Replies

Members of the group rallied on the capitol steps earlier this month and claimed the measure would violate women's right to basic health care.

NO, it would give babies their RIGHT to LIFE.

1 posted on 05/14/2008 5:03:25 PM PDT by wagglebee

To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; narses; 8mmMauser

2 posted on 05/14/2008 5:03:59 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

To: 230FMJ; 50mm; 69ConvertibleFirebird; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; An American In Dairyland; ...

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

3 posted on 05/14/2008 5:04:53 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

To: Lesforlife; BykrBayb; floriduh voter; 8mmMauser

4 posted on 05/14/2008 5:05:56 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

5 posted on 05/14/2008 5:22:20 PM PDT by cowdog77 (Circle the Wagons)

Pro-life advocates in Colorado are split on the idea with some favoring the proposal and others saying it would be overturned in the courts as unconstitutional...

NONSENSE!!! This is EXACTLY the way to end this abomination right now!

According to their own 1973 decree, it is the only thing that would pass as Constitutional.

Congressman Duncan Hunter’s Life at Conception Act, if passed, would define life as beginning at conception. If that happened, the Preamble, 5th, and the 14th amendments would apply to protecting the lives of the unborn. An admission made by the court in their Roe v. Wade ruling when Justice Blackmun wrote; If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment.

"This legislation ensures that the unborn are protected from abortion and further provided the same Constitutional protections provided to all Americans."

When Congressman Hunter introduced the legislation this year he had over 100 co-sponsors.

6 posted on 05/14/2008 5:29:30 PM PDT by Just A Nobody (PISSANT for President '08 - NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)

"There is currently no definition of person in the constitution."

It hasn't been that long ago that we didn't need a written definition of "person" in every document to know what it meant. The whole concept of words not having any meaning is a very recent development.

7 posted on 05/14/2008 5:52:55 PM PDT by BykrBayb (In memory of my Friend T'wit, who taught me much. Ãž)

May God bless this work!

10 posted on 05/14/2008 8:45:34 PM PDT by MountainFlower (There but by the grace of God go I.)

Yes, and won’t it be great when we can’t put pregnant women in prison because we would be unlawfully imprisoning an innocent person?

12 posted on 05/15/2008 3:36:16 PM PDT by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794