Replies

You are incorrect. I took BlackElk's post that he wants a federal bill, not an amendment.

FYI you are even more incorrect about Ron Paul not supporting a Pro Life amendment.

I have become increasingly concerned over the years that the pro-life movement I so strongly support is getting further off track, both politically and morally. I sponsored the original pro-life amendment, which used a constitutional approach to solve the crisis of federalization of abortion law by the courts. The pro-life movement was with me and had my full support and admiration.

Foot in mouth?

Foot in mouth?

Not in the least, the full quote

I have become increasingly concerned over the years that the pro-life movement I so strongly support is getting further off track, both politically and morally. I sponsored the original pro-life amendment, which used a constitutional approach to solve the crisis of federalization of abortion law by the courts. The pro-life movement was with me and had my full support and admiration.

I may or may not waste my time looking up his proposed amendment, but my recollection is that it returned the issue to the states, it did not define life as beginning at conception, the platform position. That's further supported by your link when Paul says.

Given these dilemmas, what should those of us in the pro-life community do? First, we must return to constitutional principles and proclaim them proudly. We must take a principled approach that recognizes both moral and political principles, and accepts the close relationship between them. Legislatively, we should focus our efforts on building support to overturn Roe v. Wade. Ideally this would be done in a fashion that allows states to again ban or regulate abortion. State legislatures have always had proper jurisdiction over issues like abortion and cloning; the pro-life movement should recognize that jurisdiction and not encroach upon it. The alternative is an outright federal ban on abortion, done properly via a constitutional amendment that does no violence to our way of government.

Clearly he prefers the authority rest with the state, something I'm not opposed to, but which I recognize is not a strong pro-life position.

And thanks for clarifying the state line issue.

Pro-life forces have worked for the passage of bills that disregard the federal system, such as the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, the federal cloning ban, and the Child Custody Protection Act. Each of these bills rested on specious constitutional grounds and undermined the federalism our Founders recognized and intended as the greatest protection of our most precious rights.

Banning the transport of a minor without parential permission across state lines to sell her an abortion is unconstitutional?

The Founders would have agreed.

As a Paul supporter, doesn't that embarass you?

Be honest, advocate the action.

rb22982: I want SCOTUS to take institutional responsibility for the American Holocaust it created and to establish as overriding federal law that personhood, for 14th Amendment purposes, begins at conception. Abortion has been crammed down America's collective throat for thirty-five years. Time to return the favor. If Congress wants to pass legislation utterly consistent, that is nice but too easily reversible. We will get that when Sandra Day O'Kennedy and John Paul Stevens and Swish Souter and Ruth Buzzi Ginsberg are replaced by actually civilized human beings. As the FF intended, amending the constitution is a very near insurmountable task. On the subject of abortion, is not going to happen unless we are about to get something better.

If (not that this could happen in a zillion millenia) paleoPaulie somehow got his skeevie treasonous little paws on the office of POTUS, he would probably be too busy applying to potential SCOTUS justices litmus tests on the "constitutionality" of publicly owned (therefore "socialist") streets, lighthouses, national parks, Air Force bases, Marine Corps facilities, any weapons systems more modern than the blunderbuss, standing Army and Navy, West Point, Annapolis and other things inconsistent with the idiosyncratic ideology of the very late Lysander Spooner to remember to ask about abortion and even then he will not seek the SCOTUS remedy of personhood.