If the Pauls are willing to allow the States to deny due process for the unborn (whom they agree are persons), then the states can deny due process for the elderly, the sick, or anyone for that matter. Why not allow the states to legalize slavery, take away our gun rights, or remove free speech? Why not let the states decide on all our unalienable rights of Life, Liberty and Property?
Judge Blackmun had the sense to say in the Roe v. Wade ruling, that if the unborn are persons they have constitutional rights. Blackmun said they are not persons and thus his decision. However, the Pauls position is WORSE than Judge Blackmun's by saying the unborn are persons but the states can decide on the right of due process. This is not a constitutional position.
The Pauls position is not one of being pro-life. Their other libertarian positions would not only allow states to decide on abortion but on a whole list of other social issues. Ron Paul is on record as supporting states' power to legalize narcotics for example. The Pauls' positions are dangerous to the moral foundation of this country.
The Pauls' positions are also dangerous to the defense of our great Nation. They support closure of Guantanamo Bay and having the terrorists stand trial in America. They also support shutting down military bases around the world. We can't show this kind of weakness while in a war on terror.
I am using every resource God has provided me to carry my message forward. American life and our country are at risk. We must have a TRUE Ronald Reagan Conservative to stand strong in Washington.
I will not give ground!
Best Regards,
Bill
UPDATE: Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life Act 'Pro-Abortion' Says Judie Brown, President of American Life League
Please support Bill Johnson for US Senate
Comments (12)
October 18, 2009 5:18 PM
Ron Paul and Rand Paul are pro-life. They merely want to the states to create laws on abortion, just like the states create laws on murder.
October 18, 2009 5:59 PM
Johnson seems not to realize that the Constitution already specifically disallows slavery. He also doesn't seem to understand the 10th Amendment.
It's pretty obvious that Johnson is just a shill for Grayson.
October 18, 2009 9:06 PM
It is precisely because the federal Constitution covers the babies that this must NOT be sent back to the states as Rand Paul suggests. Saying that the child is a "person" and, at the very same time, letting states have authority on the issue is pro-abortion.
See here: Ron Paul's 'Sanctity of Life' Act is 'Pro-Abortion' says Judie Brown, American Life League
October 18, 2009 9:17 PM
The federal government also has laws against murder. The 14th amendment says that NO STATE shall deny any "person" of the right to life. The legislation says that an unborn child is a "person" and that states have authority on the matter. It is, therefore, unConstitutional. If you care to argue that states couldn't appeal this act of Congress, how can you call it a states' rights bill? Fact is, you can't. This bill says the unborn are "persons" and that gives authority to states on the matter. The 14th amendment prohibits that. No state can take from any "person" the "right to life". Rand Paul supporters have a lot of nerve saying (1) this is a pro-life bill when it says states can have authority on killing those the bill defines as "persons", (2) calling this a states' rights bill while insisting states can't appeal this to the Supreme Court and (3) murder isn't a federal issue when the 14th amendment clearly outlaws it. I suggest that Rand Paul supporters are just spewing talking points as it is clear they have no idea what they are talking about on this issue.
See here: Ron Paul's 'Sanctity of Life' Act is Pro-Abortion, says Judie Brown
October 22, 2009 10:53 AM
When the issue is finally in the states hands, as Rand and Ron would like, we can finally have a say on the issue. Me and you voting to make abortion illegal in our own states would make this a pro-life bill and save lives. What is the alternative? What we have now is half the country against the other half. This solution can save many lives and help our nation take its first steps towards a decent society. The federal gov't cannot take a stand because it is too big and our politicians have no backbone or decency. By giving each state it's own vote on the issue would also allow all of us to figure out who's pro-murder. The argument that Rand Paul's position is WORSE than Judge Blackmun is skewed and disinformation.
October 22, 2009 11:05 AM
Although you are in Texas, I'm making an exception in your case regarding my rule that only those with Ky IP addresses may comment....because I can see you've spent some time reading the blog and you are asking a question. Sir, the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution FORBIDS states from denying anyone life without due process. Since babies do not commit crimes, it is unConstitutional for states to allow abortion. Now, if an unborn baby commits a horrible crime, states may decide to authorize that baby's death. But babies don't commit crimes. States have NO AUTHORITY to allow "persons" to be murdered. ZERO. It's unConstitutional.
October 22, 2009 11:05 AM
Although you are in Texas, I'm making an exception in your case regarding my rule that only those with Ky IP addresses may comment....because I can see you've spent some time reading the blog and you are asking a question. Sir, the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution FORBIDS states from denying anyone life without due process. Since babies do not commit crimes, it is unConstitutional for states to allow abortion. Now, if an unborn baby commits a horrible crime, states may decide to authorize that baby's death. But babies don't commit crimes. States have NO AUTHORITY to allow "persons" to be murdered. ZERO. It's unConstitutional.
October 22, 2009 11:08 AM
And the reason that it is worse than Blackmun's is that Blackmun didn't think they are "persons". This legislation says they are "persons" AND THAT STATES can authorize their murder. That is how it is worse than Blackmun's position. Your heart may be in the right place, but this bill is a PRO-ABORTION (not even merely pro-"choice") bill.......and Rand Paul supports it by his own admission.
October 22, 2009 11:14 AM
One other thing we must accept is that abortion is going to happen whether there is a state law against it or not. Another point is that if it's illegal in one state then someone trying to get an abortion would go to another state where it is legal and have it done there. This is very true, but we must look at the bigger picture. Right now abortion is not illegal anywhere. By having the states vote to make abortion illegal we can at least know where we stand in this fight. To have some states ban abortions is a huge step in the right direction and better than we have it now. This is not the end, but a starting point. Rand Paul is right. Let us do something, instead of sit around and wish for a better world.
October 22, 2009 11:25 AM
Sir, no matter how much you want to pretty it up, you're putting lipstick on a pig. The Fourteenth Amendment forbids states from deciding whether or not "persons" may live or die. If you think it's okay to give states that kind of authority on the right to life of "persons" in order to save some babies in Kentucky, you are either insane or you are blinded by your love for your candidate.....or both. It's unConstitutional....and furthermore, it's evil.
October 23, 2009 8:56 AM
Graas,
You're right.The constitution is the highest law in the land,but how well is that working out for us?It isn't. Though you make a good point, it has already failed.I know that if your point were true abortion would be murder.If you look at how congress and the administration in power,whether it be Democrat or Republican,have undermined the constitution for profit or for political power in all aspects of the economy and in American's lives socially,you can see that this battle cannot be won this way.
October 23, 2009 10:22 AM
I"ve allowed you to post a comment despite your being in Texas because you asked an honest question and you had spent some time on the pages in question. Now you are saying the Constitution isn't working out for us because politicians have undermined it, so we have to ignore it to and do something different. Some would call this treason. No further comments from you will be approved in regard to the Senate race.
Post a Comment
Comment Moderation Policy
Comments are moderated.