Hunter Introduces "right To Life Act"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lisa4Catholics
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lisa4Catholics

Guest
Washington, D.C. – Congressman Duncan Hunter (CA-52) yesterday introduced “The Right to Life Act of 2003” in the U.S. House of Representatives. This legislation, H.R. 579, would provide constitutional protection to all unborn children from the moment of conception. Below is Congressman Hunter’s introductory statement for this important legislation:

HON. DUNCAN HUNTER OF CALIFORNIA

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 5, 2003


"Today I am introducing legislation that, if passed, will once and for all protect our unborn children from harm. Over 1.3 million abortions are performed in the United States each year and over 38 million have been performed since abortion was legalized in 1973. This is a national tragedy. It is the duty of all Americans to protect our children - born and unborn. This bill, the Right to Life Act, would provide blanket protection to all unborn children from the moment of conception.

**"In 1973, the United States Supreme Court, in the landmark case of Roe v. Wade, refused to determine when human life begins and therefore found nothing to indicate that the unborn are persons protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. In the decision, however, the Court did concede that, “If the suggestion of personhood is established, the appellants’ case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment.” Considering Congress has the constitutional authority to uphold the Fourteenth Amendment, coupled by the fact that the Court admitted that if personhood were to be established, the unborn would be protected, it can be concluded that we have the authority to determine when life begins. **

"The Right to Life Act does what the Supreme Court refused to do in Roe v. Wade and recognizes the personhood of the unborn for the purpose of enforcing four important provisions in the Constitution: (1) Sec. 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibiting states from depriving any person of life; (2) Sec. 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment providing Congress the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provision of this amendment; (3) the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment, which concurrently prohibits the federal government from depriving any person of life; and (4) Article I, Section 8, giving Congress the power to make laws necessary and proper to enforce all powers in the Constitution.

"This legislation will protect millions of future children by prohibiting any state or federal law that denies the personhood of the unborn, thereby effectively overturning Roe v. Wade. I firmly believe that life begins at conception and that the preborn child deserves all the rights and protections afforded an American citizen. This measure will recognize the unborn child as a human being and protect the fetus from harm . The Right to Life Act will finally put our unborn children on the same legal footing as all other persons. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this important effort.

house.gov/hunter/righttolife03.html
 
Now all we need is two-thirds yes vote in both houses of congress, presidental approval, and four-fifths yes vote of the states. While I believe the states are doable I don’t believe this will receive any support from the Democrats as it will be a straight party line vote.

“For God all things are possible”
 
Vatican II:
Now all we need is two-thirds yes vote in both houses of congress, presidental approval, and four-fifths yes vote of the states. While I believe the states are doable I don’t believe this will receive any support from the Democrats as it will be a straight party line vote.

“For God all things are possible”
Vatican II:

He’s calling it the “Right to Life ACT” not the “Right to Life AMENDMENT”, so I don’t think he does.

He only needs a Supreme Court which would uphold the Law and Overturn Roe v. Wade based on 1) The Right to Life overrides the Right to Privacy (Hierarchy of Rights), and 2) Stare Decisis does not apply when considering a Law passed by Congress to remedy a decision that was “wrongly decided” (The Role of an Independent Judiciary in a Constitutional framework).

The Democrats still will oppose it, since they rely on Pro-Abortion groups for much of their funding and most of the activists who work their phones and their precincts.

Just pray that the Republicans (and a few Democrats) have the courage to do the right thing and vote for this Act.

In Christ, Michael
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top