26 votes

Rand Paul: New Personhood Law Will End Abortion ‘Once And For All’

U.S. Senator Rand Paul, a Tea Party favorite, is advocating for Congress to make a new law, a “personhood” law, called the Life at Conception Act,” establishing that human life begins at conception, and extending the 14th Amendment to all fetuses.

Paul in the audio message calls law “legal mumbo jumbo,” yet tells supporters, “we in Congress have the right to legally define when life begins,” regardless of what the truth is.

http://youtu.be/9-0qPVwKRdc

http://thenewcivilrightsm...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Agree.

Nothing magical happens when a baby passed through the birth canal. It is a person from conception.
grant

So a woman has an abortion

She is put in jail?

A person is innocent until

A person is innocent until proven guilty, but if a murderer is convicted of murder, it is in the court's hands to decide upon a sentence.

At least 50 MILLION babies have been murdered in this country and you are worried about how a potential murderer might be potentially charged?

Why is the life of a woman any more important than a life of a baby?

Are not all men created equal?
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transc...
"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."

...

So you would put those women in jail?

I know what you are saying, but what are you proposing here? If you are in favor of prosecution and prison, then just say it.

I am proposing that any

I am proposing that any person is innocent until proven guilty by a jury of peers.

So how would you catch these women?

Don't you think we would need additional law enforcement for all this?

I am not going to "catch" anyone

Who catches late term abortions now? What is done? I don't know. But that does not mean that we have to put up with the slaughter of preborn children to the tune of 50 million.

Here is a link to someone who says it better than I and it appears that they have experience as well: http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/2847780

I have to get some sleep. I am sorry to bug out on you.

So we get to put 50 million women in jail/prosecute them?

Well, probably less, as some women are probably repeat offenders.

I appreciate your passion, I just don't know what the practical aspects of enforcing what you are aiming for will look like.

No

No one is talking about putting 50 million women in jail. As far as I know they did not break the law.

What is being talked about is bringing the courts into line with science. The original argument by the supreme court in a split ruling was that they could not determine when life began and that science would have to do that. Science has now determined that life begins at conception.

Do you suggest another 50 million slaughtered human lives on American soil without trial or representation because that is exactly what has taken place in the last 40 years. There is no reason to have the floodgates of innocent murder open. Men and women have functioning brains and can use them to be responsible for their actions. People are flying to China and Russia and other places around the world to adopt children while we are throwing babies in buckets to die because someone has determined that the ocnvenience of their life is more important than another life.

Just because you and I made it safely out of our mother's womb does not give us the right to pronounce a death sentence upon the preborn because of convenience.

No one is saying that all abortion will be stopped. People will do what people will do, but that does not mean that we cannot own up to the fact that what is being done is murder and give the pendulum a chance to perhaps swing back back to the middle.

...

The most basic purpose of government is to protect life

So abortion should be illegal to protect the lives of the unborn. It's that simple.

“It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till." -J.R.R. Tolkien

Anything that is "that simple" never is

First of all, how in the world is this the responsibility of the Federal Government?

This is not just big government, it is HUGE government. It is big brother government.

allegory - ˈalɪg(ə)ri/ - noun - 1. a story, poem, or picture which can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one.

The Declaration of Independence is a start

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."

Liberty Related Question Here

Is the basic purpose of government to protect life or is it to protect liberty? I don't know. I am asking.

If in reality a fertilized

If in reality a fertilized ovum is not a human being rather it is simply a microscopic cell which contains the chromosomes which are capable of causing the creation of a human being if nurtured properly, that is, it is a POTENTIAL HUMAN BEING not an actual human being.

So the fertilized ovum has no "rights" whereas the pregnant woman does have the rights of a human being so there is no conflict of interest. It is her right to life and liberty and pursuit of happiness that counts.

Get it straight people, there is a distinction between a potential human being and an actual human being.

If you persist in the error of granting "rights" to a potential human, all you accomplish is the irrational violation of the rights of an actual human being, the pregnant woman whose choice it is to decide for herself whether to continue to nurture or to terminate the potential human being within her.

I have a grandson and I was there moments after he was born. I adore him but I realize that his mother and father, my son and daughter in law chose to bring him into existence.

You guys are making a mistake and your assertions are not reasonable. You are in the same category as those irrational Senators who made the ridiculous ignorant remarks.

A microscopic ovum is not a "person" any more than an acorn is an oak tree.

You should be defending a woman's right to choose not advocating that she be punished for doing what it is only her right to decide to do.

No Man's need constitutes an obligation on the part of another man to fulfill that need.

Don't change the topic

You said: "Get it straight people, there is a distinction between a potential human being and an actual human being."

We are talking about Life beginning at conception. Your argument about "potential human being" is the argument being used to advocate post birth abortions of 2 year olds.

If you persist in the error of determining who is human, and who is a potential human you are advocating euthanasia.

Ron Paul said "Unless we understand…we must protect life, we cannot protect liberty."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkAsLPrnJGc&feature=player_em...

If you do not protect life you will not be able to protect your own life. You are forfeiting your own Liberty

.

no you are wrong.

If a pregnant woman is hit by a drunk driver at ANY stage of her pregnancy and loses her fetus, the law recognizes the life the drunk took and will punish him for murder/vehicular homicide/dui manslaughter.
there is all ready precedent set that even at 2 days old, if fetus life is lost due to ob gyn mistake or drunk driver, domestic abuse etc etc, that individual that caused the death is punished for TAKING A LIFE.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

That is not true

Show me the evidence.

What then about all the miscarriages that take place daily? Should women be punished for not being careful?

How about a federal government program to prevent miscarriages?

allegory - ˈalɪg(ə)ri/ - noun - 1. a story, poem, or picture which can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one.

HERE is the evidence

There is more evidence too. Shouldn't take long to find it. It didn't take long to find this. You obviously don't want to be bothered with facts.

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/06/25/texas-drunk-driver-faces-...

What is sad is that the legislature did not have the guts to include negligence of the mother or abortion, both of which were specifically excluded from the law.

Theres no mens rea with

Theres no mens rea with miscarriages and abortions caused by birth control. The intent to harm is critical for criminal prosecution.

"You must be frank with the world; frankness is the child of honesty and courage...Never do anything wrong to make a friend or keep one...Above all do not appear to others what you are not" - Robert E. Lee, CSA

It's not an accident when you shove a penis in a vagina.

Accidents are one thing.. Ignoring the consequences and then refusing to take responsibility and stand accountable for your actions is another.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

.

Life then liberty then our pursuit of happiness.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

Thank you for taking me back to Liberty Kindergarten!

The Declaration of Independence:

"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."

There is no "then" in those words.

:)

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

As in IF, then

?

"Life then liberty then our pursuit of happiness."

he said that

You then quoted the paragraph of the original words

and I pointed out the obvious. :)

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

.

The libs here at the DP, STILL dont get it!
Dr. Paul has laid out his entire platform and they choose to ignore his most important philosophy of gvt.
and that is, any gvt of free people should protect innocent life wherever it may be found. If gvt is to protect liberty- then they MUST protect life first.
without a right to life, there can be no right to liberty.

Thats why libs here are now calling it "the liberty movement"!!!!
They cant wait to change Dr. Pauls message, by changing the name of The movement.
just like "global cooling" became "global warming" and now that the planet is cooling AGAIN, they are calling it "climate change"!lol

oh the inner workings of a lib mind.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

"any gvt of free people

"any gvt of free people should protect innocent life wherever it may be found. If gvt is to protect liberty- then they MUST protect life first.
without a right to life, there can be no right to liberty."

I will assume that you mean only human life must be protected.
And how do you define human? What about mutants?

And if government is protecting life first, then it naturally must provide lifesaving and life-prolonging care to absolutely everyone. So, government must provide the best available medical care to every human being to avoid death at all cost.
What if someone is in so much agony that they desire death? Too bad, loser. We are keeping you alive because we are protecting human life at all cost! Liberty over yourself? Pshhhh....that's a distant second priority.

God, I F-ing hate the stupid worthless abortion debate.

“If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

What about mutants?

You have proven yourself an imbecile as mutants do not exist except for in comic books.

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

Forgive my ignorance, but was the movement called to start with?

I didn't find Ron Paul till 2012 so I don't know what the movement was called before.

.

it went from "the R3volution" to "the tea party" and libs dont like the tea parties so they needed something else.
Now, after garytardfest, to the libs involved- it became the "liberty movement" so they could leave 1/2 of pauls philosophies behind.
notice no more mention of "end the fed" and "intervention is OK, someimes!!"
"foreign aid is meant for 3rd world countries who need it, we must help them" or the Prolife stand to pro choice is they aim for... etc etc they are trying to change the message and then they infect Pauls movement, like always. We have seen it all before.

Paul supporters would be smart to expunge the libs among us.
They do not seek Pauls message, they seek to change parts of it.
and will most certainly be hillary supporters over rand in 2016.
many here among us even now, would vote for and support hitlery over rand any day. They use rands endorsement of romney as an excuse but refuse to see hitlery endorsed obama. They use rands endorsement ad an excuse but truth be told, Ron Paul would be the ONLY republican they would ever hold their nose and vote for even though it kills them Ron is a republican. They conveniently forget this and when reminded of it they try and reword or change his movement.
they wont do it but they try and always have.
Paul means death to the lib/welfare movement and they are well aware of it. no different then the neocons who realize Paul means death to the warfare/authoritarian movement

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016