they will do for work, and how they will live their lives.  He knows this because our lives are like pages in a book that only He can turn back and forth.  

I know that belief system makes me part of the 1% religious right wing, but I can't deny who I am.

Of course, my secular argument would be quite different and I could argue for the tolerance of abortion due to rape, incest and the life of the mother being threatened by the pregnancy.

We are headed for a 'Fiscal Cliff' and the country just elected a dope whose motto is 'Forward'.  

---

by: Vote3rdpartynow @ Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 12:53:02 PM UTC

Death also begins before conception (0.00 / 0)

God also knows exactly when everyone when we will die, but that doesn't mean we are all already dead, does it? No, it doesn't.

As a Christian (or Jew or Muslim), you should also believe that "the life of a creature is in the blood" and that for a body or person to be alive, it has to be pumping blood, it has to have a heartbeat. That heartbeat is the legal and medical signifier of death and so also should be of life (it's true that now we can artificially pump blood through a person's body and keep them alive indefinitely even if the brain "dies" and it seems the soul has left the body, which is why there is now also a "brain death" definition to turn off life support). Bodies that are not pumping blood are not alive with their own will and life and soul, they are either dead, or not yet alive in the case of an embryo.

No one will believe your "secular argument" if there are Senators pushing for these ridiculously extreme laws that have no chance of passing anyway. We need to repudiate these extreme acts, not say we agree with them! And we should not agree with them, they are wrong about when life begins and when personhood begins.

---

by: John Howard @ Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 15:48:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You missed it!! (0.00 / 0)

This is Rand Paul being a:

(1) HUMAN PERSON; HUMAN BEING- The terms 'human person' and 'human being' include each and every member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being.

....pro-cloning TRANSHUMANIST!!

Booga booga....

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 14:01:14 PM UTC

Right, even cloned embryos would have to be implanted (0.00 / 0)

Right, I think a cloned embryo should be released into the wild, not implanted into a womb and brought to life. Actually I think that about all embryos that exist outside the body, but I don't expect to shut down the IVF industry completely. But cloned embryos, certainly should never be implanted. That's the Missouri anti-cloning Egg and Sperm law, a pretty good model that has been under fire from supposedly pro-life bioethicists since before it was passed.

Is Paul a Transhumanist? There are sure lots of Libertarian Transhumanists, and many people are Libertarians precisely because they are Transhumanists. So maybe indeed he thinks it would be sneaky to protect cloned and lab-created embryos from people who would oppose implanting them, and to set us up against Catholics and Mormons who will fret about killing the beautiful little human life.

I've been assured though, that the purpose of including cloned embryos in this list, is to stop embryonic stem cell research, but I see nothing in the bill that stops creation of cloned embryos. All I see in the bill is that they have to be implanted and brought to life. Or maybe not, maybe being implanted is not a human right protected by the 14th Amendment, since millions of embryos fail to implant naturally every month. Hard to say, but not worth finding out. A separate bill could prohibit embryonic research without declaring embryos to be persons.

---

by: John Howard @ Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 15:27:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

ES, you must oppose this, right? (0.00 / 0)

As I recall, you think embryos don't take on any right to life until they become developed enough to live outside a woman's body. So you must agree that giving embryos that have not even been implanted in a woman's body the rights of personhood is too extreme, right? And as a biology researcher, you must oppose laws that would interfere or perhaps criminalize embryonic research, right? And as a 10th Amendment guy, you must oppose a federal law that does this, right?  

---

by: John Howard @ Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 18:02:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I oppose ALL (0.00 / 0)

Federal laws concerning ANY powers not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.  I see no power given to by the People TO the Federal Government either by ratification or Amending of the Constituiton that gives the Federal Government the authority to define any protections of unborn individuals.

That goes for EVERY law YOU offer up too.

Now the STATES....

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 21:07:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well oppose this then (0.00 / 0)

What's up with Rand Paul calling for this federal law then? Do you agree that it is damaging to Republicans to be associated with it?

You aren't saying you'd support this law as a state law are you? Even if this is proposed as a a state law, it is damaging to Republicans to express a desire to make abortion and contraception a crime, and abortion a crime even in the case of rape, which these Personhood laws do, since a person can't be punished for someone else's crime.

(I think Paul's video argues that it couldn't be enacted as a state law because of Roe v Wade, so since the court believes that Congress can define a legal definition of when life and personhood begin, then that's the loophole to get around Roe v Wade).

---

by: John Howard @ Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 22:48:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Do you see why nobody (0.00 / 0)

pays you ANY attention?
I DID OPPOSE THIS.....you're just too busy trying to put words in my mouth to see it just like you do EVERY DAMNED TIME.

I oppose ALL laws concerning powers not yet delegated TO the federal government.  There is nothing in the Constituiton where the People have given the authority TO the federal government to define ANYTHING "unborn" as "having rights"........THAT IS CALLED "OPPOSING THIS LAW".

I said nothing about supporting a state doing the same thing other than THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ATTEMPT IT AT THE STATE LEVEL.  BUT, since you asked me my opinion of state level actions BEFORE you gave it to me....I would oppose it at the state level because it opens up a can of worms that goes way beyond "abortion"....you are negligent in a minor car accident and an unborn child dies, you get charged with negligent homicide.  Woman trips and falls on your property and unborn child dies....imagine the charges...the lawsuits....the lawyers, of course, should LOVE this law.
I don't give a flying pig screw what is or is not "good for the Party"....I am not a member of "the Party" and couldn't care less if they wallow in the unConstitutional means in which they conduct themselves.....means in which YOU ludicrously agree with.

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 16:56:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

National Pro-Life Alliance (0.00 / 0)

LIFE, as well as liberty and the pursuit of happiness were not "too extreme" for our Founding Fathers.  

Next,

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!

-- Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964 Republican Presidential nominee.

Then again,

I am aware that many object to the severity of my language; but is there not cause for severity? I will be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice. On this subject, I do not wish to think, or to speak, or write, with moderation. No! no! Tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of the ravisher; tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen; - but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present. I am in earnest - I will not equivocate - I will not excuse - I will not retreat a single inch - AND I WILL BE HEARD. The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal, and to hasten the resurrection of the dead.

-- William Lloyd Garrison, Abolitionist, January 1831.

Furthermore,

Better to be always in a minority of one with God - branded as madman, incendiary, fanatic, heretic, infidel - frowned upon by "the powers that be," and mobbed by the populace - or consigned ignominiously to the gallows, like him whose "soul is marching on," though his "body lies mouldering in the grave," or burnt to ashes at the stake like Wickliffe, or nailed to the cross like him who "gave himself for the world," - in defence of the RIGHT, than like Herod, having the shouts of a multitude crying, "It is the voice of a god, and not of a man!

-- William Lloyd Garrison, Abolitionist, January 1866.

National Pro-Life Alliance

NPLA's Mission

Legislatively Overturning Roe v. Wade with a Life at Conception Act

Listen to a special message from Senator Rand Paul

A Special Message from Senator Roger Wicker

For 39 years, nine unelected men and women on the Supreme Court have played God with innocent human life.

They have invented laws that condemned to painful deaths without trial more than 56 million babies for the crime of being "inconvenient."

In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade ruling forced abortion-on-demand down our nation's throat.

In the past, many in the pro-life movement have felt limited to protecting a life here and there -- passing some limited law to slightly control abortion in the more outrageous cases.

But some pro-lifers always seem to tiptoe around the Supreme Court, hoping they won't be offended.

Now the time to grovel before the Supreme Court is over.

Working from what the Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade, pro-life lawmakers can pass a Life at Conception Act and end abortion using the Constitution instead of amending it.

That is why it's so urgent you sign the petition to your Senators and Congressman that I will link to in a moment.

You see, while the national media has talked a lot about the impact of economic issues on this past election, the untold story is just how well pro-life candidates did.

So it is vital every Member of Congress be put on record.

And your petition will help do just that.

Signing the Life at Conception Act petition will help break through the opposition clinging to abortion-on-demand and get a vote on this life-saving bill to overturn Roe v. Wade.

A Life at Conception Act declares unborn children "persons" as defined by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, entitled to legal protection.

This is the one thing the Supreme Court admitted in Roe v. Wade that would cause the case for legal abortion to "collapse."

When the Supreme Court handed down its now-infamous Roe v. Wade decision, it did so based on a new, previously undefined "right of privacy" which it "discovered" in so-called "emanations" of "penumbrae" of the Constitution.

Of course, as constitutional law it was a disaster.

But never once did the Supreme Court declare abortion itself to be a constitutional right.

Instead the Supreme Court said:

"We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins . . . the judiciary at this point in the development of man's knowledge is not in a position to speculate as to the answer."

Then the High Court made a key admission:

"If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case [i.e., "Roe" who sought an abortion], of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment."

The fact is, the 14th Amendment couldn't be clearer:

". . . nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law."

Furthermore, the 14th Amendment says:

Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."

That's exactly what a Life at Conception Act would do.

But this simple, logical and obviously right legislation will not become law without a fight.

And that's where your help is critical.

You see, it will be a tough fight, but I believe with your signed petition it is one we can win.

http://www.prolifealliance.com...

Dear Pro-life American,

Tragically, over 4,000 babies are aborted every day in our nation.

That's over 1.6 million every year!

But by passing a Life at Conception Act you and I can end abortion in America!

The Supreme Court itself admitted in Roe that once Congress establishes the personhood of unborn children, they must be protected by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution which explicitly says: "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property."

Since the Supreme Court is waiting for someone to tell them who the law counts as persons, let's not wait another minute!

Your petition will let your Senators and Congressman know that their constituents support full protection for the unborn and that they must stand for life in Washington.

...

    Sincerely,

    Rand Paul,
    United States Senator (R-KY)

http://nationalprolifealliance...

Life at Conception Act Petition
to: Your U.S. Senators and Representative

Whereas:   Because of Roe v. Wade, more than 56 million unborn children have died through abortion; and

Whereas:   In Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court declared it could not resolve "the difficult question of when life begins" - and on the basis of this unresolved question, declared a new "right to abortion" based on a "right of privacy"; and

Whereas:   The 14th Amendment to the Constitution states: "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law"; and

Whereas:   In Roe, the Supreme Court admitted: "If . . . personhood [for the unborn] is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [Fourteenth] Amendment..." (Roe v. Wade [410 US 113 at 156-7]); and

Whereas:   Science is clear that human life begins at conception when a new human being is formed; and
Whereas:   The American people oppose abortion-on-demand and want innocent human life to be protected especially when it is most defenseless; and

Whereas:   It belongs to Congress to resolve the question the Supreme Court said IT cannot resolve; and

Whereas:   A Life at Conception Act, by declaring that unborn children are persons legally entitled to constitutional protection, will rescue millions of unborn children from dying by abortion-on-demand;

Therefore: I urge you to cosponsor and cast every vote for a Life at Conception Act, and to do everything necessary to win ultimate passage in the United States Congress.

http://nationalprolifealliance...

In conclusion,

I cherish as strong a love for the land of my nativity as any man living. I am proud of her civil, political and religious institutions - of her high advancement in science, literature and the arts - of her general prosperity and grandeur. But I have some solemn accusations to bring against her. I accuse her of insulting the majesty of Heaven with the grossest mockery that was ever exhibited to man - inasmuch as, professing to be the land of the free and the asylum of the oppressed, she falsifies every profession, and shamelessly plays the tyrant.

I accuse her, before all nations, of giving an open, deliberate and base denial to her boasted Declaration, that "all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

...

I accuse her of legalizing, on an enormous scale, licentiousness, fraud, cruelty and murder.

--- William Lloyd Garrison, July 1833.

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Fri Dec 07, 2012 at 00:26:04 AM UTC