foodisgood said:
Sorry but I as an "annoying Ron Paul supporter" am gonna need point some things out. Unfortunately Ron Paul's positions are easily twisted and debates like this can happen. After reading the Sanctity of Life act, it states that the federal default is that life begins at conception. However it removes the federal government from the picture.
(2) the Congress recognizes that each State has the authority to protect lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that State.
Therefore, while the feds have said life starts at coneption, it is the states job of outlawing abortion or not outlawing abortion.
You then say well federal law trumps state law and that is completely true. That is why the other clauses exist. Section 3 removes the supreme court and section 4 removes the district courts.
SEC. 5. FEDERAL COURT DECISIONS NOT BINDING ON STATE OR LOCAL COURTS.
Any decision of a Federal court, to the extent that
the decision relates to an issue removed from Federal jurisdiction under the amendments made by sections 3 and section 4, is not binding precedent on the court of—
(1) any State or subdivision thereof;
(2) the District of Columbia; or
(3) any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States, or any subdivision thereof.
All it essentially says is we define life as beginning at conception, but what the states do from that point on is their own choice.
Your next problem is the supression of the courts I would assume. Article III, Section 2 of the US Constitution states,
"The Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make."
Therefore, this act clearly leaves abortion as a states issue and is completely constitutional.
Also Phactor, and I mean this in no offensive way, but please don't walk into the Ron Paul thread and start bashing Ron Paul supporters. In your very first post you resorted to attacking Ron Paul and his supprters before anyone had even replied to you. I'll gladly admit that there are rude people out there that support Ron Paul just as there are rude people that support Obama. You are entitiled to your own opinions, but I would argue that you have done more to try to instigate name-calling and the such than anyone has done against you. It's one thing to respond to an unreasonable person, but it's entirely different to walk into a room of people that you know support ron paul and just start taking shots regardless of you past history. Thank you
Yeah but Ron Paul supporters have been spamming every board I am on. Your reasoning is well thought out. Furthermore, I can attack Ron Paul and his supporters if they start a thread about him. I may have done it somewhat disrespectfully though. To be honest though I hate the politics of the guy and view him as a negative person for this country. This is just my opinion. Though flawed here's why.
What you posted earlier is well and good but it still doesn't change the fact that you are ending the life of a human being. Currently Euthenisa in this country is illegal because it ends a life.
The only time we can ever end a "life" and not be punished is if the federal or state government approves of it. Two Examples: Legit self defense or sending someone to the death chamber .
Again I repeat that making life begin at conception, that fetus has human rights. Which include the right to live. This is why abortion is legal now. I believe this is what Roe v Wade established, but I'm not sure.
Okay second I think you are misreading certain parts:
You wrote
"Therefore, while the feds have said life starts at coneption, it is the states job of outlawing abortion or not outlawing abortion."
This still doesn't change the fact the a person is ending a life. Its still murder on the federal level at the very least.
Lastly,
I believe you used this but only quoted one part, if you read the full text you will see something interesting
Amends the federal judicial code to remove Supreme Court and district court jurisdiction to review cases arising out of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or practice, or any act interpreting such a measure, on the grounds that such measure:
(1) protects the rights of human persons between conception and birth; or (2) prohibits, limits, or regulates the performance of abortions or the provision of public funds, facilities, personnel, or other assistance for abortions.[1]
Did you notice earlier the bill defines that the fetus is a person. So therefore if the law doesn't "protect" the rights of the newly defined fetus as a person its void. So basically a state couldn't legally allow abortion because is doesn't protect the fetuses right.
Also, this would allow the state the challenge Roe V Wade. That is true. But once again on the federal level that "person" has the protection of a right to live on the federal level.
As for this part
"Any decision of a Federal court, to the extent that
the decision relates to an issue removed from Federal jurisdiction under the amendments made by sections 3 and section 4, is not binding precedent on the court of—
(1) any State or subdivision thereof;
(2) the District of Columbia; or
(3) any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States, or any subdivision thereof."
Thats well and good, but still doesn't address the point that the fetus is a living person if the SOL passes who's life is now protected by both state and federal law.
Also look at the Dread Scott case as an example of why federal law always triumphs over state law. The federal court is at a higher postion then any state.
Another example is The Supreme Court making the supreme decision regarding a case. Its the final stop and binding decision.
The only way that Abortion would be ever legal is if murder is both legalized federally and in the state you are in. This is why I keep calling the rest of the bill "fluff".
Could you provide an example of a state law ever surpassing a federal law?
All it essentially says is we define life as beginning at conception
You can't ever legally kill/end a life. Unless it is approved by the state. Again even if the state says "go ahead and abort" its still ending a life on the federal level.
BTW I'm drinking now so if I get too drunk I will wait to post till tommorow, for the benefits of all in this thread. I can get really heated over this stuff. We have a rule among my friends and I and its "No politics after a sixer"
Awaiting your response.