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

To: Dead Corpse
Back then, life back at birth. It's why they didn't fill out a "life" certificate, but a "birth" certificate.

You'd need an AMENDMENT to extend legal protections to the unborn.

You're laying out what is essentially a pro-choice position. Which is no surprise. That's where the Paul ideology ultimately leaves you if you try to defend it.

But no, you'd rather fight against a viable approach and continue to allow abortions on demand.

The Paul position is the Gerald R. Ford position, in detail. Over 37 years, that is the position that has proven not to be viable. No surprise, since it is not moral or constitutional, and it gives every politician political cover for inaction.

64 posted on 05/19/2010 12:51:10 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (There is no right to do wrong. Those who claim there is destroy the foundations of true liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]


To: EternalVigilance
You're laying out what is essentially a pro-choice position.

By purposing a "life begins at conception" Amendment? Only in your bizzaro world. :-\

66 posted on 05/19/2010 1:21:34 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (III, Alarm and Muster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

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