Posted on 02/08/2007 5:57:36 PM PST by westmichman
Thanks!
I get the feeling your stay here will be short.
Section 1. All persons born 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. 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.
Now. What is it about section 1 that Hunter's bill violates or changes? The only thing I can see about Hunter's bill that could get your knickers in a twist is that it defines 'State' as, not only the the 50 states, but also the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and all other US territories and possessions.
But for some reason, I don't think that's what you had in mind.
However, I would like it as an Amendment either way. Even though we have a right to life as declared in the Declaration of Indepedence ANYWAY (which has been referred to for Constitutional purposes in many SCOTUS proceedings, so there's precedent).
Amazing non-answer.
Rhetorical smoke and mirrors won't make you a real conservative.
Maybe a couple courses in Constitutional law and logic would?
>>>Now. What is it about section 1 that Hunter's bill violates or changes? The only thing I can see about Hunter's bill that could get your knickers in a twist is that it defines 'State' as, not only the the 50 states, but also the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and all other US territories and possessions.
I'll make an assumption here. But pharmaceutical companies have testing labs in Puerto Rico.
Wow! That's a great site! Very informative. Thanks!
Would that also include U.S. Grant funded projects outside the 50 states?
If so, that would include grant funded research on stem cells off shore, no?
"Amazing non-answer.
Rhetorical smoke and mirrors won't make you a real conservative.
Maybe a couple courses in Constitutional law and logic would?"
Look Skippy, You got you panties in a bunch saying something is wrong with the damn law. Point out what you think is wrong!
I'm starting to think Ultra Sonic 007 found the problem....if my interpretation of what he posted is correct.
D. Hunter is still looking good. This scares the RINOs.
You're welcome.
American Samoa
Canal Zone (And this is now under possession of the Chicoms, last I heard)
Guam
Midway Island
Northern Mariana Islands
Puerto Rico
U.S. Virgin Islands
These are the only US territories and possessions I can think off the top of my heads. As for the grant funding of stem cell research you mentioned...why would this bill be a problem? Wouldn't it, in fact, effectively kill embryonic stem cell research (which is a good thing)?
What do you think the bill means by possessions?
Federal or state laws?
HEAD. Not heads. Gah.
Also, for public policy issues, I would like the 10th Amendment to be employed in the case of abortion. Unfortunately, Blackmun and the other idiots on the SCOTUS seemed to forget about that for Roe v. Wade; they should've thrown the case out. They had NO JURISDICTION ON THE MATTER.
We just have to fight backwards. Hopefully we'll get to the point where either the 10th Amendment/Constitutional Amendment approach will work.
> Now. What is it about section 1 that Hunter's bill
> violates or changes?
You don't have to go any farther than the first three words: "All persons **born**...".
This Right to Life Act, if it were to become law, would be immediately aborted (excuse the phrase) by the courts. It would _have_ to be an amendment before the courts would even consider acknowledging the text.
What's worse, the game playing ballot lice who put it forward KNOW THIS to be a fact. They're yanking the chains of people who would really like to make a difference for no good reason and with no good intent.
Here's a rather lengthier critique of the same legislation from a previous session of Congress.
Unless somebody is idiot enough to claim the Constitution Party is "lib" or "pro-death", I'd appreciate the insinuation not being hurled at me.
Oh my!
This may even include China's body parts harvesting!!!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1602444/posts
Heart recipients' hospital has China death-row link
See that whole thread for links to the grant funding!!!
This bill, if I'm reading it right is dual interest. Ends abortion, ends body brokering and ends Soros Project on Death in America!!!!
OMG!!!
Go Hunter!!!!
Did I misunderstand your post 63? You said it redefines state to US territories and possessions, right?
Wouldn't possessions mean grant funded?
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.