Ron Paul Abortion Question

[acejoca]

These quote's are taken directly off Ron Paul's Website....


"In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094. "

"I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn."


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/


I am just a little confused by what he wants. I always thought that he wanted to leave the deicison to the states on what to do about abortion yet he pushes for a law that would define life at conception. If that law was passed wouldnt it force that states to essiential ban abortion s=considering they would be killing a human life at that point? Thank.

 

[Noodles]

These quote's are taken directly off Ron Paul's Website....


"In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094. "

"I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn."


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/


I am just a little confused by what he wants. I always thought that he wanted to leave the deicison to the states on what to do about abortion yet he pushes for a law that would define life at conception. If that law was passed wouldnt it force that states to essiential ban abortion s=considering they would be killing a human life at that point? Thank.

I think the answer lies in the words "removing the ability of FEDERAL courts to interfere with STATE legislation". That's where Dr. Paul's argument originates. The rest just sounds good.

 

[Noodles]

But I didn't read your whole question, did I?:o

Yes, you have a point.

 

[acejoca]

why bother though

"In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094. "

Why bother to try and pass this legislation then?

 

[MusoSpuso]

These quote's are taken directly off Ron Paul's Website....


"In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094. "

"I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn."


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/


I am just a little confused by what he wants. I always thought that he wanted to leave the deicison to the states on what to do about abortion yet he pushes for a law that would define life at conception. If that law was passed wouldnt it force that states to essiential ban abortion s=considering they would be killing a human life at that point? Thank.

Creating federal legislation to "define" what human life is does not legislate whether an abortion can or cannot be done. HR 1094 is a symbolic law I believe. It's up to the states to decide whether abortions can or cannot be done.

 

[LibertyCzar]

I am just a little confused by what he wants. I always thought that he wanted to leave the deicison to the states on what to do about abortion yet he pushes for a law that would define life at conception. If that law was passed wouldnt it force that states to essiential ban abortion s=considering they would be killing a human life at that point? Thank.

If life was federally defined as beginning at conception, and the act of violence as Ron Paul calls it was to be permitted by a particular State, I guess that State would have to incorporate abortion into the criminal code, perhaps as an exception to the rule when applied to the definition of murder.

But the important thing to realize is that if you want abortion to be legal, just vote for State officials that will ensure its legality. The same goes for if you want it criminalized. Either way, State officials are elected, just as Federal officials are elected.

 

[JaylieWoW]

Creating federal legislation to "define" what human life is does not legislate whether an abortion can or cannot be done. HR 1094 is a symbolic law I believe. It's up to the states to decide whether abortions can or cannot be done.

Ok, now that makes more sense.

 

[scbissler]

If life was federally defined as beginning at conception, and the act of violence as Ron Paul calls it was to be permitted by a particular State, I guess that State would have to incorporate abortion into the criminal code, perhaps as an exception to the rule when applied to the definition of murder.

Good answer LibertyCzar, excellent way of looking at it.

 

[acejoca]

I thought when you make a federal law it overrides any state decisions and would give the fed's rights to arrest people. but even if the states are allowed to make their own decisions why bother putting the law out there anyways?

 

[dmitchell]

Doesn't the Constitution grant Congress power to punish only treason, counterfeiting, and piracy? What would be the actual effect of HR300?

 

[xcalybur]

Ron Paul believes in Liberty and rights for all and not for just a few. I think his legislation stating life starts at conception is his way of helping define when the constitution starts to protect liberty and the rights we hold so dear.

 

[CodeMonkey]

I understand where Paul is coming from, but I just was talking with a friend and he raised a good point. Does the Constitution give Congress the ability to define human life? Shouldn't this be an Amendment rather than a House Resolution?

 

[DeadheadForPaul]

This is the only vote of Dr. Paul's which actually concerns me

 

[Bradley in DC]

Dr. Paul is pro-life and believes human life begins at conception (as do I) but that it is best addressed at the state level and by legislatures rather than courts (as do I).

If a "Human Life Amendment" to the US Constitution passed both houses of Congress with the requisite 2/3 vote, I suspect Dr. Paul would sign it so that 3/4 of all states could pass it to become adopted.

Defining for FEDERAL purposes would have very little practical effect in the real world.

Taking the issue from FEDERAL courts (ie, Roe v. Wade) would return the issue to the state legislatures where it makes the most sense. Differing laws would reflect the different views according to state opinions. Over time, those laboratories would provide information on aspects to copy and emulate (or not).

 

[CodeMonkey]

Dr. Paul is pro-life and believes human life begins at conception (as do I) but that it is best addressed at the state level and by legislatures rather than courts (as do I).

If a "Human Life Amendment" to the US Constitution passed both houses of Congress with the requisite 2/3 vote, I suspect Dr. Paul would sign it so that 3/4 of all states could pass it to become adopted.

Defining for FEDERAL purposes would have very little practical effect in the real world.

Taking the issue from FEDERAL courts (ie, Roe v. Wade) would return the issue to the state legislatures where it makes the most sense. Differing laws would reflect the different views according to state opinions. Over time, those laboratories would provide information on aspects to copy and emulate (or not).

I agree with everything you said, but this wasn't a Human Life Amendment, it was a house resolution which attempted to define human life... isn't this outside the scope of federal law?

 

[BarryDonegan]

that law would limit the ability of federal courts to mandate that a fetus is not a living entity.

its purely symbolic. federal law does not have the ability to define criminal law is at relates to violence on individuals and such, that is the jurisdiction of state law, and state law enforcement.

 

[Jennifer Reynolds]

///

 

[foofighter20x]

"In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094. "

Why bother to try and pass this legislation then?

People still live inside of federally (read: Congressionally) administered jurisdictions (like DC or Puerto Rico), over which the Congrss has exclusive power to make law.

For example: Congress could outlaw abortion in WDC if they wanted.

Not to mention that Congress has a Constitutional power to make general legislation over such federally administered areas. See: Article I, Section 8, clause 17

 

[michaelwise]

My answer to the pro-choicers; Your Pattern Indicates Two Dimensional Thinking, You are not taking into account any of the other major issues.

 

[foofighter20x]

My answer to the pro-choicers; Your Pattern Indicates Two Dimensional Thinking, You are not taking into account any of the other major issues.

And those would be?