Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

Government

Rand Paul Introduces ‘Life at Conception Act’

Mar. 15, 2013 4:42pm Becket Adams

Sen. Rand Paul (R Ky.) Introduces Life At Conception Act

Sen. Rand Paul. (Getty Images).

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul on Thursday introduced the “Life At Conception Act,” saying that the “right to life is guaranteed to all Americans.”

“I plan to ensure this is upheld,” the Republican senator added.

“Sen. Paul introduced S.583, a bill that would implement equal protection under the 14th Amendment for the right to life of each born and unborn human,” the senator’s office said, per a press release.

“This legislation does not amend or interpret the Constitution, but simply relies on the 14th Amendment, which specifically authorizes Congress to enforce its provisions,” his office adds.

Here is what Section 1 of the 14th Amendment states:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The bill has 15 cosponsors (all Republican) including Sens. John Barrasso (Wyo.), John Boozman (Ark.), Richard Burr (N.C.), Daniel Coats (Ind.), Thomas Coburn (Okla.), Michael Enzi (Wyo.), Deb Fischer (Neb.), Charles “Chuck” Grassley (Iowa), John Hoeven (N.D.), James “Jim” Inhofe (Okla.), Mike Johanns (Neb.), Jerry Moran (Kan.), James Risch (Idaho), John Thune (S.D.), and Roger Wicker (Miss.)

“The Life at Conception Act legislatively declares what most Americans believe and what science has long known — that human life begins at the moment of conception, and therefore is entitled to legal protection,” Sen. Paul said.

“The right to life is guaranteed to all Americans in the Declaration of Independence and ensuring this is upheld is the Constitutional duty of all Members of Congress,” he added.

Here’s the senator’s press release:

The senator’s office did not immediately respond to TheBlaze’s request for comment.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images.

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (182)

SocialistSlayer
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:51pm
This is a dumb argument that will cause the Republicans to lose. When will these idiots learn to quit bringing up Social Issues? If conservatives are to ever gain control they have to stop playing the Liberal Commies Games.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- All Pro
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 7:28pm
  Rand isn’t the one “playing a game”. He’s deadly serious and saying what he means and I’m pretty sure that like his dad, he means what he says.
  Rand Paul / Adam West 2016
  
  Report this comment
- Verceofreason
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 9:30pm
  Mess up and blame it on the other guys?
  That makes so much sense.
  
  Just admit most of your ‘leaders’ are buffoons.
  
  Report this comment
- All Pro
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 6:01am
  Verceofreason
  Mess up and blame it on the other guys?
  That makes so much sense.
  Just admit most of your ‘leaders’ are buffoons.
  
  No, Biden, Pelosi, Swinestein, Waters, Obama, and to many others to list are all YOURS! Funnier still is the fact that Palin is smarter than all of those listed….combined! Being that progressives are sneakier than they are bright and in the interest of being fair and balanced I could add Romney, Ryan, Boehner, McCain, Gram to that list. Libertarians tend to pay attention and keep track of these people. Progressives just do what they’re told. They are incapable of analytical reasoning and independent thought.
  
  Report this comment
ihasa
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:50pm
No they did not!

Life does begin at conception. However, terminating an unborn life, although not something to be done remotely lightly, is not the same as murdering a born person. I think we would all recognise that if in some ghastly medical emergency it came to deciding between the life if the fetus and that of the mother, the mothers life takes precedence.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- TotallyNotATroll
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 6:07pm
  Oh yes, this sort of thing will definitely help the conservative cause. Actually zygot’s (sperm and egg) are alive before conception therefor condoms are mass murder. Instead of alienating mass quantities of people with things like abortion, why not bring more people into the fold and win 90% of the time, but no, as most republican plans go lately, lets pick a random fight and take a completely radical view of it.
  
  Report this comment
- cloudsofwar
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 6:18pm
  i completely agree with Sen Rand Paul. GOD BLESS HIM. life does start at conception, at the very moment. that start is a human life.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 6:23pm
  i think the independents and liberals see a lot of hypocrisy on this issue because while the republicans care about unborn life, they do not care about born life….
  
  For instance, in general republicans are least concerned about unnecessary deaths in Iraq/afganistan and the last two presidential candidates openly discussed more unnecessary war. In addition, up until two weeks ago, republicans were the ones least concerned about assassinations carried out by our government in the name of terror war
  
  Report this comment
- Chuck Stein
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 6:36pm
  This is a waste of political capital.
  
  Report this comment
- muffythetuffy
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 6:36pm
  GOD BLESS SENATOR RAND
  
  70 million dead babies and counting. Amend the Bill to Gun Control Bills.
  
  Report this comment
- A_CALL_TO_CONSCIENCE
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 7:54pm
  This is not needed since murder is already illegal. And of course if it came to the life of the mother or the child then yes, it would be ok to terminate the pregnancy. In cases of rape it should also be allowed.
  
  @TOTALLYNOTATROLL
  
  Sperm is not a living human being, neither is an egg alone. Preventing the sperm from going in and reaching the egg (condoms) is not murder.
  
  Report this comment
- RDavis49
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 8:31pm
  I want you to go here and watch this late term abortion in progress and then you tell me that this isn’t murdering this fully formed infant. Notice that the head isn’t delivered, therefore, YOUR KIND OF PEOPLE don’t consider this a person yet. People like you are the ones who should have been aborted at birth by your own kind. I’ll bet you don’t have the guts to face what you’re calling Not Killing a Fully Born Person…. You’re so damn stupid and cold…
  
  http://www.dnatube.com/video/9919/Late-Term-Abortion
  
  Report this comment
- termyt
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 8:34pm
  Soy, you are being ridiculous. Republicans don’t care about born life? Some of us would rather die fighting than live under the boot of a tyrant. Some of us would even die to make others unrelated to us free. To use such a libelous statement shows you for what you really are – an ignorant dupe unable to debate on a level playing field so you demonize your opponents hoping for a cheap win in public opinion.
  
  Are you completely unable to understand the difference between giving one’s life willingly for the cause of freedom and murdering an innocent who cannot defend herself? Are you so dense?
  
  You could certainly, if you applied yourself, argue that the Afghan and Iraq wars were blood misspent. That the lose of American life as well as the loss of innocents caught in the crossfire was too great for any achievements made. But to lob such a baseless, ridiculous attack proves you either don’t have the ability or are too lazy to apply yourself.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 9:51pm
  @termyt
  Since you are still here – i assume you are alive and not fighting anybody. And if you are living in the USA, you are not fighting our tyrant. Your perception of the world and our involvement is based on a fairy tale. i said the wars were unnecessary, which satisfies the provisions you listed as being acceptable – so i dont know what your objection was to my post
  
  Report this comment
- termyt
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 10:44pm
  I apologize for not being clear. Allow me to quote you.
  
  “because while the republicans care about unborn life, they do not care about born life….”
  
  That is my problem. It’s a ridiculous accusation that can perform no other function rather than belittle your opponents instead of their ideas in hopes their ideas go away so you do not have to face them directly. It’s a coward’s tactic.
  
  Report this comment
- Verceofreason
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 3:29am
  His stance is not going win over women.
  
  Report this comment
- Libertarian
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 6:07am
  Wow. What Republican that runs on the Republican ticket that talks about “life” has actually ever done something about the most important issue of our time. This is what a real statesman does, he doesn’t just “say” he is going to make a difference – he does it.
  
  To all of those Mit Romney, Santorum, McCain, Gingrich and GW Bush fans – Rand Paul is a real statesman looking out for your constitutional rights. Open your damn eyes.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 8:03am
  @termyt
  Yes, i provided a hypothesis and then evidence behind it. Pretty simple really. Almost every post i see around here is speculation or exaggeration so i dont know why there is a double-standard for me
  
  Report this comment
- sbenard
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 9:41am
  In the case of your birth, I would make that rare exception! That would be a first for me!
  
  Just yesterday, FT.com had a story about a report released by China’s Health Ministry, in which they released data showing that since China’s one-child policy was instituted in 1971, china has aborted 336 million of its own citizens.
  
  336 MILLION!
  
  “The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic.” Speech by Joseph Stalin, “The Tasks of Economic Executives” (4 February 1931)
  
  Congratulations, IHASA! You have the same mentality as Joseph Stalin, one of the greatest slaughterers of human history!
  
  Report this comment
- loveyouall
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 9:43am
  “As experienced practitioners and researchers in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.”
  
  http://liveactionnews.org/dublin-declaration-abortion-is-not-medically-necessary/
  
  Report this comment
- sbenard
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 9:45am
  At Church a few weeks ago, one man accurately pointed out that we justifiably feel outrage when 20 children were massacred at Sandy Hook Elementary, but then brush aside that we butcher — literally by dismemberment — 1.2 to 1.6 million American babies every year!
  
  Joseph Stalin said in a sickeningly prescient statement:
  “The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic.” Speech by Joseph Stalin, “The Tasks of Economic Executives” (4 February 1931)
  
  Report this comment
- techengineer11
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 9:51am
  termyt
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 8:34pm
  Soy, you are being ridiculous. Republicans don’t care about born life? Some of us would rather die fighting than live under the boot of a tyrant. Some of us would even die to make others unrelated to us free. To use such a libelous statement shows you for what you really are – an ignorant dupe unable to debate on a level playing field so you demonize your opponents hoping for a cheap win in public opinion.
  
  termyt: Soy is correct. You can not jusitfy with reason and logic the disaster which is the Middle East. It did not start with 9-11. Not even close. As much as I hate it 9-11 was blowback. We’ve been propping up dictators over their for well over 100 yrs now.. It’s not our business. Now when they come over unprovoked and without cause I’ll be first to demand War and I’ll give my own life for the cause..
  
  Your just simply wrong and uninformed.
  
  As for Rand. I tend to agree with him but like many on this page suggest this is wasted energy. The abortion debate has been loss unfortunately. I do not see how this can help the cause of liberty but I’ll continue to support Rand.
  
  To win the Abortion debate we need money and power to recature the Media and Hollywood.. We’d win the debate within months if we had the Media.
  
  Everyting comes back to the Media.. Who makes the suggestions and who frames the debate…
  
  Report this comment
- termyt
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 6:49pm
  So Tech, you are officially asserting that Republicans care nothing about protecting the lives of those who are outside the womb? Think about that for a second. Your position is that Republicans would be perfectly happy if every person on the planet who has already been born were to die so long as conceived, unborn people are not also killed. Astounding.
  
  Soy – I apologize. I took you too seriously. I still think the comment is way over the top and unhelpful in invoking discussion and opening dialog, but I was far to over the top myself in my reply.
  
  Report this comment
- Mil Mom
  Posted on March 17, 2013 at 1:21am
  @TotallyNotATroll
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 6:07pm
  
  Oh yes, this sort of thing will definitely help the conservative cause. Actually zygot’s (sperm and egg) are alive before conception therefor condoms are mass murder. Instead of alienating mass quantities of people with things like abortion, why not bring more people into the fold and win 90% of the time, but no, as most republican plans go lately, lets pick a random fight and take a completely radical view of it.
  ***
  Since Sen. Paul’s bill does not force pregnancy or parenthood on every person who carries within themselves that sperm or egg, I don’t see it as radical at all. It doesn’t say life begins when the parents are conceived, (Check the history records of why abortion dr’s quit harvesting and selling ovum from aborted female fetuses. You might be shocked! I’m sure it’s on the web somewhere.) Roe v Wade said that if Congress were to specify when life begins, the ruling could become null and void, is that what the left wing radical fanatics are afraid of? That this is just carrying out the ruling of Roe v Wade? I believe the story I read about China re-thinking their abortion policy from drudge report said that there had been 315 million American’s aborted since it had been made law illegally because the Constitution says the Legislature makes law, not the courts. Social Security wouldn’t be a ponzi scheme if 315 million more young people were paying into it through the years. IMAGINE?
  
  Report this comment
- Mil Mom
  Posted on March 17, 2013 at 1:30am
  @Verceofreason
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 3:29am
  
  His stance is not going win over women
  ***
  I AM WOMAN WON’T BOTHER TO ROAR! His stance solidifies with me and hundreds of others I know that he is definitely someone to be trusted. He says what we believe. DON’T THINK BECAUSE A LOT OF VERY VOCAL WOMEN DESIRE TO KILL UNBORN HUMANS THAT ANYWHERE NEAR A MAJORITY OF US DO!!! I know well over a hundred couples who would have loved to adopt a baby but couldn’t because the abortionist got to them first. I know others who turned to international adoption because of the same reason. Women will definitely stand with Rand!
  
  Report this comment
- SenatorLoser
  Posted on March 17, 2013 at 8:51am
  If However, terminating an unborn life, although not something to be done remotely lightly, is not the same as murdering a born person.” is true then why is murdering a pregnant woman considered a double homicide?
  
  Report this comment
- ChildOfTheKing
  Posted on March 17, 2013 at 11:47am
  …….NOT ACCORDING TO THE CATHOLICS. Life begins at conception for them. I believe that God breathes a soul into an child at time of birth, but it is still ALIVE in the womb. So, to me, ABORTION IS MURDER and God will hold you accountable. GOD WILL HOLD ANYONE RESPONSIBLE, INCLUDING THE DR,., THE NURSE, THE MOTHER, THE FATHER, THE GRANDPARENTS, and anyone else who does not try to stop the abortion (legally).
  
  Since eternity is forever, it is better to think of the consequences in eternity, when you must face your Maker. After all, God created man and woman and the ability to produce. If you mess with that process, you are in VIOLATION OF GOD’S LAW OF REPRODUCTION and He will hold you accountable for whatever you do against Him or HIS LAWS. THINK ABOUT THAT.
  
  Man is not perfect – just forgiven,IF man comes to Jesus. God gave us His son, Jesus, to make us perfect in HIS eyes. And, you can ask ANY TRUE FOLLOWER OF CHRIST, how they felt BEFORE they became a child of God and then how they feel NOW after they came to know Christ and a TRUE FOLLOWER OF CHRIST will tell you that their eyes were opened to the truth of God. ABORTION IS MURDER.
  
  Report this comment
- JacobPritchett
  Posted on March 17, 2013 at 5:09pm
  @SOYBOMB315_II: I think you’ll find that Sen. Paul hasn’t just cared about unlawful killing for two weeks. He’s said time and time again that the same rules apply to Republican and Democrat presidents and that he was equally critical of President Bush (this was, however, before he was in politics). He is one of those rare people that consistently stands up for his principles (he wrote an op-ed criticizing Romney’s statement on a foreign policy issue even after he endorsed his presidential bid). There are people like this in both parties, it’s just practically unheard of for them to gain national prominence.
  
  Report this comment
watashbuddyfriend
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:44pm
Rand, you keep screwing up! You are not reading my mail! Stay off those humanistic topics.
Log in to ReplyReply
- Keatonc333
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:49pm
  That is the only way he could win on a national stage.. can’t talk about social issues.. he’s on the losing side of all of them. except immigration, which he is apparently now Ok with.
- buttpatriot
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:55pm
  we want to force you to keep your down syndrome children, but do not ask for support from the government to care for them!
  
  Paul just jumped the shark.
- termyt
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 8:40pm
  So you are saying people with Down Syndrome have no right to life? What other conditions revoke that right? Alzheimer’s? Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s)? Disagreeing with you?
  
  As soon as you put conditions on the right to life, you risk finding yourself on the wrong list.
- Eastinfection
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 9:18pm
  “force you to keep your down syndrome children”
  
  Tell me… what else are people to do with their “down-syndrome children”?
  C’mon genius… should they be given away? aborted?… do we need a big, Fed. institution to support all the Down Syndrome babies abandoned by Liberals?
  
  Tell me your answer.
  I won’t judge you.
  
  But i like to know these things so i can try to fathom how much more Progressivism is going to cost… you know… so that Liberals can continue to evade responsibility when they get “victimized” with inconveniences like having a kid with down syndrome…. then kill “it” or put her/him up for adoption.. (knowing full-well kids with down-syndrome are SO popular among prospective adoptive parents)
  
  C’mon … what do YOU do when you find out the baby YOUR wife carries is retarded? Tell us.
  Please.
- buttpatriot
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 4:14pm
  all i know is when he outlaws masturbation, he will have to peel it from my cold, dead hands.
  molon labe.
soybomb315_II
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:36pm
I understand why someone would be opposed to abortion based on biblical grounds. But I have wondered why that same attitude is not used for artificial insemination (ie: in-vitro fertilization)….Isnt that the same thing – about man assuming the role of God?

Curious to know if this has already been discussed

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Voter713
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:43pm
  Its not just about biblically based – its not hard to understand that you would not be typing if your life was ended with the Plan B pill (if it were available at the time).
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:45pm
  SOY, sort of like putting a band aid on a nasty scratch? Sort of takes away from your perception of God’s plan, or is it God teaching man?
  
  Report this comment
- Eastinfection
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:51pm
  I smell what you’re cooking SOY but i think the art-incem argument is actually closer related to the Catholic birth control stance.
  Regardless, i believe nearly all Christian denominations oppose termination, regardless of the insemination source.
  I personally agree with that stance but think it’s hazy on a Constitutional level unless the Constitution is Amended to define “Life”.. as Rand, here, is attempting.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:57pm
  if it is wrong to end life, i think it would also be wrong to create life. Just wait till this test stem cell/tube stuff gets in full gear – then things will get real confusing
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:58pm
  I think the answer to this might be too simple and have nothing to do with God.
  
  Create Life = good.
  Destroy Life = bad.
  
  No matter who is doing either.
  
  Report this comment
- Eastinfection
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 6:03pm
  The key is this:
  
  Rand is a Constitutionalist (from what i’ve heard) and a smart bugger to boot.
  If you want to change the abortion argument… forget about State’s rights, Christianity, and Science.
  
  Focus on the definition of CITIZENSHIP.
  
  Make your amendment say that Natural born American Citizens must be CONCEIVED in the US or to two US parents, and citizenship occurs at conception.
  
  Kills the “border baby” issue and abortion in one- fell swoop.
  
  Report this comment
- PK_SEA
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 6:22pm
  Soy: According to Catholic doctrine in IVF, the ethical dilemma is in the disposal of the un-used fertilized eggs.
  
  Report this comment
- Keatonc333
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 6:32pm
  Eastinfection…. That leaves a lot of room for American citizens being born by non american parents who were vacationing in New York 9 months earlier… To have citizenship begin at conception would open a whole can of worms. and we really don’t need any more citizenship problems in this country.
- Eastinfection
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 9:00pm
  KEATON… opening up THIS can of worms wouldn’t be relevant unless the other can was empty. I’m talking about NEW solutions instead of the old ones that are failing. Amend it! Change it! Contribute to the conversation.
  THAT is my view.
  Pretty sure it’s yours, too.
  
  Report this comment
- Eastinfection
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 10:15pm
  WANGO..
  
  That random interjection was very well penned.
  You should be proud of yourself.
  
  Report this comment
- YOURSENSEI
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 10:38am
  Mr or Ms EASYINFECTION,
  
  This is what you must know:
  
  How many of those rubber knives do you own?
  
  It is so.
- YOURSENSEI
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 10:44am
  Mr or Ms EASYINFECTION,
  
  This you must know:
  
  I forgot to commend you – and it is all about you – for your Lincoln-esque call for maturity . . . “… opening up THIS can of worms wouldn’t be relevant unless the other can was empty. I’m talking about NEW solutions instead of the old ones that are failing. Amend it! Change it! Contribute to the conversation.”
  
  Yes, yes, cans of worms, or cans formerly holding worms, I understand now. And I like your strategy, too . . . some things are bad and we should make them good. I applaud your consistency with the most recent Republican presidential strategy. (You forgot the “black” part but it’s early. You’l have more chances.) That’s what I call a contribution. And so artfully cast. You should feel proud.
  
  Pray thee, vicar, do go on.
  
  It is so.
- Eastinfection
  Posted on March 17, 2013 at 1:06pm
  Wango-
  
  Rubber knives?
  
  Report this comment
NILAP
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:25pm
But will there be a crime and sentence associated with this. Murder, death penalty, life in prison ?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Keatonc333
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:51pm
  And are miscarriages now considered involuntary man-slaughter?
Wildcat1997
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:21pm
If we’re going to be 100% against abortion, we need to also be 100% for supporting those families that will be adopting… there are going to be a lot more kids in need of adoption.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- pauli101
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:26pm
  adoption? that means half of Africa and Mexico. this is not an ideological battle of left vs right, GOP vs Dems, Socialism vs liberty. This is ethnic warfare against white people.
  
  Why are hostile globalist elite defending Israel as a Jewish ethnostate with Jewish only immigration, but ravaging white majority Europe, North America into a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural Gulag with dystopian non-White colonization?
  
  Why do gullible Whites kowtow to hostile Jewish & crypto-Jewish elite, who butcher White soldiers in bankrupting wars, infiltrate & subvert our banks & spying agencies, indoctrinate us in classrooms & mass media, & plunder our jobs & wages?
  
  East Asia is 99% yellow. Africa is 99% Black. West Asia is 99% Brown. But 3rd world colonizers are annihilating Whites, just as Chinese colonizers are annihilating Tibet.
  
  “Native” Americans are not native. They invaded from East Asia. Not just Whites, but Muslims, Jews, China, India, Mayans, Africans all are guilty of slavery, imperialism. Whites were victims of Islamic, Jewish, African imperialism, slavery.
  
  Gullible Whites should reject subversive Jewish ideologies like libertarianism, feminism, liberalism, socialism, and hostile slanders of racism, collectivism.
  
  Love to all humanity, but White people must unite & organize to advance their families, their fertility, their interests. Reading list:
  http://goo.gl/iB777
  http://goo.gl/htyeq
  amazon.com/dp/0759672229
  amazon.com/dp/1410792617
  
  Report this comment
- Wildcat1997
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:29pm
  wow, crazy rant. I was just talking about adoption.
  
  Report this comment
- Voter713
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:35pm
  A FACT: None of our voices would be speaking on this page TODAY if it werent for the FACT that we were conceived!
  
  Report this comment
- Pillar of Fire
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:57pm
  THAT can be done more easily than you think. This is one repentance that would cause this Nation to prosper. Close those demon holes & we’d at least be on the right path that way!
  
  Report this comment
- John655
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 10:45pm
  @ Wild
  
  We need to fix the Dept of Children and Family Services (each state will have its own name.) They leave kids in terrible homes long enough to make the kids complete disasters, then if you choose to adopt one of these kids they will never tell you the history of the child, And you may get the child and everything may be fine till the kid turns ten or so and then they might decide to burn your house down or worse. I’ve adopted two children but from overseas. I don’t know if I could ever risk my family to a domestic adoption.
  
  Report this comment
Voter713
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:20pm
Bout time someone in politics had some b@@@s to stand up for life! Yea this risky for him to do but I applaud him for it!! And I highly doubt it will stick, but if it does omgoodness omgoodness omgoodness…:):):)

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
captainaubrey
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:18pm
Y’all better hope it doesn’t pass. Any one of you who has trouble conceiving a child will be SOL. No In-Vitro, no stem cells. This is classic Paul family silliness. They make a lot of sense, they make a lot of sense, and then boom, the wheels come off.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Voter713
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:28pm
  Im ok with no stemcells -oh and the fact that it would DEMOLISH roe vs wade —> which was based on a LIE (research it for yourself) – but explain to me how there would be no invitro?
  
  Report this comment
- Grover_Standpipe
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:44pm
  There would be no in vitro because in vitro doesn’t always work and depends upon redundancy to offer a good probability of success without prohibitive expense. Multiple embryos are created and implanted one at a time until one takes. The remainder are stored for a time and eventually destroyed if not needed.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:48pm
  @Voter713
  
  “but explain to me how there would be no invitro?”
  
  Is that a serious question? In-vitro involves placing already fertilized eggs (or humans, if this Act passes) inside a women having trouble conceiving. If the implantation fails, they try again. And again. Until one sticks and becomes viable.
  
  For every attempt to do so that fails, that is AT LEAST manslaughter. In fact, just holding fertilized eggs outside the body would be considered slavery or kidnapping.
  
  Report this comment
- Grover_Standpipe
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 6:57am
  whalevox
  I’m not quoting anybody. I’ve been saying this for years. For all I know, he got it from me.
  
  Report this comment
- Voter713
  Posted on March 18, 2013 at 2:32pm
  @locked – it wouldnt be considered manslaughter if the womans body couldnt hold the baby – that is the dumbest thing I have ever heard…it would or could never be considered manslaughter in that manner. FYI they can still do invitro by freezing the egg only – that way there is no “manslaughter” charge. Now if she got pregnant by invitro but just decided she didnt want the baby <—-that is manslaughter.
  
  Report this comment
Polarized America
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:15pm
SEARCHER619..said ..”"Based on what exactly?”"… sorry search but you have to be over 18 for me to explain it to you …../;-)

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Polarized America
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:37pm
  .
  ….???????? where did that death troll go ?…maybe somewhere to “”LIVE”"
  
  Report this comment
momrules
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:11pm
Well hallelujah……….Good for you Rand Paul.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
justangry
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:02pm
Damn it, he just blew it. There’s no way he’ll win the presidency now.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Steelhead
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:07pm
  he never had a chance to begin with..
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:10pm
  its politics – just like the romney endorsement
  
  Report this comment
- Kathleen
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:12pm
  A coward dies a thousand deaths.
  
  Nobody likes a coward and that is what the Republicans today are. A bunch of cowards.
  
  Report this comment
- Gonzo
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:14pm
  Bull, he just got a lot of people listening that weren’t listening before. He’s doing fine. Steely, I’d love to see him debate the cackling crone of the Democrat party. Hillary wouldn’t know what hit her.
  
  Report this comment
- DLV
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:25pm
  Just- he didn’t blow anything. He is sticking to principle. It’s a first and one you should root for.
  
  Report this comment
- justangry
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:49pm
  Folks, I agree with his principles. I just think this hurts his chances to win if he were to run and I’m unable to to grasp how such legislation can be enforced without violating the woman’s 4th amendment rights. Legislatively, it’s going to take a constitutional amendment to rid ourselves from it without violating the 10th.
  
  Report this comment
- Verceofreason
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 9:21pm
  No creationist will ever be elected president – and that
  includes the double talking Rubio.
MRSBoJangles
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:02pm
Rand Paul 2016!!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
welovetheUSA
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:58pm
Good…..the Mexicans will be behind you on this one.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
searcher619
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:58pm
Sorry but that is not a fact based law and as such, has no business being a law.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Kathleen
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:11pm
  Do you know otherwise?
  
  Report this comment
SteelJewel
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:57pm
Life does start at conception, period.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- searcher619
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:00pm
  Based on what exactly?
  
  Report this comment
- momrules
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:08pm
  Yes it does Steeljewel….yes it does!!…..
  
  Report this comment
- Voter713
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:13pm
  @steel – well then , when does it “begin” for you? Because frankly you would not be here if you leave out that tiny little fact of life that makes ALL life possible —-> conception. We ALL started from conception. It’s not that hard to understand.
  
  Report this comment
- Voter713
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:16pm
  @steel – sorry I totally misread your statement..completely agree :)
  
  Report this comment
- Wildcat1997
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:22pm
  Based on what exactly?? Ask your mom and dad.
  
  Report this comment
- circleDwagons
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:24pm
  How do we measure when conception happened. I disagree with the idea most pregancies are naturally aborted in the first couple of weeks. Life starts at implantation.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:25pm
  does anyone really think the founders had abortion in mind when they drafted the Constitution or when the states ratified it?
  
  Report this comment
- Grover_Standpipe
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:39pm
  Life begins at conception, but so what? Mere life has no special value. Mosquitoes and slime mold have life. What makes human life more valuable than other forms of life is our human minds. Human minds begin at birth when you start perceiving the world by means of your senses. A fetus can’t develop a human mind because it has nothing to think about. A pig has more of a mind, therefore, more of a right to life than a fetus.
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:43pm
  SOY, Other than LIFE, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, just what is your point?
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:46pm
  @RJ
  That we need a constitutional amendment because abortion was not on the minds of the founders when they wrote it….Hell, they couldnt even address slavery, let alone abortion.
  
  Just like the general welfare clause of the constitution was not written to authorize things like Obamacare
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:58pm
  @Grover
  
  “Human minds begin at birth when you start perceiving the world by means of your senses.”
  
  That’s not remotely true. Fetuses have awareness of the world outside the womb before they are born. And even newborns have differences of perception.
  
  The fact of the matter is that it’s impossible to find a clear “THIS IS X” point during the process of pregnancy that everyone will agree upon. Or even with the idea of “when does life begin”! Sperm and eggs are alive; you’d be foolish to doubt that, but also ludicrous to claim that they have much significant worth.
  
  A fertilized egg will never develop into a fetus without implantation, but does that mean all fertilized eggs are equivalent to living, born, humans? Few truly equate the two: just ask someone if they would say a petri dish of fertilized eggs or a crying infant from a fire. Even implantation isn’t a simple dividing line; an implanted fertilized egg will still spontaneous abort up to 50% of the time. Is that involuntary manslaughter now? What if the mother-to-be was on a rollercoaster and didn’t know she was pregnant?
  
  Paul opened Pandora’s Box; though to be fair, it’s an issue important to a lot of people. I don’t bash him for his views, but I hope he’s prepared to deal with the hard questions that will arise. He seems smart enough to have anticipated them… though I don’t know if there are any “good” answers.
  
  Report this comment
- circleDwagons
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 7:00pm
  Locked. Thank you
  
  Report this comment
- Grover_Standpipe
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 9:22pm
  Locked
  Fetuses may have awareness of the world outside the womb in the sense that they can perceive that there is sometimes loud meaningless noise, sometimes quieter meaningless noise and sometimes no meaningless noise. That alone is not enough to convey coherent sensory impressions or stimulate the thoughts that lead to human level consciousness. Until you’re born, you have less right to life than a mole.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 10:35pm
  @Grover
  
  ” That alone is not enough to convey coherent sensory impressions or stimulate the thoughts that lead to human level consciousness.”
  
  And until babies are around 6 months old (on average) they have no perception of object permanence. You can play “peek-a-boo” and they will be completely befuddled. Are you arguing that a 2nd-trimester abortion is equivalent to a 3-month-born infanticide? Of course not!
  
  My point is that you are arguing an absolutely terrible line of demarcation. Let’s put it a different way. You’re arguing “birth” makes a significant difference. Fine. Then is a 9-month fetus born via natural birth equivalent to a 7-month fetus born via C-section? OF COURSE! The ONLY difference is whether they are reliant upon the mother or not.
  
  You are arguing a completely irrelevant point. Get a better argument. You mean to argue that birth is the key point – you won’t reach that by your current argument, because you effectively say that a 24 month fetus that is successfully delivered has a more developed “mind” is less of a human (and thus a better candidate for abortion… despite being BORN) than a 33-month fetus that is not yet born. It’s moronic.
  
  Report this comment
- Grover_Standpipe
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 12:22am
  Locked
  You got it completely backwards. I didn’t say anything about months of gestation because that’s irrelevant. I said being born, no matter when it happens, is the dividing line between sub-human and human in early stages of developing because that is when the baby first receives meaningful sensory input worth thinking about. Your theoretical 24 month fetus that has been successfully delivered has a more developed mind is more of a human than a 33-month fetus that is not yet born, and thus has a right to not be aborted because of being born while the unborn 33-month fetus is still fair game.
  
  Report this comment
- whalevox
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 4:36am
  Grover. Did you actually try to use Dawkin’s argument? At least try to find an intellectual atheist to quote.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 8:15am
  @Grover
  
  “I said being born, no matter when it happens, is the dividing line between sub-human and human in early stages of developing because that is when the baby first receives meaningful sensory input worth thinking about.”
  
  But what you’re saying here is dead wrong. Notice the subjectivity of your own words: “worth thinking about.” That’s -your- view, and that’s -my- point: there is no clear line in the sand. The easiest is birth, but we don’t make that argument because of “meaningful sensory input;” we make it because it’s at that point that a baby is no longer dependent on its mother to live. Anyone can care for a child that’s born; only a mother can care for the fetus inside her.
  
  That’s why I’m saying that not only is the idea of “sensory input” subjective, it’s also worthless to debate with. You need to find a better argument, because that one absolutely fails to be convincing.
  
  Report this comment
- Grover_Standpipe
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 3:50pm
  Locked
  I don’t care why other people make the argument that life as a human begins at birth, I make it because you can’t begin to develop a genuinely human mind while you are still in the womb, and I am right.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 17, 2013 at 9:10am
  @Grover
  
  “I make it because you can’t begin to develop a genuinely human mind while you are still in the womb, and I am right.”
  
  The only reason “you’re right” is because you’re creating a completely subjective category and then saying “hey, this is what I believe!” It’s like making up a new word and insisting your definition for it is “right.” Congrats?
  
  In your view, a mind can only begin to be “genuinely human” after birth. You’ve given no reason for why this is, besides some vague “sensory input” excuse (which I’ve already noted is BS: fetuses still receive external sensory input). That’s why you can proudly pat yourself on the back by making up a strawman and knocking it down… but it would fail to convince anyone because your argument is entirely based on your personal definitions and not facts.
  
  Report this comment
- Grover_Standpipe
  Posted on March 17, 2013 at 11:49am
  It is a fact that the amount of information about the outside world you receive through a woman’s abdomen is insignificant compared to what you can begin to perceive after you are born.
  
  Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:56pm
what is this – a republican who actually means what he says???

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
All Pro
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:53pm
Rand Paul 2016!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Steelhead
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:52pm
we have no more right for privacy these elected people want to control other peoples lives
Log in to ReplyReply
- Gonzo
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:16pm
  …and you want to end the lives of the innocent.
  
  Report this comment
- Steelhead
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:59pm
  no Gozo I want you to live your life and I will live mine. I do not care what you do with your body and I am pretty sure you feel the same about mine.
- termyt
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 8:21pm
  But if we are to remain free, we must care about what you will do with another’s body. The only limitation on rights are to prevent you from infringing another’s. Infringing another’s right to live is most serious.
  
  Report this comment
Grover_Standpipe
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:52pm
This legislation does amend or interpret the Constitution, and does not simply rely on the 14th Amendment, which specifically includes the word “born.”

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Cavallo
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:51pm
As much as I detest abortion; this isn’t the fight we need to fight now.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Shasta.Red.Banks
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:58pm
  Yes it is and it always will be.
  
  Report this comment
- john vincent
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:01pm
  -cavollo-
  
  I understand your stance and its merits,
  but perhaps one could say:
  
  if something is right, it is always the right time-
  this coming along the heels of the German family’s battle to keep their kids- and this govt position to TAKE AWAY what is good and decent; in addition, Mr Paul is on a roll so he as an attentive crowd.
  
  ‘The righteous tend to life.’
  
  Report this comment
- All Pro
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:03pm
  Yes it is! They’re trying to strip us of our second amendment and Rand is picking up right were his dad left off by championing the principles the country was founded on. He’s sticking his thumb in the progressive’s eye!!!!
  
  Report this comment
- momrules
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:17pm
  Cavallo……..This is a fight that has been needed fought since Roe vs Wade. Anytime is the perfect time to try to stop the abomination of abortion.
  
  Report this comment
- justangry
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:24pm
  @AllPro, His father’s stance was defer it back to the states as per the 10th and he personally isn’t opposed to the morning after pill. The reality is there are a lot of women, that like us, believe abortion is wrong, but don’t want the government inside their bodies. I think Cavallo is right here. The law isn’t going to pass. It’s not even going to make it to the floor to be voted on, and he did himself and us, considering he’s the only standing for our rights, a disservice because this will be remembered. Not only that, there’s no way to enforce it without violating the 4th.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:27pm
  has a state ever tried to nullify roe v wade?
  
  Report this comment
- All Pro
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:42pm
  Well Just, the fight has to start somewhere and here is as good a place as any. I’m against abortion but I’m not against contraception including the morning after pill. This is one of those issues I disagreed with his dad on. It wasn’t a deal breaker for me but I do disagree with him. The right to life is a federal issue. Period.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:54pm
  @all pro
  If this “life begins at conception” bill were to pass, wouldnt that make the “morning after pill” illegal as well?
  
  Report this comment
- justangry
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 6:02pm
  @AllPro, I personally think Rand’s right, for what’s it worth.
  
  Report this comment
eat-more-bacon-USA
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:51pm
AWESOME! Rand Paul has hit a home run with this. CHOOSE LIFE!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Verceofreason
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 9:26pm
  Another waste of time.
  Like appealing Obamacare.
  How about some REAL ideas about the economy?
  
  Report this comment
- YOURSENSEI
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 11:29am
  Mr or Ms EAT-MORE-BACON-USA,
  
  Absolutely! Even better, we’re going to send a few babies who have no place else to go to your house. They deserve a loving Christian home where they will be clothed and fed and given the education and the health care they deserve.
  
  Thank you for being so generous. Now, how many do you have room for? Tell you what, we’ll start with six and move up from there.
  
  It is so.
- ltb
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 4:38pm
  It never ceases to amaze me how piggish liberals think if they get a woman pregnant that the options are: 1) murder the baby, or; 2) let somebody else raise the kid. So, let me get this straight, nonsensei – you want to have indiscriminate sex and you expect me to raise your kids after you’re finished having fun? Yeah, thanks but no thanks. Your ghetto mentality will get you no where in life… of course, that’s probably not a newsflash to you.
  
  Report this comment
tommytruck
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:51pm
It’s about time.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Steelhead
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:50pm
Add your comments

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Gonzo
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:17pm
  Speechless? This is a first.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:59pm
  @Gonzo
  
  Let’s hope it lasts!
  
  Report this comment
MajorMolly
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:50pm
Amen

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
MCON29
Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:47pm
This should not need to be legislated. It is common fact! The fact that we have a Democratic party that is willing to allow murder is INSANE!!!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- MCON29
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 4:51pm
  They dont just allow it, they champion it, they endorce it and promote it. They advertise for it, they legislate the right to allow it, and they fund it through taxpayers money. Its like they are hiring hitmen in the form of abortion doctors.
  
  Report this comment
- searcher619
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:03pm
  How is it a fact? Please enlighten us since people who know a bit more about life and biology don’t agree with you.
  
  Report this comment
- nesmond
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:22pm
  Since we do not know that absolutely that life begins at conception, should we not err on the side of caution? We do know as an absolute scientific fact that each and every embryo is a potential human life. If progressives are so hell-bent on population control, they should all just commit suicide.
  
  Report this comment
- momrules
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:31pm
  MCON29……..There is a Democratic President that champions the wholesale murder of innocents up to late term abortion/murder. He even champions letting the survivors of their late term murder attempt be left alone to die.
  
  Of course his supporters boo’ed God three times at their convention so they will not be happy with Senator Paul, but I sure am.
  
  Report this comment
- Verceofreason
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 9:24pm
  Forced pregnancy is yet another effort
  to keep women out of the work force and down trodden
- YOURSENSEI
  Posted on March 16, 2013 at 11:26am
  Mr or Ms NESMOND.
  
  This is what you must know:
  
  I commend you for your even-handed approach to this very divisive issue. I especially like your suggestion that all liberals should commit suicide. I mean, it’s so obvious! There is one wrinkle in your plan, and I’m sure you know what it is . . .suicide is against God’s will. And being one of His turgid little soldiers, I’m sure you want to live within the confines of His Word. Far better to simply round up the transgressors – gays, Jews, artists, liberals, non-believers – perhaps put them on a train to someplace more suitable for their detention. Give them a nice cot, some grain, and in the end maybe a shower. Yes, I believe we have a solution . . . finally.
  
  Love your uniform, by the way.
  
  It is so.

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.