From Matt Swaim on CMReport
PREFACE: I don't want Ron Paul to be Mitt's running mate.
However, I can tell you exactly why he voted against the bill- because it would list sex-selective abortions as a federal crime, and he didn't want it handled on a federal level. He's argued before that abortions should be illegal, and that when performed, they should be prosecuted on the local level rather than the federal level.
Right now, most murders are prosecuted at the local level, unless they're things like the murder of the President or a foreign diplomat, the blowing up of an airplane, or other major offenses. With as many potential sex-selective abortions going on in this country as there are, you can imagine the court (i.e. taxpayer) costs involved in prosecuting all of them, and the ammo that could give to the Other Side.
Not every well-intentioned pro-life legislative idea is a practically implementable pro-life legislative idea. But it certainly provides the opportunity for the "hey- wait a second" people who think about unintended consequences to get blasted. This time around, I think Paul had thoughtful reasons to vote the way he did, even if you disagree with him.
Me? I think the best part about this bill, even though it would have had some really complicated consequences, is that finally a light is being shed upon one of the darkest aspects of the culture of death, and upon the hypocrisy of the so-called feminists who defend unregulated abortion at all costs. For that, I applaud this bill's authors.
5 comments:
So the federal government doesn't have the right to protect unborn baby girls? Rights come from God not the state.
The federal government has no way to enforce the law unless the FBI charges a person with a crime(the FBI does not examine abortion facilities). A good example is the fact that the national Partial Birth Abortion ban was passed by the federal government but the practice is still done today. Why would UW Madison try to open a late term abortion mill if they thought the practice was being enforced as illegal? This is also true of restrictive abortion legislation passed with exceptions. Ronald Reagan said when this is done the exception becomes the practice.
There's more to ending abortion than just being "against it". It requires laws be passed that effectively end the practice, not just legislation passed to raise awareness.
This has nothing to do with federal Vs. State authority. Paul, like Rep. Justin Amash of MI, voted against this bill because its essentially a hate crime bill. It makes motivation the target of criminal charges rather than the action itself.
Obviously, there would be the deception as you can't outlaw ultrasound. Still, we do know that this goes on in clinics as Lila Rose just proved. The Federal Government did pass FACE and does try to enforce it. Ron Paul will not find a federal law limiting abortion that he will vote for ever.
Anon-4:05, are you familiar with the "We the People Act"?
Post a Comment