-------------------------------------------------------------
FYI: I’m getting a >>> file not found 404 <<< prompt/warning at the link provided.
FYI: I’m getting a >>> file not found 404 <<< prompt/warning at the link provided.
-------------------------------------------------------------
freepersup wrote:
FYI: I’m getting a >>> file not found 404 <<< prompt/warning at the link provided.
Try this link: Romney Refuses to Sign Prominent Pro-Life Group’s Pledge.
Red_Devil 232 wrote:
According to the pledge, if elected President, candidates will:
- Only nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court and federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, not legislating from the bench;
- Select pro-life appointees for relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch positions, in particular the head of National Institutes of Health, the Department of Health & Human Services, and the Department of Justice;
- Advance pro-life legislation to permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion in all domestic and international spending programs, and defund Planned Parenthood and all other contractors and recipients of federal funds with affiliates that perform or fund abortions;
- Advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.
Well, I'm not sure what Cain's reasoning is. But I can tell you that I have a problem with that pledge.
First, I'm on board with the first three points 100%. Also, you probably won't find a more pro-life person than me. However, I'm also 100% pro United States Constitution. Indeed, I think the first point goes well above and beyond "Pro Life" issues. It goes to the foundation of our United States.
Which brings me to Item 4 in that pledge from the SBA List. They are advocating a Federal "Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act."
Perhaps someone can point out exactly where in the powers actually enumerated in Article 1 Section 8 of the United States Constitution Congress would have the authority to pass such an act? And wouldn't a President who is committed to folllowing the Constitution have an issue with Congress passing an act for which there is no power actually enumerated in Article 1 Section 8 of the United States Constitution? I would hope that a conservative president who believes in the United States Constitution would veto any bill for which there is no delegated power for the Congress to act.
As with most "Pro Life" groups, this group hasn't thought through their pledge. I worked as a volunteer for a candidate in the Primaries in 2010. He was the most "limited government conservative" you could imagine, and he was very strongly pro-life. But we would get questionaires to the candidate from Pro Life groups which would start out with: "Do you think that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and the power to regulate or ban abortions should be returned to the states?" That's an obvious "Yes." But then they would go on with a wish list of Federal legislative proposals that they wanted their Congressional candidates to support. Federal requirements for parental notification, federal laws for this and for that. Well, as a strict constitutionalist, our candidate couldn't support those measures because he saw nothing in the actual delegated powers of Article 1 Section 8 of the United States Constitution which would allow Congress to pass such legislation.