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

Skip to comments.

Pro-Life Bill Officially Filed In Texas State House
Freedom Outpost ^ | July 2, 2013 | Tim Brown

Posted on 07/02/2013 10:12:46 AM PDT by EXCH54FE

A new bill that limits the murder of the unborn to 20-weeks and requires abortion clinics to meet basic medical standards has been officially filed in the Texas State House. HB 2 declares that the state has an obligation to protect the unborn.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, R-Texas, called a second special session of the Texas legislature to pass the late-term abortion ban bill.

“I am calling the Legislature back into session because too much important work remains undone for the people of Texas. Through their duly elected representatives, the citizens of our state have made crystal clear their priorities for our great state,” Perry said. “Texans value life and want to protect women and the unborn. Texans want a transportation system that keeps them moving. Texans want a court system that is fair and just. We will not allow the breakdown of decorum and decency to prevent us from doing what the people of this state hired us to do.”

The bill reads in part:

The compelling state interest in protecting the lives of unborn children from the stage at which substantial medical evidence indicates that an unborn child is capable of feeling pain is intended to be separate from and independent of the compelling state interest in protecting the lives of unborn children from the stage of viability.

•Increase abortion facility safety standards to the level of ambulatory surgical centers to shut down Gosnell-like abortion providers in Texas,

•Require the 18,000 RU-486 abortions performed each year be done according to FDA safety standards,

•Require physicians who perform abortions to be qualified to treat life-threatening complications after botched abortions and have privileges at a local hospital, and

•Ban abortions on unborn children beginning at 20 weeks after fertilization, when scientific evidence clearly shows babies can feel pain.

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; culturewar; feminazis; feministsagainstlife; filibuster; hb2; legislation; prolife
Liberals couldn’t come up with their own slogan, so they borrowed one from the Rand Paul filibuster and wore shirts and held signs that read “Stand With Wendy.”
1 posted on 07/02/2013 10:12:46 AM PDT by EXCH54FE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

Rick Perry bolstering his feeds.

Love this move to begin to outlaw this barbaric practice

I hope God will forgive us as a nation for murdering an untold number of babies.


2 posted on 07/02/2013 10:18:19 AM PDT by ConservativeMan55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE
Liberals couldn’t come up with their own slogan, so they borrowed one from the Rand Paul filibuster and wore shirts and held signs that read “Stand With Wendy.”

It doesn't work, because it doesn't rhyme.

I think I would go with

"Trendy with Wendy"

or maybe "Bendy with Wendy"
3 posted on 07/02/2013 10:18:26 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana (There's no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

The DNC slogan can now be “Gosnell/Davis in 2016”


4 posted on 07/02/2013 10:20:32 AM PDT by DPMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE
Why don't we just ask Anthony Kennedy now if this is Constitutional or not, so we can save everyone many years of futility, wasted time, and wasted money.

-PJ

5 posted on 07/02/2013 10:22:40 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DPMD

Ha! bttt


6 posted on 07/02/2013 10:23:15 AM PDT by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

7 posted on 07/02/2013 10:23:20 AM PDT by tflabo (Truth or Tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

How about “Depends on Wendy” as a slogan?

You know, for those who are urinary-catheter-challenged.


8 posted on 07/02/2013 10:25:34 AM PDT by exit82 ("The Taliban is on the inside of the building" E. Nordstrom 10-10-12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
I hope God will forgive us as a nation for murdering an untold number of babies.

More babies have been slaughtered through abortion since 1973 than the total current population of South Korea. Can you spell --- holocaust?

9 posted on 07/02/2013 10:28:00 AM PDT by tflabo (Truth or Tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

This bill will get the same treament as SB 1070 in AZ with a court fight, but in the short term it reacts to Gosnell’s horrors and makes the Republicans look good.

Its one of those emotional wedge issues the Republicans can use to keep Pro-Life voters with the GOP-E candidates in 2014.

20 week limit legislation didn’t pass the House in Washington for nothing.

But in the end the federal courts will gut it just like SB 1070 on immmigration did in Arizona.

Remember that GOP-E Arizona Governor Jan Brewer ran with Bill 1070 to re-election last time. She used it as an emotional wedge.

Now Brewer endorsed the amnesty legislation that passed the Senate claiming security issues are being addressed.

Where will be GOP be on abortion after this bill passes, they all get credit for passing it, get re-elected and the courts gut the legislation?????


10 posted on 07/02/2013 10:29:55 AM PDT by Nextrush (A BALANCED BUDGET NOW AND PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN ARE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush
But in the end the federal courts will gut it just like SB 1070 on immmigration did in Arizona.

Twelve other states have already passed the 20-week rule. Nebraska's was the first...and it has withstood SCOTUS muster.

11 posted on 07/02/2013 10:34:17 AM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

I read that one reason the previous bill wasn’t passed is because they allowed a bunch of pro-death protestors into the gallery. The protestors were making so much noise the legislators literally could not do their business.

Limiting the number of protestors seems logical. Say, no more than 25?

Insisting the protestors keep their mouths shut seems logical also. With forced removal as a penalty.

The folks in the legislature were elected by the populace of Texas. Allowing a few protestors to subvert the people’s business needs to be shut down hard.


12 posted on 07/02/2013 10:34:18 AM PDT by upchuck (To the faceless, jack-booted government bureaucrat who just scanned this post: SCREW YOU!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

I opposed Gov. Rick Perry in the last election, because I had issues with some of his prior decisions, like Gardasil. However, he primarily lost because he couldn’t handle the debates.

Now I’ve grown to respect Gov. Perry. He’s not perfect, but he’s at least an 80% ally (meaning: conservative friend). He would have made a much better president than Romney or Obama. Of that I’m certain.

I also respect the way he bowed out when it became apparent he couldn’t win. Had the other conservative candidates consolidated behind the most electable conservative, Romney would have lost.

In regards to the special session, good job Gov. Perry. It’s actually a boon to conservatives that this abortion safety law wasn’t passed, because a 20-week restriction and medical safety standards are extremely reasonable requirements for all but the hard left. Let them argue the need to butcher viable children in unsafe clinics. We’ll win big in the court of public opinion on this one.


13 posted on 07/02/2013 10:36:05 AM PDT by CitizenUSA (Why celebrate evil? Evil is easy. Good is the goal worth striving for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01

The court challenges will result in rulings.

The liberals can shop for judges here just like they did with great success on Prop 8 in California.

The judicial process continues in these cases and there are no final rulings.

In fact, that’s the political sweetness of it all.

The politician gets credit for pushing the court challenged law and wins the next election while the judicial process drags on.

This is what Karl Rove calls a “wedge issue”.

It doesn’t overturn Roe vs. Wade but it mobilizes the emotion of Pro-Life voters behind the established politicians.

Groups like the GOP-E affiliated National Right To Life will use the US House vote on 20 week ban legislation to enable RINO’s who support amnesty for illegals to win primaries.


14 posted on 07/02/2013 10:41:10 AM PDT by Nextrush (A BALANCED BUDGET NOW AND PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN ARE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CitizenUSA

Between 2006 and 2010 we heard opinions expressed that Governor Perry was bad, then he was good when 2010 came around.

Perry knows how to use rhetoric to win in Texas and when the people realize that its all rhetoric with no backbone they will be looking for something else, maybe a third party.

Does Perry have an opinion on the amnesty bill in Washington right now or does he have to keep pushing the abortion bill as a diversion from that discussion????


15 posted on 07/02/2013 10:51:42 AM PDT by Nextrush (A BALANCED BUDGET NOW AND PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN ARE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush

Let me answer that last post.

Most Texas legislators and Perry have supported in state tuition for the children of illegal immigrants.

Perry opposes a border fence saying would be too expensive

In comments to the Wall Street Journal recently, Perry said the people will trust Washington on immigration if they get serious about security.

The illusion that the legislation is “tough” on border security is being pushed by its backers.

Jan Brewer in AZ at least came out and claimed the bill has security in it LOL.

Perry’s views on the immigration issue are not tough because he has money behind him that wants the cheap labor just like other GOP politicians do.

So why not beat his chest and push Pro-Life legislation and drag the process out while immigration remains a hot topic issue.

Its a good emotional diversion??????


16 posted on 07/02/2013 11:02:22 AM PDT by Nextrush (A BALANCED BUDGET NOW AND PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN ARE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CitizenUSA

20 weeks is five months, of nine total gestation. How can that be negotiable at all.

No life should be taken. Perry is negotiating with evil. Of course evil wants more evil. At least Perry is on the right side of the discussion and is forcing the legislature out into the open.

Obama made abortion pills legal for 15 year old children.

We live in a nation where the vocal populace broadly chooses death for children, horrific. 50+ million aborted lives in 40 years, genocide by any standard: compare to 3 to 4 million live births per year.


17 posted on 07/02/2013 11:08:11 AM PDT by FlyingEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush

Well, Gov. Perry seemed wobbly on amnesty, and that was definitely a strike against him in my book. However, I think he’s doing a reasonably good job in other areas, and abortion is one of my major voting issues. I cannot and will not vote for a pro-abortion candidate.

In this particular case, Gov. Perry’s rhetoric seems to align with actual action. He did call the special session.

I think politicians should be encouraged and supported whenever they do the right thing. We can’t simply write them all off whenever they disappoint. We have to hang in there and try to influence them to act appropriately. Why? In the case of Gov. Perry, he really is a governor, and he’s going to use that office for good or bad either way. When he does good, shouldn’t we try to bolster that so he (we) can actually win on those particular issues?

Senator Rubio is an excellent example. I despise the man’s dishonest approach to amnesty. However, he’s going to be a senator until 2016. If Rubio came out tomorrow on the right (conservative) side of an issue, I’d back him on that issue. That doesn’t mean I have to support amnesty. It means I want to move the goal posts to the right, and I’ll support anyone who can do that WHILE they’re doing that.


18 posted on 07/02/2013 11:12:31 AM PDT by CitizenUSA (Why celebrate evil? Evil is easy. Good is the goal worth striving for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: FlyingEagle

FlyingEagle: “How can that be negotiable at all.”

Wars are not won in a single battle. It’s negotiable, because it moves the goal posts to the right. 20 weeks is better than 25. 15 weeks would be better than 20, but you take whatever political victories you can when you can get them. Then you fight for more. That’s exactly how the left has managed to move the country inexorably to the left year after year. They don’t try to bite off more than they can politically chew at one time. The recent Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage was exactly that. They knew they couldn’t get away with mandating gay marriage across the nation at this point, so they built the foundation to do it in ten or 15 years.

If you want abortion to be very, very rare (or not at all), then it’s wise to methodically move to the right. That, btw, is EXACTLY why the left is up in arms over this! They use the incremental approach against us. They understand it very well, and they KNOW it’s far, far easier to beat them with incremental wins. They seem to be irrational. Opposing 20 weeks makes no reasonable sense unless you see it in the larger scheme of things. If we can do 20 weeks, we can do 12, and that’s exactly why they are livid over this.


19 posted on 07/02/2013 11:21:35 AM PDT by CitizenUSA (Why celebrate evil? Evil is easy. Good is the goal worth striving for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: CitizenUSA

A 20 week limit is less than what Ronald Reagan supported....

“My answer as to what kind of abortion bill I would sign was one that recognized an abortion as the taking of a human life. In our Judeo-Christian religion we recognize the right to take life in defense of our own. Therefore an abortion is justified in self defense. My belief is that a woman has the right to protect herself against rape, she should not be made to bear a child resulting from the violation of her person and therefore abortion is an act of self-defense.

I know there will be disagreements with this view, but I can find no evidence whatsoever that a fetus is not a livng human being with human rights.”

Reagan said that in a 1970’s radio commentary but most importantly he signed 1967 legislation that limited abortion to rape, incest and the life of the mother from the moment pregnancy began. It wasn’t a 20 week ban.


20 posted on 07/02/2013 11:22:23 AM PDT by Nextrush (A BALANCED BUDGET NOW AND PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN ARE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush

This makes after 20 weeks illegal, with ALL of the typical exceptions including rape, incest, harm to mother or fetal abnormality. Hell, this is NOT an unprecedented, extreme position; this is the law in twelve other states - ALREADY.

Plain and simple, the Dems want to be able to kill that baby right up until the last toe-nail passes the vaginal entry - PERIOD! ANY restriction from being able to kill that baby is considered a “War on Women!” and the media plays it up and sells it to the public as if this is the truth. It is simply BS!

If anything, this bill is more FOR the health of women than ANY abortion title implies. It forces Doctors to be able to admit patients to a hospital, it makes a hospital be available within a certain distance (in case of emergency), it makes abortion clinics meet medical-procedure-level standards (because abortion IS a medical procedure) oh, and it means a woman must decide to kill her baby within FIVE months of getting pregnant - OH, THE EFFING HORROR!

Even the Dems have stated that less than 2% of ALL abortions done in Texas are done AFTER 20 weeks, so then WHY would you not want to limit this procedure? These people are NOT “pro-choice” they are all about KILLING, KILLING, KILLING babies!


21 posted on 07/02/2013 11:22:29 AM PDT by ExTxMarine (PRAYER: It's the only HOPE for real CHANGE in America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: CitizenUSA

I should add, the left is immoral and evil, but they are NOT stupid. Their leaders know exactly what they’re doing, and that’s why they’ve been winning for decades.

This Texas law is an excellent opportunity to strike back! This isn’t about banning abortion! It’s about women’s safety. It’s about the quality of medical care, and it’s about saving infants that would otherwise survive outside the womb.

It wasn’t all that long ago when the left changed gay marriage into “marriage equality.” Well, we’ve got to learn to use their own techniques against them. Again. This law is for safe, quality medical care—not anti-abortion. It’s about saving children who have developed enough to feel pain and survive on their own outside the womb. This is NOT an anti-abortion law. It’s about making abortion safe, legal, and rare—the exact same rhetoric used by the left to beat us earlier.


22 posted on 07/02/2013 11:30:43 AM PDT by CitizenUSA (Why celebrate evil? Evil is easy. Good is the goal worth striving for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ExTxMarine

ExTxMarine: “These people are NOT “pro-choice” they are all about KILLING, KILLING, KILLING babies!”

You get it, and we can beat them at their own game. 20 weeks is more than reasonable, but this threatens the left. It moves toward further restrictions on abortion, and they can’t stand it. They aren’t battling this because 20 weeks itself is so bad. They’re battling this because they see it as a gradual shift toward respect for life. The hard core left wants infanticide, but the vast majority of Americans oppose that. This law makes the left look ridiculous and unreasonable. It moves toward making abortion safer and rarer. It’s sets the stage for further reductions in abortions. This is exactly how we can beat the left.


23 posted on 07/02/2013 11:36:32 AM PDT by CitizenUSA (Why celebrate evil? Evil is easy. Good is the goal worth striving for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: CitizenUSA
I should add, the left is immoral and evil, but they are NOT stupid. Their leaders know exactly what they’re doing, and that’s why they’ve been winning for decades.

You are correct. That is why the Dems are screaming that this is an anti-abortion bill and talks about how it will close down 37 of 40+ clinics across Texas.

The Conservatives have explained that those are 37 ABORTION clinics, NOT women's "healthcare" clinics. But, like usual, the media ignores the words of the Conservatives and amplify the rhetoric of the Democrats! It is ALL BS!

This bill makes getting an abortion SAFER for women. This bill makes abortion doctors be more effective and careful in their actions. This bill makes abortion doctors have to be associated with an available hospital in the event of an emergency. This bill is FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH, and yet the Democrats scream and gnash their teeth and the media puts it all on display.
24 posted on 07/02/2013 11:42:10 AM PDT by ExTxMarine (PRAYER: It's the only HOPE for real CHANGE in America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush
Groups like the GOP-E affiliated National Right To Life will use the US House vote on 20 week ban legislation to enable RINO’s who support amnesty for illegals to win primaries.

< So, are you saying that the Texas House and the U.S. House shouldn't attempt to legislate a 20-week ban? We should remain supine, for fear of unleashing a stampede of RINOs?

Liberals advance their agenda by accepting half-loaves. Do you suggest we pursue no loaf at all?

25 posted on 07/02/2013 3:14:18 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: okie01

Like I said this will lead to court challenges that will take a long time to work their way through the system while the business as usual RINO politicians get to use the emotional feelings of Pro-Life supporters to their advantage.

The NRL by the way used to discourage states from passing Pro-Life legislation limiting abortions because they were afraid it would create court cases that would solidify Roe vs. Wade as the law of the land with federal courts reaffirming it.

The abortion clinic regulations may survive muster but I suspect in the end a federal court will strike down the 20 week thing.

Five years ago this would have never happened but now that the grassroots are more stirred up than ever, the economy is on the skids and RINO’s like Boehner have teamed up with Obama to give us higher taxes and a higher debt ceiling with amnesty on the brink of being pushed through, its time for the GOP-E to give the “mad dog” conservatives some raw meat. So we get this abortion legislation thrown at us as if we are a pack of angry canines.

“Raw meat” is the expression they’re using over in the UK right now as David Cameron’s “Conservative Party” led government fends off the challenge from the new UKIP real conservative party with all kinds of symbolic ititiatives.

I’m not biting on this raw meat.


26 posted on 07/02/2013 9:36:49 PM PDT by Nextrush (A BALANCED BUDGET NOW AND PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN ARE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush
...its time for the GOP-E to give the “mad dog” conservatives some raw meat. So we get this abortion legislation thrown at us as if we are a pack of angry canines.

I couldn't care less about Rubio's proposed national 20 week bill in the Senate. It has no chance of passage.

The Texas 20-week bill, however, will pass. And it probably won't be challenged in court, since SCOTUS has already passed on the Nebraska bill. Nonetheless, it will make the Texas libs rabid.

27 posted on 07/02/2013 9:53:09 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: okie01

It is designed to start a fight with the libs that the GOP-E can exploit to divert our attention and emotions away from their selling out this country with amnesty, among other things.

Hate the liberals for supporting abortion after 20 weeks and forget about the GOP promoting amnesty for illegals.

Hate Obama and forget about Boehner’s deal with him to raise taxes and increase the debt ceiling.

And the list goes on and on because the GOP-E will have to mobilize all our resentments to cover their cave ins to the liberals and Obama.


28 posted on 07/02/2013 9:57:13 PM PDT by Nextrush (A BALANCED BUDGET NOW AND PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN ARE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

#equalprotectionforposterity

Texas H.B. 2 dehumanizes the child, denies Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection

Texas House Bill 2 divides unborn children into two classes of persons: those who feel pain, and those who do not. The bill then provides full protection only to unborn children who are claimed to feel pain.

SECTION 1. (a) (2) the state has a compelling state interest in
protecting the lives of unborn children from the stage at which
substantial medical evidence indicates that these children are
capable of feeling pain[.]

Children who are supposedly not old enough to feel pain are dehumanized and therefore left unprotected.

The Texas Penal Code clearly identifies all children in the womb as persons (Title 1, Chapter 1, Sec. 1.07.), without regard to gestational age, or to any sensory ability or supposed awareness. All are protected equally in Sec. 1.07, without distinction.

The proposed House bill ignores current law. Rather than equally protect all, the bill creates a prerequisite physical condition to qualify for full protection: a measurable sensation of pain. This arbitrary standard violates the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the law to all persons.

The Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution instructs:

“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.”

H.B. 2 is clearly at odds with the Fourteenth Amendment, and is therefore unconstitutional, as it fails to equally protect all persons in their right to life.

The bill is not justified in creating this new injustice, not even by the existence of injustice and contradiction in the current law. Texas Penal Code, Title 5, Chapter 19, Sec. 19.06 certainly qualifies as unjust and unconstitutional, and should be repealed.


29 posted on 07/02/2013 10:00:21 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01

But Rubio sure does care about that bill because its part of his ticket to make people forget about amnesty and the Gang of Eight.


30 posted on 07/02/2013 10:01:56 PM PDT by Nextrush (A BALANCED BUDGET NOW AND PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN ARE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

#equalprotectionforposterity

The Texas House bill (H.B. 2) promises to nullify itself, once its restrictions are found to impose an “undue burden” or “substantial obstacle” in the way of ANY pregnant woman in her ability to have an abortion.

In effect, the bill pledges to enable every woman to have an abortion.

(4) restricting elective abortions at or later than 20
weeks post-fertilization, as provided by this Act, does not impose an undue burden or a substantial obstacle on a woman’s ability to have an abortion because:
(A) the woman has adequate time to decide whether
to have an abortion in the first 20 weeks after fertilization; and
(B) this Act does not apply to abortions that are
necessary to avert the death or substantial and irreversible
physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman or abortions that are performed on unborn children with severe fetal abnormalities.
(b) The legislature intends that every application of this
statute to every individual woman shall be severable from each other. In the unexpected event that the application of this statute is found to impose an impermissible undue burden on any pregnant woman or group of pregnant women, the application of the statute to those women shall be severed from the remaining applications of the statute that do not impose an undue burden, and those remaining applications shall remain in force and unaffected, consistent with Section 10 of this Act.


31 posted on 07/02/2013 10:02:47 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush
It is designed to start a fight with the libs that the GOP-E can exploit to divert our attention and emotions away from their selling out this country with amnesty, among other things.

However, I don't think that's going to work.

Because Rubio has lost all credibility with the base. Nobody is going to fight on his behalf.

32 posted on 07/02/2013 10:03:41 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

Something I sent to the Governor today.

An important message for Gov. Rick Perry and all pro-life Texas Legislators:

Simply repeal Texas Penal Code, Title 5, Chapter 19, Sec. 19.06., and the Texas Code will then be in perfect conformance with the principles of the Declaration of Independence, all of the stated purposes of the U.S. Constitution you swore to support and defend, and the explicit, imperative equal protection requirements of the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments.

*strike*

Sec. 19.06. APPLICABILITY TO CERTAIN CONDUCT. This chapter does not apply to the death of an unborn child if the conduct charged is:

(1) conduct committed by the mother of the unborn child;

(2) a lawful medical procedure performed by a physician or other licensed health care provider with the requisite consent, if the death of the unborn child was the intended result of the procedure;

(3) a lawful medical procedure performed by a physician or other licensed health care provider with the requisite consent as part of an assisted reproduction as defined by Section 160.102, Family Code; or

(4) the dispensation of a drug in accordance with law or administration of a drug prescribed in accordance with law.

Added by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 822, Sec. 2.02, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.

*end strike*

Abortion at any stage of human development will then be completely illegal everywhere in the Lone Star State, primarily because of the Personhood language you put in the Code nearly ten years ago:

Texas Penal Code, Title 1., Chapter 1., Sec. 1.07.

(26) “Individual” means a human being who is alive, including an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth.

(49) “Death” includes, for an individual who is an unborn child, the failure to be born alive.

You’re going to take political fire no matter what you do, so you might as well take that fire for fulfilling the first and most important obligation of your oath: the equal protection of the unalienable right to life of our Posterity. Frankly, if you will do this, and then back it up with the full weight of the executive and legislative power of the great State of Texas, you will go down in history as a great hero of human rights.

Conversely, you can continue to forward the immoral, unconstitutional, anti-Equal Protection bill you’re now pushing and you WILL go into the history books as nothing more than part of what is destroying the moral, constitutional, and legal foundations of this great free republic we call America.

Sincerely,


33 posted on 07/02/2013 10:04:59 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

Gov. Rick Perry and the “pro-life” Republicans screwed up the Texas Code a decade ago, when they recognized the personhood of the individual child in the womb, and then granted “legal” permission to kill every single one of them. So, all they have to do now to make abortion illegal in Texas, and to provide equal protection for every person within their jurisdiction, as the Constitution absolutely requires, is to strip out the permission they put there. The current bill is horrid, from end to end. It makes a bad legal code even worse. And it doesn’t protect a single child.


34 posted on 07/02/2013 10:06:44 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

My friend of mine who is promoting the immoral, unconstitutional Rick Perry “pro-life” bill asked me: “Should we sit on our hands till the perfect legislation comes along? As 80,000 babies dies per year?” My response? “NO. The Texas legislature should revisit what they passed a decade ago in the wake of the infamous Lacey Peterson murder. That code section rightfully recognizes the personhood of the individual child in the womb. But then it contains another section that grants permission in the law for abortionists to murder children. So, all they have to do is strike out the second section, and voila, abortion is illegal in Texas, and the Texas Code is brought into compliance with God’s requirements, the laws of nature, the principles of the Declaration of Independence, the stated purposes of the Constitution, and the explicit requirement for equal protection found in the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments. Do it my way, and all are protected. Do it Perry’s way, and we have forty years of experience that tells us that all will continue to die, one way or another.”


35 posted on 07/02/2013 10:09:25 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

We often rightly criticize our elected officials for voting for bills they’ve never read. But how often do we hypocritically do the same thing when we support particular policies or legislation? I’ve asked a number of supporters of the immoral, unconstitutional Rick Perry Texas ‘pro-life” bill which is now under consideration, and other compromised bills like it, if they have read what they are supporting and thought through the moral, constitutional, legal, and political consequences of that sort of legislation. It’s pretty obvious so far that none of them have.


36 posted on 07/02/2013 10:11:06 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

If politicians won’t provide the equal protection that the Constitution explicitly requires for the most helpless and innocent among us, those little persons who are still in the womb, why on God’s green earth would you ever be surprised when those same politicians ignore the rest of the Constitution and fail to protect YOUR rights?

Good night.


37 posted on 07/02/2013 10:12:23 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

If you have the governmental power to regulate the murdering of little boys and girls, you have the power to protect them all, as your sacred oath requires.


38 posted on 07/02/2013 10:13:26 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Thank you for digging up the details on this bill.

It appears to have Roe Vs. Wade language written into it and contradicts itself in the details about limiting abortions.

Fetal abnormality is something I never knew of as an exception in news reports about the legislation.

But based on what you just posted, this bill reminds me of all the promises about “border security” in the amnesty bill.

This “abortion restricting” legislation in Texas looks like the scam being perpetrated as “border security” in the immigration bill.

Its no wonder the Republicans and the National Right To Life are pushing this legislation all over the country. Its symbolic and doesn’t mean anything and like posters said will “stand SCOTUS muster” (won’t be overturned) because its language reaffirms Roe vs. Wade.

All it does is stir up a fight and keep Pro-Life voters thinking how great the GOP is and how bad the Democrats are.

It gets the liberals and Democrats stirred up too to keep their base in line thinking the GOP is out to take away a woman’s right to choose when it isn’t.

Both parties need the emotional diversion of a fight.

The Dems get to work this issue to raise money and keep libs in line who are upset about things like NSA spying and so on.


39 posted on 07/02/2013 10:14:57 PM PDT by Nextrush (A BALANCED BUDGET NOW AND PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN ARE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | 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