Media

Rand Paul Won’t Allow Vote on Flood Insurance Until Senate Votes on When Life Begins

In a move that is sure to endear him to social conservatives (and irritate liberals of all stripes), Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has refused to allow votes on a bill that reauthorizes (and funds) FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program. And no, it is not only because Senator Paul shares his father Ron Paul’s draconian approach to spending.

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul Holds Up Vote on Flood Insurance So That He Can Get a Vote on Whether Life Begins at Conception

Senator Rand Paul and his father Congressman Ron Paul

Paul the younger is doing this because he wants to get a vote on a bill of his own — one that no liberal will ever want to face. Talking Points Memo reports:

But the Senate may not be able to clear its entire near-term agenda before the Independence day recess because Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) won’t allow a measure extending the FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program for five years to move forward until he gets a vote on legislation declaring that human life begins at conception.

“Just trying to get a vote for the people who elected me,” Paul told TPM in the Capitol Tuesday evening. “If he’ll give me a free-standing vote, I’ll take a free-standing vote anytime. He hasn’t been really forthcoming with offering a free-standing vote on it.”

The current NFIP authorization expires at the end of July, right in the middle of hurricane season. And though it’s feasible that the Senate could put a long-term extension to bed well before then, Reid says he won’t let Paul link his “personhood” amendment to a disaster insurance.

This puts Democrats in a pickle, because Paul is obviously not going to budge, and his simple argument that he just wants a vote will carry a lot of weight among people with an elementary sense of fairness. The fact that Democrats don’t want to be on the record voting against the idea that life begins at conception also speaks volumes about whether their conception of human life stacks up with that entertained by most Americans.

Nevertheless, this is Congress we are talking about. Some sort of middle ground that satisfies precisely no one and lowers their approval ratings will probably be reached.

Comments (33)

  • THX-1138
    Posted on June 29, 2012 at 10:39am

    This will not turn out well. They will never admit that life begins at conception so they will settle on the day it’s born (so as to expand the infanticide window rather than close it).

    The time for this vote was 200 years ago when most Americans weren’t in favor of legalized theft and murder.

    Report Post » THX-1138  
    • Conservative-Atheist
      Posted on June 29, 2012 at 3:09pm

      Why does this issue have to be so polarized with extremes on either side? One side seems to want abortion legal up until the moment before birth…clearly that’s not right. The other side wants it to be declared murder to abort an embryo that is a tenth of a millimeter big. If I eat an egg, have I just killed a chicken? It’s clearly wrong in my mind to abort a fetus once that fetus has an operating brain. I don’t see aborting an embryo as murder though. It’s not a person yet. That’s just my view, yours may differ.

      Report Post » Conservative-Atheist  
  • Warpspeedpetey
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 7:58pm

    Yeah Baby!

    Report Post »  
  • jjlm8
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 5:22pm

    I don’t understand calling a human fetus a parasite? When a woman wants her unborn child and the pegnancy is a difficult one then doctors and the potential parents will endure pain and spend tons of money to save the fetus and therefore the child. People will move heaven and earth to save a wanted child but if the mother doesn‘t want the baby then it’s ripped out and disposed of. Gven no more thought than a dirty tissue. A child can either be a priceless gift or trash. All that matters is what the woman wants.

    Report Post »  
  • soybomb315
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 3:26pm

    “And no, it is not only because Senator Paul shares his father Ron Paul’s draconian approach to spending.”

    Huh?

    Report Post » soybomb315  
  • Shakespear
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 11:25am

    Thanks be to God or Rand Paul. He makes me proud to be a Kentuckian! Finally, someone with enough courage to stand up to that sicko Dirty Harry Reid.

    Report Post » Shakespear  
    • justangry
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 12:03pm

      Remember where his character came from. We’ve had somone with that type of inegrity in office for the past 30 years. Many of us just didn’t realize it.

      Report Post » justangry  
    • soybomb315
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 3:27pm

      Not many people know much about Ron Paul personnaly, but you must be a good man to raise a son like that

      Report Post » soybomb315  
  • Pontiac
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 11:13am

    Republican logic:
    Force people conceive children they cannot afford and do not want.
    Expect them or their children not to vote you out and drain you dry with their system of government…

    Report Post » Pontiac  
    • EqualJustice
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 11:17am

      HAHA How do you FORCE people to CONCEIVE, you idiot?

      Report Post » EqualJustice  
    • blackyb
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 1:03pm

      Then don’t lay down and have sex, dog. If you don’t want children then you have no business laying your sorry azzes down (male or female) especially outside of marriage. If you have to be that sorry then use condoms. Those who want to kill little babies so they can have sex at will are murderers. These are not mistakes. A mistake is like calling the wrong phone number. A man and woman who lays down for sex has the free will will not to do this. Why should babies die so people can fornicate?

      Report Post » blackyb  
    • Pharmer1
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 1:54pm

      Abortion is used for concealing rape and sexual abuse of minors. This needs to be fully appreciated in order to understand the underpinnings of Pontiac’s comment.
      One of the essential arguments for “needing” abortion was to prevent women who were raped from having to carry the child. The pregnancy rate from forcible rape is extremely low. On the other hand, repeated sexual abuse of minors has contributed more to the demand for abortion, and even the so called “justification” for it.
      This can help in understanding Pontiac’s statement in support of abortion.
      Wouldn’t it be so much nicer if the sex crimes could be prevented, rather than covered up by killing humans prior to, during, or shortly after birth?

      Report Post »  
    • Pontiac
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 2:39pm

      @EqualJustice
      [FORCE people to CONCEIVE]
      Force people to be orphan vessels for your dogmatic mythology. Hows that? Idiot.

      [Those who want to kill little babies so they can have sex at will are murderers. These are not mistakes.]
      Your “god” kills 1 in 5 babies every year, if not more.
      “Miscarriages are very common. Approximately 20% of pregnancies (one in five) end in miscarriage. The most common cause is a genetic abnormality of the fetus. Not all women realize that they are miscarrying and others may not seek medical care when it occurs.”
      “The medical term for miscarriage is spontaneous abortion.”
      encyclopedia.com

      Lastly,
      Implying people ONLY have sex to conceive children.
      Implying walking sacks of hormones are intelligent enough to use contraceptives 100% of the time.
      Implying contraceptives are 100% perfect.
      Implying rape and child abuse would be reduced without abortion or that having a strangers or relatives child is preferred.
      Implying you remotely know my stance on the issue.

      Pontiac  
    • jjlm8
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 5:07pm

      Contraception is available to everyone in this country. We may not condone forcing our Catholic friends to provide it and pay for it. however, anyone that wants to avoid an unwanted pregnancy just needs to stop by a drugstore or keep their pants up and PROBLEM SOLVED!!

      Report Post »  
    • Warpspeedpetey
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 8:03pm

      @Pontiac

      +Your “god” kills 1 in 5 babies every year, if not more.

      By that reasoning anyone who dies from natural causes is killed by G-d. Your reasoning here leads to an absurd conclusion

      Report Post »  
    • Pontiac
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 10:46pm

      @Warpspeedpetey
      Yes, god is an absurd conclusion for anything.

      @jjlm8
      [just needs to stop by a drugstore or keep their pants up]
      Implying all people are that intelligent, never act on impulse, or had contraceptives fail.

      Report Post » Pontiac  
    • Libertarian
      Posted on June 29, 2012 at 3:33am

      Pontiac,

      In order to uphold the law and protect ones RIGHT to LIFE, liberty and property. Isn’t it upon us to define when life begins so that we can protect it, define liberty positive or negative and property personal and real property? We do this daily, in courts, before legislative bodies, at the ballot boxes and through debate.

      Debate is good. Are you going to pull a Gorical and tell me that the debate is over?

      Oh and btw, at what point in time did non-living matter turn to living matter? How did this happen? Certainly your faith in this phenomena relies on an equal amount of faith as an Omnipotent God.

      Report Post » Libertarian  
    • THX-1138
      Posted on June 29, 2012 at 10:43am

      “HAHA How do you FORCE people to CONCEIVE, you idiot?”

      You convince them that life is not sacred and that it’s ok to kill your baby. Besides, “everyone’s doing it”….

      Or you offer them more money in their government check for each child you have out of wedlock.

      Or…

      Report Post » THX-1138  
    • Pontiac
      Posted on June 29, 2012 at 12:24pm

      It is no more okay for them to kill a fetus than it is for you or I to tell a woman she MUST have it from the moment of conception. It is as if you people think you own women. For the first 40 days there are no brain waves from a fetus. None. Nadda. I say a woman choosing (NOT YOU CHOOSING FOR HER) to have an abortion in that period of time is fine. So long as we’re not paying for it! If we are paying for the abortion or those on welfare are having children they cannot afford then that should open the door to mandatory sterilization. That would put and end to welfare broodmares.

      Report Post » Pontiac  
  • TEIN
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 10:37am

    The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a “child in utero” as a legal victim, if he or she is injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines “child in utero” as “a member of the species **** sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb”…there is a law that already defines when an “unborn” child is recognized as an entity with protection of life…no one in congress or the courts has the courage to uphold that the child is an individual when it comes to abortion…..

    Report Post »  
  • G.E.R
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 10:28am

    He’s a moron like his father. And this sanctity of life thing is nothing more than a man made BS story so living people can feel noble.

    Report Post »  
    • EqualJustice
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 11:18am

      I bet you value YOUR own life?

      Report Post » EqualJustice  
    • G.E.R
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 2:03pm

      We’re not talking about me. What we’re talking about is how a moron like Paul would tie 2 completely different issues together. And as far as the moment of conception goes. That is not a person, technically it’s a parasite.

      Report Post »  
    • Warpspeedpetey
      Posted on June 28, 2012 at 8:47pm

      @GER

      Who gave you the right to define a person?

      Report Post »  
  • T-2
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 10:11am

    I have an man-crush on Rand Paul.

    Report Post »  
  • honor007
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 10:05am

    good job, Rand!!!! Make them come and declare their position!!!

    Report Post » honor007  
  • sawbuck
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 10:05am

    Rand is a good chess player…Your move Dems.

    Report Post » sawbuck  
  • IMCHRISTIAN
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 10:05am

    If it was not for that first cell none of us would be here. God is our Creator and that cell is our beginning..

    Thank you God for my life and may I make you proud by doing what is right in all things.

    Report Post »  
  • Stoic one
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 10:03am

    “Nevertheless, this is Congress we are talking about. Some sort of middle ground that satisfies precisely no one and lowers their approval ratings will probably be reached.”

    This is Rand Paul we are talking about here – I am willing to bet Reid buckles.

    Report Post » Stoic one  
  • hauschild
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 10:01am

    Awesome! One of only a handful of conservatives with actual stones.

    It’s all about principles.

    Report Post »  
  • Tri-ox
    Posted on June 28, 2012 at 9:57am

    Sweet.

    Report Post » Tri-ox  

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love