Comment: Nah, He is following in the Good Dr's Footsteps!

Ron Paul sponsored Sanctity of Life Acts in 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 at the Federal Level.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctity_of_Life_Act
“The Sanctity of Life Act would have defined human life and legal personhood (specifically, natural personhood) as beginning at conception,[7][8] "without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency."[9] By contrast, the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 amended 1 U.S.C. § 8 to provide that legal personhood includes all Homo sapiens who are "born alive".[10]
Section 2(b)(2) of the Sanctity of Life Act further would have recognized that each state has authority to protect the lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that state.[11] Such legislative declarations are nonbinding statements of policy and are used by federal courts in the context of determining the intent of the legislature in legal challenges.”[

Do you understand the difference in terminology: personhood vs. beginning of life ?

The original Roe v Wade argument was that the courts did not have the technology to determine when life begins.

It is now evident thru technology that “life” begins at conception. The argument is now being moved to personhood; i.e., at what point does life qualify as personhood.

What PERSON has the right to define personhood? Whether a 2 year old has obtained personhood is now being discussed...as in Post-birth abortion.

It is a disgusting proposition even more so now that those who have deemed themselves as persons are now wanting to determine who can join their “personhood club.” Origin of life has been moved from an objective argument to one which is subjective. Subject to a myriad of litmus tests: http://www.alzheimer-europe.org/DE/Ethics/Definitions-and-ap... .

...