0 votes

Ron Paul H.R. 2533: Sanctity of Life Act; update

There should be many more co-sponsors of this bill.

now with 2 co-sponsors
Roscoe Bartlett [R-MD6]
Scott Garrett [R-NJ5]

H.R. 2533:

Sanctity of Life Act of 2009
111th Congress

To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception, and for other purposes.

Summary:

Sanctity of Life Act of 2009 - Deems human life to exist from conception, without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency and requires that the term "person" include all such human life. Recognizes that each state has authority to protect the lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that state . Amends the federal judicial code to remove Supreme Court and district court jurisdiction to review cases arising out of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or practice, or any act interpreting such a measure, on the grounds that such measure: (1) protects the rights of human persons between conception and birth; or (2) prohibits, limits, or regulates the performance of abortions or the provision of public funds, facilities, personnel, or other assistance for abortions. Makes this Act and the amendments made by this Act applicable to any case pending on, or commenced on or after, the date of enactment.

Full Text:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-2533




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

WARNING

THIS ARTICLE IS BEING USED IN AN OFF-SITE EFFORT TO DEFAME RON PAUL.

-quiet engineer

I support it

Because the right to abortion is ultimately protected by the right to consent, and the justification is protected by the right to privacy.

A human from conception

If life begins at conception, then would any child conceived in America have the right to later obtain his US citizenship even if he was born in another country? As I see it, this would be the case since the unborn child was first deemed a "person" in the USA

No.

I don't doubt that Dr. Paul considers the born children of illegal immigrations to be alive or to be people, but still wants to repeal the 14th amendment (or at least the citizenship clause), which would take the US back to other and/or previously-existing standards for US citizenship and obviate birthright citizenship. They would still have to be the child of US citizens and meet other requirements as applicable.

Recognizing that someone is alive doesn't have much to do with their status as a citizen of this nation one way or the other.

this bill is 2 years old

and at the time RP also had a proposal to end birthright citizenship(anchor babies), so that wouldn't be a problem.

Bump

for Truth and Action. Upon the first unalienable right, hang all the rest.

thanks, Doc!

but what would the republicans do

if abortion was illegal? Oh my gosh they might be held accountable. This is the end. Oh wait they will never let this pass never mind false alarm.

So sad that Dr. Paul is not wiser than this

Does he have the plans outlined for making sure women disclose when they have had sex so they may report to the state for pregnancy testing?

Abortion: If my baby is hungry, or needs its diaper changed, or needs clothes, are you responsible to come care for my baby? Of course not. I am responsible for my children. You are responsible for yours. Why do you think the fact that you are responsible for my “unborn” children? You have fallen for a divide and conquer tactic if you believe you have some responsibility for or right over me or my unborn children. It is no coincidence that every time Libertarians and Conservatives begin to unite, “abortion” is trotted out to split them. It is probably impossible, I know I have tried to explain this over and over and have not gotten anywhere. If this issue can keep “right” and “more right” split, how will we ever find unity with the “left?” Yes, unity with the “left” means we have finally conquered ignorance, and identified who our neighbors are and who our enemies are. AFTER we kick the banksters out of our lives, you may resume hassling your neighbors if you feel you must, but for now, Dr. Paul and everyone who is falling for this divide and conquer tactic REALLY need to let this go.

Truth exists, and it deserves to be cherished.

You miss the point as well as beg the question!

The simple result of this Act is to remove the Federal government from it's unconstitutional role of facilitating by provision, the death of unborn... an obvious inconsistency with law once such an Act becomes law!

On the other hand, if the states in fulfilling their rights under the 10th amendment, choose by virtue of their respective consensus, to adopt a differing position for their respective state, notwithstanding the inability to fund as a socialist state, it would appear it might be within their constitutional prerogative to so adopt a differing view.

Always keep in mind that, though a bill or act put forward by Paul may reflect a personal and moral position, he nevertheless always focuses the subject matter directly at the constitutionally prohibitive aspect, leaving the states to decide for themselves under their appropriate mandates.

Many among the electorate confuse addressing moral or criminal issues with the limiting Article I, Section 8 duties proscribed, limiting and separating Congress from the State legislatures. Such ignorance and confusion has resulted over time in the chaos growing today, and the daunting task of education required to delineate and re-acquaint voters with fundamental truths, it's absence, and the corresponding consequences.

You are correct, but I think

You are correct, but I think many others would read this wrong, and not see that it removes federal jurisdiction. I hope they can understand this. Ron is also PRO the morning after pill because in the first day one can not truly know if conception has occurred or not. People need to take more responsibility for their family and sexual conduct FOR SURE. I will go a step further. If we do help take care of an unwed woman who can not afford it and has a child, and does not put it up for adoption, then if she has another one she should lose the money for the first.

SteveMT's picture

Ron Paul has delivered 4,000 babies. I do not believe he ever..

aborted any.

The abortion rate as is the teen pregnancy rate in Europe are both very low, much lower than the States.
Why? That is the area to improve upon....prevention.

http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/index.php?option=com_conten...

gov't instituted to protect rights

Do you agree the founding fathers wrote that government is instituted to protect the rights of the people?

Should government protect the right of people to live their life without being murdered?