Uncategorized

Why Rand Paul’s “Life at Conception Act” is Bad Legislation

EDITOR'S NOTE: I am a Kentuckian who has been beating this drum for years. I hope Rand Paul will finally listen and withdraw this horrible legislation. I think he will listen to reason. He once agreed with me that the word "person" in the Fourteenth Amendment applies to the unborn.

EDITOR’S NOTE: I am a Kentuckian who has been beating this drum for years. I hope Rand Paul will finally listen and withdraw this horrible legislation. I think he will listen to reason. He once agreed with me that the word “person” in the Fourteenth Amendment applies to the unborn.

AMERICAN LIFE LEAGUE

Senator Rand Paul introduced another flawed bill in the Senate. The senator introduced the “Life at Conception Act” last weekend. Despite a bad title, the act actually starts off very good. It says: “ . . . the Congress hereby declares that the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human being.” It then defines a “human being” as: “The terms ‘‘human person’’ and ‘‘human being’’ include each member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization or cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being.” Despite this good language, the bill also says: “Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require the prosecution of any woman for the death of her unborn child, a prohibition on in vitro fertilization, or a prohibition on use of birth control or another means of preventing fertilization.” So, this “pro-life” bill says it is okay to kill a human being created through IVF or by using birth control—even though all hormonal birth control methods have a third method of operation—preventing implantation of an already created human being. It is noteworthy that the bill does not define the word “birth control.” 

Explanation: 

  1. We say the bill has a bad title because “conception” was defined by ACOG in 1965 as “implantation in the lining of the uterus,” which is five to seven days after a new human being is created at fertilization (Stage 1-A of the Carnegie Stages of Human Development). “Life at Creation Act” would be better.
  2. The wording in the bill (“prohibition on use of birth control or another means of preventing fertilization”) implies that birth control works by preventing fertilization. However, all manufacturers of hormonal birth control products (pills, shots, patches, etc.) say on their package inserts that these products have three methods of operation: 1) suppressing ovulation; 2) thickening of the cervical mucous; and 3) thinning the lining of the uterus to prevent implantation. There is no predicting which of these methods will be used with any particular dose of the product. Thus, by refusing to prohibit birth control, this bill is actually allowing the killing of millions of babies a year by birth control products. 

So, we have a supposedly pro-life bill that only protects a small portion of preborn human beings who are killed before birth. The bill, as it stands, should really be called an “abortion regulation” bill rather than a pro-life bill.

READ MORE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PRO-LIFE COMMUNITY THIS WEEK AT ALL.ORG

PHOTO CREDIT: Gage Skidmore

KEEP PIERCED HEARTS BLOG ONLINE BY DONATING BELOW

[Donation total for the month of January, 2021=$9.41]

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00

Or enter a custom amount

$

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly
%d bloggers like this: