Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Right to Life Act of 2005
righttolifeact.org ^ | October 12, 2005

Posted on 10/21/2005 6:49:57 PM PDT by cpforlife.org

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-75 last
To: cpforlife.org
I believe this will be the beginning of the end of abortion on demand in America. The evidence of per-born person-hood is so great that I believe the Supreme Court, with one or two more conservative nominations, would have no choice but to uphold the constitutionality if this law. It is a debate that is long overdue and a debate in which I plan to be very active.

Someone asked, [why was this not done earlier?] The democrats held a majority in congress for more that 30 years. Even with a strong republican majority, the passage of The Right to Life Act of 2005 will be an up hill battle. Some states like to elect fiscal conservatives, but endure or prefer pro-abortion republicans like Chafee, Snowe, Spector, etc.

Our job will be to convince the public and our Congessmen of the validity of the human rights that will be restored under this new law. We will also need to restore in the public mindset, an optimistic picture of American life without abortion. I beleive that the public is way ahead of the politicians with regard to a major shift in abortion policy. It will take a major public push to get politicians to take a major step in the inevitable restoration of human rights in America.

61 posted on 10/24/2005 4:09:57 AM PDT by Got a right to Life? . . Huh? (America will live without Roe. Americans will adapt to the new standard for human behavior.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
GOD BLESS Duncan Hunter! You are a great American. Well done good and faithful servant
62 posted on 10/24/2005 4:28:46 AM PDT by Got a right to Life? . . Huh? (Roe legalized the murder of young human beings for the sake of convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; NYer
If Congress had a "Right to Life Act" prior to 1973, it would have flown through the voting process and we'd never have had abortions. The hearts of evil men deliberately distracted the nation and the world with nonsensical news and false urgencies.

Given the present mood for infanticide and the demand for such a "right", I calculate the odds of a 2nd American Civil War to be very high should humans now be protected at the moment of conception. If this were rushed, as I figure it will be, we'd have to carefully guard against our neighbors the same way the Balkans erupted into disastrous fratricide.

This too, is a calculated move by the evil one, and it's civil war that the devil wants. The lines against the Natural and the wicked are so tightly defended, and (though not equal) the numbers are still high enough, that those who've always been violent to the unborn will reach for the throats of those who are numerous enough (and growing yet) to change the nation and end genocide. As is stands, evil will go down fighting.

I think it will be a long time coming before we see a Presidential signing of the "Right to Life Act". If it happens sooner, it's because the wicked die off by an Act of God and not by human endeavors. Violence and murder will neither stop abortion nor preserve it.

Could anti-slavery movements have been made state to state without a war? Will God give us such time? Is it in His Mercy to spare the families and communities that protect the unborn, frail, infirm, and elderly?

The devil rules such politics when the hearts of men refuse personhood to the least of our brothers and sisters. If we're not with the Word of God, He will hand us over to sin and Satan.
63 posted on 10/24/2005 8:00:07 AM PDT by SaltyJoe (A mother's sorrowful heart and personal sacrifice redeems her lost child's soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org; Coleus

Hear, hear! I have for years said that Section 5 of the 14th Amendment gives Congress the power to get rid of abortion once and for all. President Bush better make sure that he names a judicial conservative to replace O'Connor (Miers just doesn't hack it)---maybe Judge Janice Rogers Brown---so that the Supremes don't strike down Hunter's bill if and when it becomes law. But the way that Kennedy has been ruling lately, we may need for President Bush to replace Stevens as well.


64 posted on 10/24/2005 8:02:34 AM PDT by AuH2ORepublican (http://auh2orepublican.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

bttt


65 posted on 10/24/2005 9:46:19 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org

bookmarking


66 posted on 10/24/2005 5:17:57 PM PDT by TxBec (TEXANS - VOTE NOV 8TH FOR PROPOSITION 2 - THE MARRIAGE PROTECTION AMENDMENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: All

I thought there were supposed to be THREE branches of government, all equal, but where are the checks and balances?

Our rights have been diluted by unelected judges.

And some of them want to use other countries to decide OUR UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION?

Instead of interpretting the Constitution, they are CLAIMING the Constitution supports their own personal ideology.

Power is the great evil with which we are contending. We have divided power between three branches of government and erected checks and balances to prevent abuse of power. However, where is the check on the power of the judiciary? If we fail to check the power of the judiciary, I predict that we will eventually live under judicial tyranny. -- Patrick Henry


67 posted on 10/24/2005 5:20:31 PM PDT by Sun (Hillary Clinton is pro-ILLEGAL immigration. Don't let her fool you. She has a D- /F immigr. rating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: All; AuH2ORepublican

While I want President Bush to pick strict Constructionalists anyway, would it matter in this case?

From Post #2 at this thread:

"Would this legislation actually overturn Roe v. Wade?
Yes, it would. Few people realize that Roe v. Wade shows us the way to its own downfall. The key passage, written by the author of the majority opinion, Justice Harry Blackmun, states in unequivocal terms: “If personhood is established, the case for legalized abortion collapses, for the fetus' right to life would be guaranteed by the 14th Amendment." (Roe v. Wade, Majority Decision, Section IX) The pro-life movement keeps trying to make believe that it can work within the framework of Roe v. Wade, gradually chipping away at abortion. At the same time, the number of victims of abortion keeps climbing and well-intentioned laws are struck down time after time by the monolith of Roe v. Wade. The Right to Life Act faces the reality that the wall of abortion is still intact. Roe v. Wade itself offers us the key to bring down abortion, that key is personhood, and the Congress has ample room under our Constitution to define it to include the unborn."


68 posted on 10/24/2005 5:25:09 PM PDT by Sun (Hillary Clinton is pro-ILLEGAL immigration. Don't let her fool you. She has a D- /F immigr. rating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; Coleus; nickcarraway; narses; Mr. Silverback; Canticle_of_Deborah; ...
From http://www.operationrescue.org/?p=281
More details + Contact Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and ask him to schedule hearings on the Right to Life Act of 2005

Right to Life Act of 2005 Urgently Needs Your Attention

Your help is urgently needed to pass the most important piece of federal legislation to be introduced since the criminalization of slavery.

On February 2, 2005, Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-CA) introduced the Right to Life Act of 2005 (View Text) which, if passed, would implement the right to life for each born and pre-born human person under the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. This legislation would literally STOP abortion in America – all abortion – because the Constitution would guarantee the right to life for the pre-born.

As the current situation now stands, even if Supreme Court Justices were appointed that would overturn Roe v. Wade (and we have serious doubts this will happen), the so-called “right” to an abortion would revert to the control of each state. Some states would certainly outlaw abortion, but many states already have laws on the books to make sure that abortion on demand continues unabated.

That is why control of the Supreme Court, while critically important, is only a partial answer to seeing the scourge of abortion forever removed from our nation.

The Right to Life Act is nothing new to the US Congress. It was introduced yearly by former Rep. Bob Dornan, the firebrand pro-lifer from Orange County, California when he served in Congress in the 1990s. When Dornan was defeated in 1997, Congressman Duncan Hunter of San Diego County agreed to continue to submit this legislation each year, but each year no hearings were scheduled and the bill languished in obscurity and neglect.

However, this year is different.

The culture in America is undergoing a remarkable change and is increasingly uncomfortable with abortion on demand. The Pro-life Movement is especially making great gains among the younger generation, which is more pro-life that ever before. In fact, for the first time in decades, the majority of Americans consider themselves pro-life!

The last presidential election was a water-shed moment in American history when a president was elected primarily by citizens who wanted to see the Supreme Court move to the right and overturn Roe v. Wade. Abortion is “THE” issue in the current debate over the next Supreme Court justice. Americans want and need a public discourse on abortion and the question of when life begins.

With the current debate on abortion surrounding the recent Supreme Court vacancies, more and more people are seeing that the courts are only part of the answer. The document to which all our laws must comply, the U.S. Constitution, must be legally interpreted to clearly and unequivocally protect the lives of pre-born boys and girls.

The Right to Life Act of 2005 would do just that!

Political and cultural conditions are the most favorable they have ever been for legislation that would implement equal protections under the Constitution and restore the legal protections of personhood to the pre-born.

Now is the time to press for the Right to Life Act of 2005.

Currently, the RTL Act is languishing in the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution. No hearings have been scheduled. Hearings are important because they will open up the national debate about the personhood of the pre-born a debate that is long overdue.

When the Congress held hearings on the partial-birth abortion ban, the entire nation became aware of the heinous nature of late-term abortions. They began to understand that there are some things civilized people JUST DON’T DO. The attitudes of Americans were changed as a result and now the overwhelming majority of our countrymen oppose late-term abortions.

We believe that a similar debate concerning the personhood of the pre-born could further enlighten our nation as to the heinous nature of ALL abortion, and could be the next step in reclaiming the right to life for ALL Americans, regardless of their age or stage of development.

We must get America talking about the personhood of the pre-born and the all-important question of when life begins. This is a debate the abortion lobby fears more than anything because they know it is a debate we will always win!

THIS IS WHERE YOU COME IN!

We are asking you to do three things to help move this live-saving legislation along and open the national debate on the personhood of children in the womb:

  • Contact the Congressman from your district and ask him or her to sign on as a co-sponsor of the Right to Life Act of 2005. Currently there are 68 co-sponsors, more than there have ever been! But more are needed to give this bill the kind of respectability that will motivate Congressional action.

Click here to view the current list of co-sponsors.
Click here to contact your representative.

  • Contact Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and ask him to schedule hearings on the Right to Life Act of 2005
. Rep. Sensenbrenner is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. It is within his power to schedule hearings or kill this bill through neglect. It is guaranteed that he will not act UNLESS HE HEARS FROM US! Congress has reconvened this week, and all representatives at their Washington DC offices now.

Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner:
E-mail: sensenbrenner@mail.house.gov
Phone in Washington DC: (202) 225-5101

  • Forward this message to your friends and family and ask them to do the same.

There has never been a better opportunity to pass legal protections for the pre-born that now. We know not everyone can protest against abortion, or drive a Truth Truck, or hold a graphic sign. But everyone CAN and SHOULD make two phone calls or write two e-mails asking for co-sponsorship and hearings for the Right to Life Act of 2005.

Please do not let this bill continue to languish in neglect. If we have to wait until 2006, there is no guarantee conditions will be as favorable.

But most importantly, if we have to wait another year, the lives of 1.3 million innocent children will be needlessly taken by abortion! That’s right. The lives of 1.3 million children (and countless more if this bill is not debated and passed) desperately depend on you and me making a couple of phone calls and sending a couple of e-mails. (After all we’ve been through, how ironic is that!)

Please stop and make your calls and send your messages now!

While you are at it, please call or fax Congressman Duncan Hunter and let him know you appreciate his staunch pro-life efforts. Rep. Hunter is well known to those of us from Southern California and has been kind and courageous enough to speak on behalf of the pre-born at our rallies in past years. Please let him know his efforts are appreciated. He can be reached at (202) 225-5672; FAX: (202) 225-0235.


69 posted on 10/25/2005 2:06:58 AM PDT by cpforlife.org (Abortion is the Choice of Satan, the father of lies and a MURDERER from the beginning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun

"While I want President Bush to pick strict Constructionalists anyway, would it matter in this case?"



Unfortunately, more than you can imagine. Section 5 of the 14th Amendment gave Congress the power to legislate for its enforcement because the Reconstruction Congress did not trust courts to enforce the rights conferred by Section 1 of the 14th Amendment (i.e., Due Process, Privileges and Immunities and Equal Protection). This legislative power would thus include the authority to legislate regarding the scope of Section 1. However, the "modern" view of judicial power (also known as the "imperialist" view) claims that only the judicial branch of government may interpret any clause in the Constitution, so a Supreme Court in which an O'Connor is the swing vote would likely rule that Congress may not legislate to include unborn human beings within the coverage of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. We need a strict constructionist, not merely a pro-lifer, to replace O'Connor in the Supreme Court, and given that Kennedy has been wobblier than ever of late we may need an additional strict constructionist to replace Stevens (who may retire soon, although he may try to wait until after the next presidential election in the hopes that a fellow liberal is named to replace him).


70 posted on 10/25/2005 6:53:08 AM PDT by AuH2ORepublican (http://auh2orepublican.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: AuH2ORepublican

Thanks for the info.

I'm learning all the time. :)


71 posted on 10/25/2005 2:04:59 PM PDT by Sun (Hillary Clinton is pro-ILLEGAL immigration. Don't let her fool you. She has a D- /F immigr. rating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
Welcome back. Hopefully, though you might have fewer trees around, everything else is sort of back to normal.

I know from a friend in Lafayette, LA, that people are looking at any vacant house as a place to move into...

72 posted on 10/26/2005 6:19:50 AM PDT by topher (Please let Old-Fashioned moral values return to the United States!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All

Bump for Life!

See post #69.


73 posted on 10/29/2005 6:26:35 PM PDT by Sun (Hillary Clinton is pro-ILLEGAL immigration. Don't let her fool you. She has a D- /F immigr. rating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

bttt


74 posted on 11/03/2005 6:58:02 PM PST by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bump


75 posted on 11/04/2005 2:41:08 AM PST by .30Carbine ("remember love conquers everything!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-75 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson