Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) was one of only seven Republicans (see also here) to vote against the Prenatal Non-Discrimination Act of 2012 yesterday. He is complicit in the bill’s failure. Selective Sex Abortion are an ongoing practice. There is documentation that this is occurring here in the United States.
Naturally impossible sex ratios at birth are also occurring in the United States, as documented in survey data from 2000 and after. Skewed sex ratios (108), favoring boys over girls, have appeared in U.S. subpopulations mirroring the international data (Chinese-Americans, Korean-Americans, and Filipino- Americans). Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund of Columbia University identified these trends, including a male bias of 50% among third-order births, in U.S. populations of Chinese, Korean, and Asian-American heritage. “We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage,” they write. This fact has prompted several U.S. states to ban sex selection abortion in their jurisdictions. These states include Illinois (2008), Pennsylvania (2008), Oklahoma (2010), and Arizona (2011).
The federalism argument doesn’t wash here when you have the 14th Amendment. I am disappointed, but not surprised by Iowa’s Democratic Congressional Delegation’s vote. Congressman Paul came through Iowa touting his prolife position and record while trying to smear Rick Santorum’s. Anyone remember this ad he ran before the Iowa Caucus?
Yet he couldn’t vote for this simple bill. What a fraud.
Mr. Speaker, as an OB-GYN who has delivered over 4,000 babies, I certainly abhor abortion. And I certainly share my colleagues’ revulsion at the idea that someone would take an innocent unborn life because they prefer to have a child of a different gender. However, I cannot support H.R. 3541, the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, because this bill is unconstitutional. Congress’s jurisdiction is limited to those areas specified in the Constitution. Nowhere in that document is Congress given any authority to address abortion in any manner. Until 1973, when the Supreme Court usurped the authority of the States in the Roe v. Wade decision, no one believed or argued abortion was a Federal issue.
I also cannot support H.R. 3541 because it creates yet another set of Federal criminal laws, even though the Constitution lists only three Federal crimes: piracy, treason, and counterfeiting. All other criminal matters are expressly left to States under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, and criminal laws relating to abortion certainly should be legislated by States rather than Congress.
I have long believed that abortion opponents make a mistake by spending their energies on a futile quest to make abortion a Federal crime. Instead, pro-life Americans should work to undo Roe v. Wade and give the power to restrict abortion back to the States and the people. It is particularly disappointing to see members supporting this bill who rightfully oppose ludicrous interpretations of the Commerce Clause when it comes to the national health care law, which also abuses the Commerce Clause to create new Federal crimes.
Pro-life Americans believe all unborn life is precious and should be protected. Therefore we should be troubled by legislation that singles out abortions motivated by a “politically incorrect” reason for special Federal punishment. To my conservative colleagues who support this bill: what is the difference in principle between a Federal law prohibiting “sex selection” abortions and Federal hate crimes laws? After all, hate crime laws also criminalize thoughts by imposing additional stronger penalties when a crime is motivated by the perpetrator’s animus toward a particular race or gender.
I also question whether this bill would reduce the number of abortions. I fear instead that every abortion provider in the Nation would simply place a sign in their waiting room saying “It is a violation of Federal law to perform an abortion because of the fetus’ gender. Here is a list of reasons for which abortion is permissible under Federal law.”
Mr. Speaker, instead of spending time on this unconstitutionally, ineffective, and philosophically flawed bill, Congress should use its valid authority to limit the jurisdiction of activist Federal courts and (thereby) protect state laws restoring abortion. This is the constitutional approach to effectively repealing Roe v. Wade. Instead of focusing on gimmicks and piecemeal approaches, true conservatives should address the horror of abortion via the most immediate, practical, and effective manner possible: returning jurisdiction over abortion to the States.
Congressman Paul seems to wish the 14th Amendment away. We have a right to life which is given to us by God and enshrined in our Declaration as organic law. Our Constitution in the 5th and the 14th Amendments clearly state that the right to life should not be taken away without due process. So to argue the Feds can’t defend a basic right is ludicrous. This isn’t to say that you don’t bring up some good points. It is an imperfect bill. I’d rather see us vote for imperfect bills that will help save lives than to do nothing until we get that one perfect bill (Sanctity of Life Act, Personhood Amendment, etc) that will protect all children that can finally be passed because we finally get the right make-up in Congress.
Also regarding the states’ rights argument I’ve asked Ron Paul supporters if they know of any state that has allowed murder, and if there was a state that suddenly codified a right to commit murder would they support the Feds getting involved. No rational person would think it would be ok for a state to allow murder, but Ron Paul would have you believe that it is ok for a state to do so as long as the person is still in the womb.
Latest posts by Shane Vander Hart (see all)
- (Video) Tim Scott at Iowa GOP Lincoln-Reagan Dinner - July 21, 2018
- Is Iowa’s Investment in Pre-K Education Worthwhile? - July 20, 2018
- Chaz Allen Decides Not to Run for Re-Election to Iowa Senate - July 20, 2018