Posted on 07/13/2013 2:11:12 AM PDT by lbryce
The Texas Senate gave final passage on Friday to one of the strictest anti-abortion measures in the country, legislation championed by Gov. Rick Perry, who rallied the Republican-controlled Legislature late last month after a Democratic filibuster blocked the bill and intensified already passionate resistance by abortion-rights supporters.
The bill would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy and hold abortion clinics to the same standards as hospital-style surgical centers, among other requirements. Its supporters say that the strengthened requirements for the structures and doctors will protect womens health; opponents argue that the restrictions are actually intended to put financial pressure on the clinics that perform abortions and will force most of them to shut their doors.
Mr. Perry applauded lawmakers for passing the bill, saying Today the Texas Legislature took its final step in our historic effort to protect life. Legislators and anti-abortion activists, he said tirelessly defended our smallest and most vulnerable Texans and future Texans.
Debate over the bill has ignited fierce exchanges between lawmakers, and tense confrontations between opponents of the bill, who have worn orange, and supporters of the bill wearing blue. Signs and slogans have been everywhere, bearing long, impassioned arguments or the simple scrawl on a young mans orange shirt, a Twitter-esque @TXLEGE: U R dumb.
The bill had come nearly this far before: a version had been brought to the Senate in the previous session of the Legislature, in June, and was killed by State Senator Wendy Davis, a Democrat from Fort Worth, with an 11-hour filibuster that stalled the bill until after the deadline for ending the session. The filibuster became an overnight sensation on Twitter and other forms of social media, with more than 180,000 people viewing the filibuster live online
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Your little purist law would be struck down even quicker?
What do ya do then? What can ya do?
you must be aware that I am out of power here in CT. And the half dozen folks I’ve helped elect to the CT state House are out of power, too, as they are part of a small minority party.
You are demanding that people do something that you, yourself, have not done. When the people of Iowa elect a majority to the state House who are Constitutionalists-of-old, we will all know that it was EV that did it and you will surely be given the credit.
I’m sorry you can’t see the difference between keeping your oath to support the Constitution no matter what anyone else may or may not do, and what Obama does, which is to ignore the oath, ignore the Constitution, and do anything he wants.
Follow the Constitution. Keep the oath. Provide equal protection for the supreme God-given UNALIENABLE right, the right to live.
It's so simple.
We’ve elected a small handful, enough to block the immoral, unconstitutional phony “and then you can kill the baby” bills like this one in Texas. But sadly, there are too many as yet who fail to recognize that they are proving Einstein’s definition of insanity.
A small handful won’t do. You need a working majority, which only happens if you have allies.
Until then, remember, on roll calls that are 65 yes 35 no, the “no’s” get ZERO. Same in elections: the constitutionalist who ran here and got 27% of the vote, gets ZERO. “Winner take all” system is what we got.
Meanwhile, the squishy RINOs and fake pro-family DEMS who voted ‘no’ on Same-Sex Civil Unions back in 2005 ... they still live on in the legilature ... should be purge them to make room for more progressives?
But it’s not really that simple is it? Because the fallout and consequences won’t be as you predict them. All that the other side will do is say - they do it, so we can do it. They will find whatever ‘constitutional’ justification they need to do it. Remember all our federal bills require this, and the libs find justification every time.
You’re basing your strategy on Marxist/Alinsky purity tactics. You can spout purity principles all you want, but with a certified and formidable opposition trying to oppose and undo everything we do, nothing in your fantasical scenario is going to work as you say it will. You’re simply drawing lines in the sand you can’t enforce.
Wrong. I’m simply saying that the oath to support the Constitution must be kept, or we in fact have no more free republic.
The idea that that is somehow Marxist/Alinsky is laughable.
It’s even funnier in light of the fact that you yourself have been (crudely) using truly Alinksyite tactics against me right on this very thread.
You do understand that if Texas passed a complete ban on abortions it would be overturned by a Federal Judge before midnight on the same day it passed?
And yet another Alinsky tactic! Accuse your opposition of what you’re doing! Hilarious. We’re using Alinsky tactics pointing out your Alinsky tactics. Nice twisty lawyer doublespeak there.
You have no path on how to get from Point A to Point B, nor do you deal with the fallout of ‘keeping their oath to support the Constitution’. Your ‘arguments’ are simply academic cocktail napkin discussions that can’t be applied in the real world due to the fact we’re so far from your perfect vision of things that the fallout from your proposed actions will not be the effect you intend. Your prescriptions are fantasies and and levers connected to nothing and have no applicational value in the system as it stands today.
“You don’t “get your nose in the tent” by sacrificing the only moral, constitutional, and legal arguments there are against the practice of abortion. You’re throwing the whole tent on the campfire.”
I agree with you 100%, however the tent is already on fire. Maybe, just maybe this throws some water on it. I wish that we got it all, but we didn’t.
The possibility of closing 76 of 80 abortion clinics is a start.
But EV gets ever so much more attention by being this way.
:o)
Or what woman, if she has ten silver coins and loses one coin, does not light a lamp and sweep the house and search carefully until she finds it? When she has found it, she calls together her friends and neighbors, saying, Rejoice with me, for I have found the coin which I had lost! In the same way, I tell you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.
Luke 15:4-10I think it is a safe bet to save those 20+ weeks and older. And then 19 weeks, and then 18 weeks, and on until all the unborn are protected at conception.
We can be joyous at saving those we can now and continue to work to save the rest.
Your reasoning is like that of a man upon dropping a $5 bill in a porta-john throws his Rolex in the hole too because it isn't good enough to reach in the muck over just $5.
A federal judge recently overturned the Wisconsin pro-life statute the same day it was signed.
It was identical to the Texas 20-week statute.
Oddly, twelve other states already have such a law in place -- and SCOTUS approved of the first one (Nebraska).
It's still necessary for any "infringement" on "the right to murder your baby" to run the pro-abort legal gauntlet, however.
Before you get all huffy,here is the deal.
If they pass the law you want a federal judge will throw it out the minuite Perry signs it. Then it's back to square ONE,and ALL the unborn chidren will be sacrificed on the alter of abortion.
he wants the state of TX to defy the federal courts ... which is fine ... but the followers of A.L.L. are not willing to be active in state government to see such an action take place. Easy chair quarterbacks of A.L.L.
You pretty much nailed it. There is a whole faction in this state (Iowa). They get up on soap boxes and scream about how every bill is not perfect, to create a Marxist action/reaction scenario and get a following. Yet they never accomplish a damn thing except get money and attention from it. It’s quite the racket.
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.