HR 1096: Sanctity of Life Act of 2011 (Ron Paul)

[FrankRep]

http://static01.mediaite.com/med/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Picture-140.png
Ron Paul, CPAC 2011 Straw Poll Winner (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/6299-ron-paul-wins-cpac-presidential-straw-vote)


H.R.1096 - Sanctity of Life Act of 2011 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-1096)

Sponsor: Ron Paul



A BILL

To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception, and for other purposes.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.


This Act may be cited as the ‘Sanctity of Life Act of 2011’.

SEC. 2. FINDING AND DECLARATION.


(a) Finding- The Congress finds that present day scientific evidence indicates a significant likelihood that actual human life exists from conception.

(b) Declaration- Upon the basis of this finding, and in the exercise of the powers of the Congress--


(1) the Congress declares that--


(A) human life shall be deemed to exist from conception, without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency; and

(B) the term ‘person’ shall include all human life as defined in subparagraph (A); and

(2) the Congress recognizes that each State has the authority to protect lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that State.

SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON APPELLATE JURISDICTION.



(a) In General- Chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:


‘Sec. 1260. Appellate jurisdiction; limitation


‘Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 1253, 1254, 1257, and 1258, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any case arising out of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, practice, or any part thereof, or arising out of any act interpreting, applying, enforcing, or effecting any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or practice, on the grounds that such statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, practice, act, or part thereof--


‘(1) protects the rights of human persons between conception and birth; or

‘(2) prohibits, limits, or regulates--


‘(A) the performance of abortions; or

‘(B) the provision of public expense of funds, facilities, personnel, or other assistance for the performance of abortions.’.

(b) Conforming Amendment- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

‘1260. Appellate jurisdiction; limitation.’.

SEC. 4. LIMITATION ON DISTRICT COURT JURISDICTION.



(a) In General- Chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:


‘Sec. 1370. Limitation on jurisdiction



‘Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the district courts shall not have jurisdiction of any case or question which the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to review under section 1260 of this title.’.

(b) Conforming Amendment- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:


‘1370. Limitation on jurisdiction.’.

SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.


This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply to any case pending on, or commenced on or after, such date of enactment.

SEC. 6. SEVERABILITY.


If any provision of this Act or the amendments made by this Act, or the application of this Act or such amendments to any person or circumstance is determined by a court to be invalid, the validity of the remainder of this Act and the amendments made by this Act and the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall not be affected by such determination.

[Feeding the Abscess]

The part of Paul's political platform where I put my fingers in my ears and go LALALALALALALALALALALALA

[Agorism]

Maybe he is thinking about Iowa.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Maybe he is thinking about Iowa.

Na, he's introduced this bill many times over the years.

[FrankRep]

Maybe he is thinking about Iowa.

Flashback:

H.R.1094 - Sanctity of Life Act of 2007 (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h1094/show)

Sponsor: Ron Paul

[FrankRep]

How many other Conservatives will step up and co-sponsor?

[Anti Federalist]

How many other Conservatives will step up and co-sponsor?

Ahahahahhaha...Oh that's rich.

[Sola_Fide]

The part of Paul's political platform where I put my fingers in my ears and go LALALALALALALALALALALALA

That's sad to hear. Especially when you think about how you are putting your fingers in your ears to try to ignore the fact that abortion mill doctors cut babies' spinal cords in half.

Anybody who tries to ignore that kind of brutality really does not understand liberty at all.

[Feeding the Abscess]

"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain."

Obviously, socialism doesn't work in this context, but the sentiment is the same.

[Wren]

Ron Paul rejects the theory of evolution and now THIS? He's lost my vote.




























(yeah right) :rolleyes:

[HardyMacia]

Paul's bill should be a constitutional amendment.

This is one of the reasons why I like Gary Johnson better than Paul. Johnson is more pragmatic about it and in line with more Americans.

[Fox McCloud]

Ron Paul rejects the theory of evolution and now THIS? He's lost my vote.

What's pathetic is back in 2007 we lost quite a few supporters when they found out he doesn't accept evolution...

[Ranger29860]

What's pathetic is back in 2007 we lost quite a few supporters when they found out he doesn't accept evolution...

It kinda was weird for me to hear the first time. That being said i really could care less what his personal belief are on scientific matters.
He does his job right and inline with the constitution i haven't seen him take one stance on anything evolution related. Until he does in a serious way he wont lose my vote.
And if anything it reinforces my faith in him since he doesn't let his religion inter fear with his policy's. As for the bill itself i'm not anywhere near qualified to make any judgments on abortion so i cant really agree of disagree with this.

[RileyE104]

What's pathetic is back in 2007 we lost quite a few supporters when they found out he doesn't accept evolution...

Liberty:

If my neighbor believes in twenty gods or no gods, it does not pick my pocket or break my leg and therefore it is no harm to me. ~ Thomas Jefferson

[MaxPower]

Maybe he is thinking about Iowa.
...This is the fourth time he's introduced this legislation in the last six years.

[MaxPower]

It kinda was weird for me to hear the first time. That being said i really could care less what his personal belief are on scientific matters.
He does his job right and inline with the constitution i haven't seen him take one stance on anything evolution related. Until he does in a serious way he wont lose my vote.
And if anything it reinforces my faith in him since he doesn't let his religion inter fear with his policy's. As for the bill itself i'm not anywhere near qualified to make any judgments on abortion so i cant really agree of disagree with this.
To be clear, here, Dr. Paul does not "reject" the theory of evolution; he has taken effectively an agnostic position on the matter. This is important because the statement that he "rejects" evolution tends to imply that he actively denies the concept and may want to push some kind of "federally-required-creationism-in-public-schools" agenda.

[Aldanga]

Off topic:

The title is somewhat misleading. Dr. Paul says that he doesn't accept evolution, but also says that he doesn't know how the Universe came about and that making such an assumption about the origins of the Universe is foolish. (It should be noted there is an edit in the video, but I cannot find the original as it's no longer on YouTube.)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw


Back on topic:

I'm glad to see Dr. Paul continue his consistency. This will only help him within the debates—if moderators even give him the chance to address this subject. :rolleyes:

[BamaAla]

How many other Conservatives will step up and co-sponsor?

My congress-critter damn well better. He's getting a call in a few hours.

[romeno182]

what about the sanctity of alive people

so will we have a sexuality police who looks after conceptions?? ridicolous you religious nuts should get a life and focus on alife people instead of trying to use collectivist force (ahh communism in RPF) on the womb of the woman

[Sola_Fide]

what about the sanctity of alive people

so will we have a sexuality police who looks after conceptions?? ridicolous you religious nuts should get a life and focus on alife people instead of trying to use collectivist force (ahh communism in RPF) on the womb of the woman



You are uninformed...bordering on ignorant.


Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the "right" of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the "property rights" of slave masters in their slaves. Moreover, by this method the State achieves a goal common to all totalitarian regimes: it sets us against each other, so that our energies are spent in the struggle between State-created classes, rather than in freeing all individuals from the State. Unlike Nazi Germany, which forcibly sent millions to the gas chambers (as well as forcing abortion and sterilization upon many more), the new regime has enlisted the assistance of millions of people to act as its agents in carrying out a program of mass murder.

-Ron Paul


According to Ron Paul, YOU are a statist and a tyrant. I agree with Ron Paul and Liberty...you don't.

You sound like those cackling ignorant hens on The View that Ron Paul had to correct and silence. Did you ever see it?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EL1BOWC3No0

[JohnEngland]

Given that this is supposedly the most pro-life congress ever, I would have thought that there would be no difficulty in passing this legislation.

[JohnEngland]

what about the sanctity of alive people

so will we have a sexuality police who looks after conceptions?? ridicolous you religious nuts should get a life and focus on alife people instead of trying to use collectivist force (ahh communism in RPF) on the womb of the woman

Focus on alive people? That's exactly what the pro-life movement specialises in! Now, flat-earthers may believe that human beings magically become human at birth, but for those of us who believe in science, human life quite obviously begins at conception.

The reason the pro-life movement is dominated by the religious (and usually Christians) is because we believe the science and, since we also believe that human life is sacred, we therefore defend human beings from their very beginning.

[robert68]

a) Finding- The Congress finds that present day scientific evidence indicates a significant likelihood that actual human life exists from conception.

What's that mean?

The great "Congress" also thinks science shows global warming is a future problem, and must be addressed with more taxes and regulations.

[robert68]

...
The reason the pro-life movement is dominated by the religious (and usually Christians) is because we believe the science and, since we also believe that human life is sacred, we therefore defend human beings from their very beginning.

Do you think science shows that zygotes have souls?

[Jeremy]

The part of Paul's political platform where I put my fingers in my ears and go LALALALALALALALALALALALA

So when do you think a human should be considered a legal person?

[Feeding the Abscess]

When it is not residing in the body of another human being.

[Sola_Fide]

When it is not residing in the body of another human being.

This is absolutely ridiculous.

The law protects babies when they are in the womb.

When Scott Peterson murdered his pregnant wife, he was charged with TWO counts of murder.

When an OBGYN is negligent in his care of an unborn baby, he is responsible for the damage he has caused the unborn baby by his negligence.

The ridiculous idea that a baby is only a baby when it is "outside the womb" is a statist, tyrannical idea which takes away rights of a certain class of people. The state cannot declare which people get the right to live. The right to live is a God-given liberty that no human institution can declare void.

[eduardo89]

How many other Conservatives will step up and co-sponsor?

Not many, they're all spineless hypocrits in Congress

[Feeding the Abscess]

This is absolutely ridiculous.

The law protects babies when they are in the womb.

When Scott Peterson murdered his pregnant wife, he was charged with TWO counts of murder.

When an OBGYN is negligent in his care of an unborn baby, he is responsible for the damage he has caused the unborn baby by his negligence.

The ridiculous idea that a baby is only a baby when it is "outside the womb" is a statist, tyrannical idea which takes away rights of a certain class of people. The state cannot declare which people get the right to live. The right to live is a God-given liberty that no human institution can declare void.

When it is concluded that life begins at conception (or at any particular point), I'm open to revisiting the issue.

[eduardo89]

When it is concluded that life begins at conception (or at any particular point), I'm open to revisiting the issue.

When there's evidence pointing that life does not begin at conception and that genetically and physically that new life is not another person I'll be willing to revisit the issue.

[erowe1]

The part of Paul's political platform where I put my fingers in my ears and go LALALALALALALALALALALALA

If you think the federal courts should be able to prevent the states from regulating abortion, then there must not be very much of his platform you do like.

[Feeding the Abscess]

If you think the federal courts should be able to prevent the states from regulating abortion, then there must not be very much of his platform you do like.

That is a vast oversimplification of what this bill is, and one can believe in decentralized power without supporting this bill.

[erowe1]

Given that this is supposedly the most pro-life congress ever, I would have thought that there would be no difficulty in passing this legislation.

What a lot of the pro-lifers are going to say about why they won't sponsor this is that it's a "states rights" approach, and they will insist that a states rights approach is actually pro-choice. So they're going to hold out for a federal ban. They won't get it. And they actually don't want to get it. Because being able to hold out a carrot in front of pro-life voters to get them to the polls year after year thinking, "this is the election that will finally make the difference on abortion," is a tool they don't want to lose.

[erowe1]

The other thing pro-lifers can fall back on when they don't sponsor RP's bill is that they're sponsoring this one instead:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-212

[Superfly]

I don't get it. Two people can create a child by having sex, hold it against its will inside of the mother, and then choose to end the life whenever they want before it is born and people think that is the stance of liberty? It's not a parasite it's a prisoner and you can't just kill a prisoner because it's an inconvenience.

[eduardo89]

The other thing pro-lifers can fall back on when they don't sponsor RP's bill is that they're sponsoring this one instead:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-212

Why not cosponsor both?

[erowe1]

Why not cosponsor both?

1) If you like both, why not cosponsor the one with more cosponsors? After all you don't want every legislator to introduce redundant bills and expect everyone to cosponsor all of them.
2) It goes back to my other point. They will say that RP's version is a "states rights" approach. The other one explicitly includes authorization for Congress, not just the states to pass laws protecting the unborn.
3) I also think they don't really like the way RP explicitly takes it out of the hands of the courts. They like to keep holding out that carrot of overturning Roe v. Wade in SCOTUS. They want to be able to tell voters every single presidential election that who gets elected will determine the makeup of the Supreme Court, and that Roe hangs in the balance. They can't keep doing that if the cat gets out of the bag that they have the authority to take that power away from the courts.

[ds21089]

What's pathetic is back in 2007 we lost quite a few supporters when they found out he doesn't accept evolution...

What's pathetic is how these questions are NEVER asked to any other candidate. The interviewers always think of questions which no matter how he answers, he's sure to lose a few voters. Forcing him to pick and choose such touchy subjects to people is such bullshit. I think he should just never answer them and say "people have the right to feel how they want on these matters. Me believing or not believing any such thing will not effect my leadership as president."

[erowe1]

What's pathetic is how these questions are NEVER asked to any other candidate. The interviewers always think of questions which no matter how he answers, he's sure to lose a few voters. Forcing him to pick and choose such touchy subjects to people is such bullshit. I think he should just never answer them and say "people have the right to feel how they want on these matters. Me believing or not believing any such thing will not effect my leadership as president."

There was a debate in 2008 where they asked all the Republicans to raise their hand if they disbelieved in evolution. RP did not raise his hand (presumably as a non-answer, rather than an explicit yes or no), neither did a few others. Huckabee and Brownback both raised theirs, and I can't remember if anyone else did.

The video where RP said he didn't believe in it was just some small town hall meeting or something where it came up. It wasn't a journalist trying to trap him.

[silentshout]

The part of Paul's political platform where I put my fingers in my ears and go LALALALALALALALALALALALA

Same here. This and the stuff about defending DOMA. Oh well, cant agree with someone on everything.

[silentshout]

So if RP wants to ban even very very early first trimester terminations, does he also want a government ban on emergency birth control like plan B that prevents zygote implantation? curious, because that's where many other religious conservatives go, and it makes me sick.

That being said, i am ok with abortion being a state issue. It is just that i don't trust politicians to keep it so. I wonder how theywould investigate illegal abortions if there is a federal ban. Would ere be a uterus inspection force, like the DEA but for abortion? Have the fbi investigate? Make all miscarriages suspect? Would they allow terminations for ectopic pregnancies, or do they still damn the woman in that case? And do people who want a ban on abortion want women and teen girls in jail for getting one?

[Brett85]

Same here. This and the stuff about defending DOMA. Oh well, cant agree with someone on everything.

And I wouldn't support him if he didn't have those positions.

[FrankRep]

Same here. This and the stuff about defending DOMA. Oh well, cant agree with someone on everything.

Ron Paul is awesome! :)

[Brett85]

So if RP wants to ban even very very early first trimester terminations, does he also want a government ban on emergency birth control like plan B that prevents zygote implantation? curious, because that's where many other religious conservatives go, and it makes me sick.

Over 50 million unborn babies murdered in cold blood since 1973 is what makes me sick.

[silentshout]

And I wouldn't support him if he didn't have those positions.

Good for you, I guess.

[silentshout]

Over 50 million unborn babies murdered in cold blood since 1973 is what makes me sick.

so would you prefer a law that prevents/bans women from using plan b as well?

[Brett85]

so would you prefer a law that prevents/bans women from using plan b as well?

I don't know whether Plan B actually causes an abortion or simply prevents the fetus from ever forming in the first place. I'm not opposed to birth control pills in general, but with some of these pills it's hard to know whether they're actual birth control pills or pills that actually cause an abortion.

[QueenB4Liberty]

I don't know whether Plan B actually causes an abortion or simply prevents the fetus from ever forming in the first place. I'm not opposed to birth control pills in general, but with some of these pills it's hard to know whether they're actual birth control pills or pills that actually cause an abortion.

It doesn't cause an abortion.

[Rocket80]

The part of Paul's political platform where I put my fingers in my ears and go LALALALALALALALALALALALA

+1

I recently read about some study that showed women who have abortion(s) ultimately end up having the same amount of babies they would have had anyway. Turns out if a woman wants 3 kids, she'll have 3 kids regardless of whether or not she had an abortion. So don't think of it as ending a life, as much as postponing the start of a life. Who is to say the kid she aborted at 15 is more deserving of a life than the one she didn't have at 30? I dunno, just a thought. I just don't think more unwanted children in this country is a good thing, nor can I bring myself to embrace a position that forces a woman to go to term with an unwanted pregnancy. I find that violation of liberty more abhorrent than destroying a 12 cell zygote.

[Rishinfreakapotamus]

Who is to say the kid she aborted at 15 is more deserving of a life than the one she didn't have at 30?

That's entirely hypothetical though. If she had had the child at 15, no child would be created when she was 30 if she was to only have 3 children. It would not have been conceived, no fertilisation would occur, thus no life would have ever begun to take away.

[erowe1]

I recently read about some study that showed women who have abortion(s) ultimately end up having the same amount of babies they would have had anyway. Turns out if a woman wants 3 kids, she'll have 3 kids regardless of whether or not she had an abortion. So don't think of it as ending a life, as much as postponing the start of a life.

But it is ending a life.

[Stary Hickory]

Ron Paul rejects the theory of evolution and now THIS? He's lost my vote.

Yeah Ron Paul is just awful he wants it so states can deem when a life is a life and not the Federal government, which has no authority to do so anyways. How unprincipled of him. This just be a state issue the federal government has no say in it...

























(yeah right) :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

[Icymudpuppy]

Such a touchy issue, and I've changed my mind on this subject a lot.

Ultimately, I think family planning should be between a woman, her mate, her parents, her other children, her doctor, and her faith. Government should butt the hell out.

Once again, a place where government should get out and give the churches a chance to shine.

[Brett85]

Such a touchy issue, and I've changed my mind on this subject a lot.

Ultimately, I think family planning should be between a woman, her mate, her parents, her other children, her doctor, and her faith. Government should butt the hell out.

Once again, a place where government should get out and give the churches a chance to shine.

Should government butt out if I want to murder my next door neighbor?

[Brett85]

+1

I recently read about some study that showed women who have abortion(s) ultimately end up having the same amount of babies they would have had anyway. Turns out if a woman wants 3 kids, she'll have 3 kids regardless of whether or not she had an abortion.

So according to you all children are exactly the same? The child that got aborted didn't have anything unique to offer the world?

[Icymudpuppy]

Should government butt out if I want to murder my next door neighbor?

After you murder him, his family can choose to press charges to involve the govt. If they don't, then yes, the gov should butt out. Perhaps they'd rather kill you without involving govt.

Pre-crime, much?

I think family of the aborted should press charges if they want, or perhaps sue for wrongful death.

The govt needn't be involved in a ban, (Uterus police), or in funding abortions (tax theft) either way.

[crazyfacedjenkins]

If everything that ever lived is dead, and everything that's alive is gonna die, where does the sacred part come in?

[FrankRep]

If everything that ever lived is dead, and everything that's alive is gonna die, where does the sacred part come in?

CFJ, Should Murder be Legal then? :rolleyes:

[crazyfacedjenkins]

CFJ, Should Murder be Legal then? :rolleyes:

Just having trouble with the sacred part, Franky.

[robert68]

yeah ron paul is just awful he wants it so states can deem when a life is a life and not the federal government, which has no authority to do so anyways. how unprincipled of him. This just be a state issue the federal government has no say in it...

The "congress" is a part of the federal governement. If you meant what you posted, you should have a problem with Ron Paul's bill:


1)... the congress declares that--

(a) human life shall be deemed to exist from conception, without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency; and...

[Alielbaryeshua]

Every one of you who come here should come her to support liberty. We ALL have the Right to LIFE, liberty and the pursuite to happiness. It makes me sick to think that people actually beleive that the killing of an unborn baby is OK. WTF?!
Are you all BRAIN DEAD? How would you like for me to suck your brains out with a vaccum or slice through your neck bones with garden shears? Or how about throw you alive into a wood chipper? I was being sarcastic, but these are all literal descriptions of what an abortion proceedure does to a baby. Not to mention death by acid bath. A mean, WTF?! Did you know that people had the same opinion when it came to black people? They told themselves, " Oh. Its OK to beat them Nig%#ers becuase they aint fully human!" And the same thing is said about unborn American citizens! They call them a blob of flesh, or hunk of tissue. If you would like to learn the truth, copy and paste this link to your web browser: http://youtu.be/XnnvQ5mUnj4

I am sure many people will criticize me and tell me that I am foolish or a religious nut. Mark Twain said "A real patriot is brave, hated and scorned. It is not until his cause succeeds that the timid come and join him. For then it costs nothing to be a patriot."
I am simply awake to the 53 million babies MURDERED since 1973. I am awake to the 100 billion dollar industry bent on genocide. If you are for abortion, you ARE NOT HUMAN. YOU ARE SOMETHING WORSE.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Every one of you who come here should come her to support liberty. We ALL have the Right to LIFE, liberty and the pursuite to happiness. It makes me sick to think that people actually beleive that the killing of an unborn baby is OK. WTF?!
Are you all BRAIN DEAD? How would you like for me to suck your brains out with a vaccum or slice through your neck bones with garden shears? Or how about throw you alive into a wood chipper? I was being sarcastic, but these are all literal descriptions of what an abortion proceedure does to a baby. Not to mention death by acid bath. A mean, WTF?! Did you know that people had the same opinion when it came to black people? They told themselves, " Oh. Its OK to beat them Nig%#ers becuase they aint fully human!" And the same thing is said about unborn American citizens! They call them a blob of flesh, or hunk of tissue. If you would like to learn the truth, copy and paste this link to your web browser: http://youtu.be/XnnvQ5mUnj4

I am sure many people will criticize me and tell me that I am foolish or a religious nut. Mark Twain said "A real patriot is brave, hated and scorned. It is not until his cause succeeds that the timid come and join him. For then it costs nothing to be a patriot."
I am simply awake to the 53 million babies MURDERED since 1973. I am awake to the 100 billion dollar industry bent on genocide. If you are for abortion, you ARE NOT HUMAN. YOU ARE SOMETHING WORSE.

Please take into account the following quote, from Bastiat:


Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.