Skip to comments.Life At Conception Act Introduced By Senator Rand Paul
Posted on 03/20/2013 8:32:36 AM PDT by EXCH54FE
Senator and CPAC straw poll winner Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced the Life at Conception Act on Thursday afternoon. He then went to Twitter and tweeted the following:
According to Senator Paul, S 583 does not amend or interpret the Constitution, but simply relies on the 14th Amendment, which specifically authorizes Congress to enforce its provisions.
From Section 1 of the 14th Amendment:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United 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 laws.
The Life at Conception Act legislatively declares what most Americans believe and what science has long known- that human life begins at the moment of conception, and therefore is entitled to legal protection from that point forward, Sen. Paul said. The right to life is guaranteed to all Americans in the Declaration of Independence and ensuring this is upheld is the Constitutional duty of all Members of Congress.
The substance of the bill reads,
To implement equal protection for the right to life of each born and preborn human person, and pursuant to the duty and authority of the Congress, including Congress power under article I, section 8, to make necessary and proper laws, and Congress power under section 5 of the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Congress hereby declares that the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human being. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require the prosecution of any woman for the death of her unborn child.
(Excerpt) Read more at freedomoutpost.com ...
We sure don’t need a libertarian like him running for President!
The anonymous source is a clinical psychologist wanting to protect her good name.
Other than his ridiculous stand on immigration, I can agree with him across the board. What does he think he's gaining by ignoring the word "illegal" in illegal alien?
Please see my post #46.
Are you sure?? Maybe you need to look at the Consitution. Where does it say that Government should tell us how to live??
I am going to call his office.... I think we need to deal with the ILLEGALS we have here — first by making English the only language that is offical. (In Florida, you can have your voting ballots in Creole and Spainish! No... If you can read English, to Fing bad...go home, if you think you are harassed!! my grandfather came over from Italy, and learn to speak English while working in the mines and building 6 homes.)
We don’t need to press 1 for English. (On my answering machine, we have... if you want to press 2 for Spainish or # for Crole, please disconnect and try again when you learn ENGLISH.)
Sounds good, but why does Rand Paul have a 33% rating from Planned Parenthood?
“KY U.S. Senate Jr Rand Paul Republican 33”
I survived! And am better, just the energy isn’t filled up yet.
Happened to some friends of mine. Severely malformed.
Not one other Republican has ever proposed a Constitutional solution to abortion such as this. It sweeps aside Roe v. Wade like yesterdays trash.
With all due respect to Rand Paul supporters, and I may end up being one of them, the article explaining Paul's proposed Life at Conception Act has the overtones of a publicicy stunt for 2016 imho.
More specifically, the first paragraph in the article subtly sidesteps the constitutonal reality that Congress has no constitutional authority to ratify proposed amendments to the Constitution.
"According to Senator Paul, S 583 does not amend or interpret the Constitution, but simply relies on the 14th Amendment, which specifically authorizes Congress to enforce its provisions."
Article V of the Constitution clearly indicates that only the states have the power to ratify proposed amendments.
The problem with the statement above from the article is this. Since the states have never amended the Constitution to define life as beginning at conception, there is no enumerated right which defines when life begins that Congress can enforce via 14A imo.
In fact, although John Bingham, the main author of Section 1 of 14A, had worded 14A to indicate that it applied only constitutionally enumerated privileges and immunities to the states, he had more clearly stressed this point about enumerated rights in the congressional record imo.
"Mr. Speaker, this House may safely follow the example of the makers of the Constitution and the builders of the Republic, by passing laws for enforcing all the privileges and immunities of the United States as guaranteed by the amended Constitution and expressly enumerated in the Constitution (emphasis added)." --John Bingham, Congressional Globe, 1871. (See bottom half of third column.)
(Note that activist justices ignored this clarification, imo, when they not only hid behind the 9th Amendment to apply nonenumerated abortion rights to the states in Roe v. Wade, but wrongly legislated state legislative powers from the bench in order to do so.)
Next, patriots who have read Section 1 of 14A can tell you that the excerpt from Section 1 in the referenced article left out the first sentence of Section 1. The problem with the first sentence is that it contains wording which arguably weakens Paul's proposed Life at Conception Act.
14th Amendment, Section 1 begins as follows.
All persons born (emphasis added) or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. ...
So all that justices have to argue is that unborn children aren't regarded as citizens, and therefore have no constitutionally protected rights.
So although I'd probably support Paul for 2016, I'm disappointed in Paul for what may be a publicity stunt by proposing the Life at Conception Act. But hey, since constitutionally indefensible DOMA undoubtedly won some votes from Constitution-ignorant voters for incubment lamakers, the Life at Conception Act may win some votes for Paul whether Congress passes it or not.
That was prescient of him. He's been pushing this hard for several years now.
...there is no enumerated right which defines when life begins that Congress can enforce via 14A imo...
LOL The enumerated right is the right to life. All his bill does is define when life begins. There is no new right being defined here. Nice red herring.
The unborn are not citizens, they are persons. Persons who are not citizens do have constitutional rights. Otherwise we could just gun down illegal aliens in the streets because they have no rights.
Thanks for the ping! I always like to read good news! :)
This is very good news.
Thanks for the ping, Jim! We haven’t had much good news lately.
Different story today...special privileges are being extended...for the vote.
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.