Amash explains his position on controversial bills on his facebook page

[sailingaway]

I know those here are aware of it, but it is a current topic on twitter:

Justin Amash ‏@repjustinamash
@amyjaynehawkins Yes. Please see my Facebook Page. This is a hate-crime bill with a pro-life message. I support the message, not the bill.

 

[Spoa]

This is a good example, where I respectfully disagree with Congressman Amash, but I'm not going to go crazy over this one vote. 1) It would have failed regardless of even if he voted yes. 2) while I disagree with his final vote, I can understand the point he is making.

I appreciate him explaining his vote...even though I disagree with it, it's nice to know he is pro-life. When I first saw the vote, I thought Justin had started supporting abortion, but after reading his post, I can say that I remain a supporter of him! I hope he will continue to lead the pro life fight, just like he always has. I hope he will be a more outspoken supporter for the Pain Capable Act, which he has cosponsored. Thank you Rep Amash! (by the way, does anyone know if Ron Paul voted against the bill for the same reasons...I kind of wish he would post explanations on facebook too...it might clear up some misunderstanding!) I hope reps. Paul and Amash will continue their support for pro life values!

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

This is a good example, where I respectfully disagree with Congressman Amash, but I'm not going to go crazy over this one vote. 1) It would have failed regardless of even if he voted yes. 2) while I disagree with his final vote, I can understand the point he is making.

I appreciate him explaining his vote...even though I disagree with it, it's nice to know he is pro-life. When I first saw the vote, I thought Justin had started supporting abortion, but after reading his post, I can say that I remain a supporter of him! I hope he will continue to lead the pro life fight, just like he always has. I hope he will be a more outspoken supporter for the Pain Capable Act, which he has cosponsored. Thank you Rep Amash! (by the way, does anyone know if Ron Paul voted against the bill for the same reasons...I kind of wish he would post explanations on facebook too...it might clear up some misunderstanding!) I hope reps. Paul and Amash will continue their support for pro life values!

Ron also voted against this bill. He does the same thing with all thought crime bills, including transporting minors across state lines for abortion bills.

 

[1836]

Big supporter of Amash but pretty strongly disagree with him here.

 

[EBounding]

The bill was lousy. It does nothing to protect the unborn. It accepts the premise that Roe v. Wade is valid. It undermines the pro-life movement by accepting that the motives for some abortions are worse than others. It's a "hate-crime" bill in disguise. To top it all off, the Republican leadership had no intention of passing this bill since they suspended the rules which requires a 2/3 vote. All they wanted to do is use the pro-life base against Obama, and provide political cover for RINO Republicans who couldn't care less about abortion.

 

[Spoa]

I still disagree with Rep. Amash on this vote, but I'm thankful he reiterated his support for the pro-life movement. Here's his recent post on Facebook concerning life:

These are the pro-life bills/amendments I have voted for this term:

H R 3, No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act (cosponsor):
http://facebook.com/repjustinamash/posts/201808683191879

King of IA Amendment 2 to H R 2112:
http://facebook.com/repjustinamash/posts/130743267007096

H R 358, Protect Life Act (cosponsor):
http://facebook.com/repjustinamash/posts/186379334774895

This is a pro-life bill I am authoring:

District of Columbia Respect for Life and Conscience Act of 2012:
Requires minors in DC to receive their parents' consent before having an abortion, prohibits non-doctors from performing abortions, and provides conscience protections for individuals and health care facilities in DC that refuse to perform abortions.

These are additional pro-life bills I have cosponsored:

H R 217, Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act:
Prohibits all funds from Title X (reproductive and family health funds) of the Public Health Service Act from going to any entity that performs abortions.

H R 361, Abortion Non-Discrimination Act of 2011:
Prohibits government entities from discriminating against organizations that refuse to perform abortions.

H R 3803, District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act:
Bans abortions in DC if the baby is 20 weeks old or older.

Send Rep. Amash a thank you for co-sponsoring these pro-life bills and voting correctly on other pro-life legislation. I'm hopeful that there may be a vote on a few of these bills soon!

 

[RPforPrez.]

I applaud Justin for standing by his own beliefs, even though he knows it could get controversial.
After all, its only a few days after HR 4133. I hope anyone who has a problem with his vote acts respectfully, and treats him equally as he would Ron Paul (as he also voted on the bill)

 

[angelatc]

The bill was lousy. It does nothing to protect the unborn. It accepts the premise that Roe v. Wade is valid.

I think it contradicts Roe-v-Wade. Previously, women were allowed to have abortions for any ol' reason they wanted. Roe-v-Wade is based only on a right to privacy. Now they're saying that it's ok to kill a fetus if you don't know the sex, or if the baby is handicapped, but not if you wanted a girl.

 

[EBounding]

I think it contradicts Roe-v-Wade. Previously, women were allowed to have abortions for any ol' reason they wanted. Roe-v-Wade is based only on a right to privacy. Now they're saying that it's ok to kill a fetus if you don't know the sex, or if the baby is handicapped, but not if you wanted a girl.

That's a good point. What I was trying to say is that the bill "tweaks" Roe-v-Wade instead of rejecting it completely. It accepts that women have a right to privacy to kill their baby, unless they intend to do it for sex selection purposes. That's very damaging to the pro-life cause and unfortunately most conservatives don't see it.

 

[Zach Vega]

Amash has a point. Instead of this bill, why not overturn Roe v. Wade?

 

[Spoa]

Amash has a point. Instead of this bill, why not overturn Roe v. Wade?

REVERSING Roe v. Wade should be the goal of every pro-lifer (Remember, nobody can overturn a court decision). Unfortunately, a bill that simply overturns Roe v. Wade is impossible. Congress does not have the authority to overturn court decisions. A bill that is simply passed by congress that overturns Roe v. Wade could easily be challenged by any pro-abortion group. The Supreme Court could rule that the bill is unconstitutional and abortion simply continues in our nation. More babies are killed. Just look at what happened to the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. In Gonzales vs. Carhart, the Supreme Court luckily ruled that the law was unconstitutional by a 5-4 margin. Had there been one more pro-abortion judge on the bench, the bill could have easily been overturned and rule unconstitutional. So simply passing a bill overturning Roe v. Wade is not the answer because the Supreme Court could simply strike it down as unconstitutional.

The only answer to this problem is a constitutional amendment defining life as beginning at conception. But that is a long process, requring 2/3 of the House, 66 votes in the Senate, and at least 3/4 of the states must approve the amendment. This is the only way to stop the supreme court from overturning a pro-life protection.