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

Skip to comments.

Democrat tries to put new twist on Texas abortion bill
Austin Statesman via Sacramento Bee ^ | Aug. 2, 2013 | CHUCK LINDELL

Posted on 08/03/2013 1:05:17 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o

Edited on 08/03/2013 1:40:52 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

AUSTIN, Texas -- When he filed an abortion-related bill with only one day remaining in the recently completed second special session, Texas state Sen. Eddie Lucio Jr. was hoping to make a statement, not change the law - at least not right away.


(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: abortion; adoption; asprolife; deathpanels; eddieluciojr; lucio; obamacare; rickperry; texas; zerocare
A worthy addition to our portfolio of pro-life initiatives, if you ask me.
1 posted on 08/03/2013 1:05:17 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan; GeronL; I want the USA back; F15Eagle; Gay State Conservative; sitetest; ...

Of interest.


2 posted on 08/03/2013 1:11:50 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Live and Let Live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I think this should have been done in all states long ago. Wonder why it hasn’t been?

I still think abortions should be limited to registered Dems, with severe penalties for registered R’s.


3 posted on 08/03/2013 1:28:07 PM PDT by Balding_Eagle (When America falls, darkness will cover the face of the earth for a thousand years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

How long before he is booted out of the democrat party?


4 posted on 08/03/2013 1:30:55 PM PDT by Iron Munro (They Old. That's Old School People. We In A New School, Our Generation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle
This Lucio guy though, the sponsor of this bill, is a pro-life Democrat.

I prefer him to pro-abort Texas State Rep. Sarah Davis, a "mainstream" Republican and the only GOP vote against the recent TX prolife bill which shut down filthy, unsafe-for-women,and post-20-weeks abortion mills in that state.

5 posted on 08/03/2013 1:35:10 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Live and Let Live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

It would seem to me that the women’s rights groups,
and all feminists would want a woman to be acquainted
with ALL her options when pregnant. No?
How odd.


6 posted on 08/03/2013 1:38:39 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

There is nothing radical or extreme about the bill, of course.


7 posted on 08/03/2013 2:01:35 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

If you haven't heard of these 3 - you will soon. The left in Texas has put their hopes and dreams in these commies ruling Texas in the very near future.

8 posted on 08/03/2013 2:08:30 PM PDT by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Valance

The 2 bothers were considered “rising stars” during the dmocRat convention.

Who else was considered a “rising star” just a few short years ago? That’s right, the communist and usurper now occupying 1600 Penn Ave.


9 posted on 08/03/2013 2:34:40 PM PDT by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal the 16th Amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
I think an “options” education session would be helpfull on any number of levels for women seeking an abortion.

The few women I know who had an elective abortion were heavily coerced into a “choice” by their male partners.

Perhaps some effort should also be made to convince males to have elective vasectomies...or to refrain from having unprotected sexual intercourse.

10 posted on 08/03/2013 3:16:13 PM PDT by sarasmom (The obvious takes longer to discover for the obtuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

If you have the power to regulate mass murder, you have the power to fulfill your oath to provide equal protection to every person.


11 posted on 08/03/2013 3:20:59 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sarasmom
Elective vasectomies are a bad idea. They make it very hard for the male to subsequently marry and be a good husband and father.

It also promotes the untruth that the "problem" is his fertility, when actually his fertility is a gift from God; the problem is his behavior.

"Unprotected" sexual intercourse is also an equivocating term. If you mean un-conracepted, it again gives the impression that the problem is the fertility, not the fornication.

Let them abstain from sexual intercourse until marriage. And then, love their spouses and their children wholeheartedly.

12 posted on 08/03/2013 3:21:39 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Make love. Accept no substitutes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

I believe in equal protection, and I support any steps to make it more equal.


13 posted on 08/03/2013 3:23:14 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Live and Let Live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

But bills like the recently passed Texas bill don’t “make it more equal,” at least as concerns the protection of the supreme God-given, unalienable right. They specifically grant “legal” permission to kill every single child, as long as it is done on schedule, and by the book.

And meanwhile, the Constitution absolutely requires equal protection for every person.

“No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.”

“No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”


14 posted on 08/03/2013 3:31:26 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: EternalVigilance
But that's not true. These laws don't grant legal permission. That's already a given, a damnable fait acccompli..

These laws limit legal permission. Thus extending protection to more babies; and the more these limits are extended,the more equal the protection gets.

I believe that's what we want.

16 posted on 08/03/2013 4:49:22 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Live and Let Live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Rory Hall, executive director of Adoption Advocates Inc. in Austin, called Lucio's bill a simplistic response to a complex situation.

The decision to place a child for adoption is often a wrenching, months-long process that involves fear, guilt and worry about whether the newborn will be properly cared for, Hall said.

But of course slicing and dicing the unborn, requires none of the fear, guilt, or worry.

What is simplistic about requiring women to take a short course to make it clear they understand a great way to make sure the child lives, even if they can't care for it themselves?  Obviously, it's a more detailed and complex route to ending the life of the unborn, if they still want that option.  It certainly IS NOT simplistic.


Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/08/03/5621619/democrat-tries-to-put-new-twist.html#storylink=cpy



Ramirez's latest political cartoon LARGE VERSION 08/01/2013: LINK  LINK to regular sized version of Ramirez's latest, and an archive of his political cartoons.




FOLKS, THOSE OF YOU WHO CAN, PLEASE CLICK HERE AND PENCIL IN YOUR DONATION TO HELP END THIS FREEPATHON.  THANK YOU!
...this is a general all purpose message, and should not be seen as targeting any individual I am responding to...

17 posted on 08/03/2013 4:50:07 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

No. They grant explicit “legal” permission to murder infants in the womb.


18 posted on 08/03/2013 5:46:19 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

If so, this is redundant. What is not redundant is the limitation they place of child-slaying.


19 posted on 08/03/2013 5:51:05 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Point of clarification.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

It’s redundant in the sense that the Texas code sections that already existed, put there by Perry and his cohorts ten years ago next month, already also grant specific “legal” permission to murder all of the innocent babies, as long as they are murdered according to their rules. All they’ve done is jiggered the rules a little, as an exercise in political theater. But, in any case, every single baby can still be murdered in Texas, under the color of “law.”


20 posted on 08/03/2013 5:54:54 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: tet68

It would seem to me that the women’s rights groups,
and all feminists would want a woman to be acquainted
with ALL her options when pregnant. No?
How odd.”

Really aggravated me that the Texas Federation of Republican Women did not come out in support of the bill but all you could hear were crickets chirping. Large women’s group that could exert an enormous amount of pressure if their current President wasn’t a far left Republican from Austin! We’ll see what their new President does in the future on such issues.


21 posted on 08/03/2013 6:11:48 PM PDT by Grams A (The Sun will rise in the East in the morning and God is still on his throne.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Grams A

It is what we have to do EVERYWHERE.
Replace, displace, retrace.

I am convinced that if the republican party does
not heed our instructions, we will do it to them too.


22 posted on 08/03/2013 6:16:34 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

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