Life at Conception Overturns Roe v Wade


John R. Houk

© July 28, 2013

 

Senator Rand Paul explains how Roe v Wade Supreme Court decision allows for legislators – State level and Federal level – to define when life begins for an unborn baby. Thus defining life beginning at conception effectively ends abortion murder. Why? Because the 14th Amendment protects life.

 

VIDEO: Rand Paul on the Life at Conception Act

 

Amendment 14

 

SECTION 1.

 

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. 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.

 

SECTION 2.

 

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

 

SECTION 3.

 

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

 

SECTION 4.

 

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

 

SECTION 5.

 

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

 

Section 1 is the reference giving rights to humans. I highlighted the relevant portions in bold print above, but for the sake of brevity below is the highlighted bold print of Section 1:

 

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.

 

In the matter of Texas disallowing abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy when the kid is fully formed and recognized as a human, you can see the outrage I feel toward Leftists that feel a21 Week Old Baby on Delivery woman’s Right of Choice outweighs a human being’s Right to Live.

 

Here is a link to the petition Senator Rand Paul is talking about.

 

JRH 7/28/13

Please Support NCCR

The shocking video the Supreme Court doesn’t want you to see


Abortion is Murder definition

Abortion is murder. I’m not going to get into argument abortion in cases of rape, incest or the threat to a mother’s life. Those three pro-abortion arguments are a mere diversion to distract Pro-Life and uninformed people on the fence about abortion about the overwhelming reason abortions happen. THAT REASON is birth control! DEFINITELY birth control abortion is murder and must be stopped!

 

Below is a message from Senator Rand Paul which is followed by the words of a petition. To sign the petition as you should click the link at the end and to page I cross posted from then engage signature information.

 

Thank you

 

John R. Houk

3/1/13

Please Support NCCR

*************************

The shocking video the Supreme Court doesn’t want you to see

 

By Sen. Rand Paul

Sent: 2/28/2013 4:20 PM

Sent from: National Pro-Life Alliance

 

Dear Concerned American,

I’ve prepared a brief but urgent video regarding breaking news in the fight to overturn Roe v. Wade in our nation.

Please take a moment to listen to my urgent message by clicking here.

After you listen, please sign the petition to finally end abortion on demand.

Sincerely,

Rand Paul,
U.S. Senator (R-KY)

________________________

Rand Paul on the Life at Conception Act

 

56 MILLION BABIES CONDEMNED TO PAINFUL DEATHS …

 

“A Bold Aggressive Campaign

 

The Life at Conception Act, a simple piece of legislation to bring “LEGAL” definition of life inline the biological, in effect, bypassing Roe v Wade.

 

Rand Paul Video

 

SIGN THE PETITION BELOW

__________________________

NPLA Mission

 

Because every human life is precious in the eyes of God, and science and common sense dictate that life begins at conception, it is clear that abortion is the wanton taking of human life and no truly great nation can allow this practice to take place.

Ever since the dreadful Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, more than 55 million precious unborn babies have lost their lives.

The National Pro-Life Alliance’s members, staff and volunteers are dedicated to halting this slaughter once and for all. And despite the many remaining obstacles, there is light at the end of the tunnel.

National Pro-Life Alliance’s Focus Is Passing Substantive Pro-Life Legislation

The National Pro-Life Alliance occupies a unique and important role in the pro-life movement. The focus of many other pro-life organizations is research, publications or counseling.

These are all important and worthy activities, but the National Pro-Life Alliance is singular in its focus on passing pro-life legislation that will protect the unborn from the moment of conception onward.

We believe that it is not sufficient to merely support minor regulations on abortion in a few outrageous cases.

Instead, members of the National Pro-Life Alliance lobby both incumbents and candidates for office to come out clearly for measure like a Life at Conception Act to legislatively define constitutionally-protected “personhood” as beginning at the moment of conception.

Grass-Roots Pressure Has Built Record Support in Congress for Ending, Not Merely Regulating, Abortion-on-Demand

The grass-roots lobbying efforts of our 650,000 members have garnered a record level of support and cosponsors for such substantive measures.

The fact is, even with pro-abortion politicians still in leadership positions in the Senate and a radical President in the White House, pro-lifers have record support in Congress. More than 80 new members of Congress were elected on pro-life platforms. Now pro-lifers must hold the feet of each and every self-proclaimed “pro-life” member of Congress to the fire and demand meaningful legislation to limit, and ultimately end, abortion-on-demand.

Yet pro-abortion politicians from both parties will use every trick available to stop pro-life legislation. Nevertheless READ THE REST

Abortion: A Contribution to the High Crime Rate in the African American Community


Aborted - BHO View on Right to Life and Liberty

Here are some interesting thoughts about abortion sent by a person who wishes to remain anonymous at this time.

 

JRH 2/17/13

Please Support NCCR

***************************

Abortion: A Contribution to the High Crime Rate in the African American Community

 

By Anonymous

Sent: 2/16/2013 8:28 PM

 

One of the common misconceptions that are perpetuated in our society is that abortion reduces crime rates.  Therefore abortion is a necessary evil as it accomplishes a greater good for our society.  I take exception with the terms necessary evil or greater good, as it is contradictory in itself and has been used as a justification for some of the worst atrocities in human history.  I seek to outright contradict the notion that abortion reduces the crime rate.  In fact I propose that abortion actually increases crime rates.  Though all I will be able to give you is logic and data that has a correlation to the effect I strongly believe this is the case.

The data:

There have been studies that claim abortion reduces crime.  But what is shown here, anyone with a little bit of intelligence and curiosity can easily build themselves.  It is very simplistic and as we know from Occam’s Razor when all the wrong answers are removed the simplest solution is likely the correct one. All one has to do to produce the graph below is look up the national crime rates, number of abortions, and number of people in the nation for the years shown and they themselves can produce the same graph.  The blue line represents the number of crimes per person, while the red line represents the number of abortions per person multiplied by 7 and then with an offset of 10 years into the future.

 

mime-attachment.jpeg

 

national crime rates, number of abortions, and number of people graph

The abortions per person is multiplied by 7 only to give the curve a more distinct appearance so that it can be easy followed along with the crime statistics while the offset for 10 years is to compare the age at which children might have started committing crimes.  As can be seen the crime rate is proportional to the abortion rate suggesting a correlation between increase crimes with increased abortions and decreased crimes with decreased abortions.

 Why might it increase crime rather than reduce it?  Well this is a good question?  In the last 50 years our country has done everything it can to destroy the family structure from allowing no fault divorce to encouraging sexual promiscuity.  But what most may have not realized is that our country is also encouraging the worst possible mothers to be the parents of the next generation, and abortion is only half the equation to this encouragement.

One of the common themes that the left tries is to paint abortion in a positive light by saying that it is a necessary evil because it eliminates unwanted children who have no future and would only be a burden on society. Commonly pro-life advocates argue against this as a valid reason to end the life of what is sacred and valuable (every human life).  Even though it is true that this isn’t a valid reason pro-life advocates commonly fail to challenge the premise that abortion is ridding us of unwanted children whose future is unlikely to turn out well.  In reality when US policies allow mothers to choose abortion, it is those women who are actually contemplating their future.  In their fear of what it may become, they are ending these lives.  While the benefit of the welfare system is encouraging the women who are thinking of what they can get now to keep their children by increasing what they can get.   So instead these philosophies are encouraging those who would probably turn out to be bad mothers to keep their children and those who would probably turn out to be good mothers to kill them.  This is sad because we should be encouraging those who would be good mothers to keep them and those who would be bad mothers to put them up for adoption.

 Fatherlessness is noted as the prime reason for high crime rates in the African American community.  Most will not deny that, including me, as it is one the major differences in African American communities and communities of other ethnic backgrounds which do not have higher crime rates.  This huge shortage of positive male role models is causing destruction of the family structure and its benefits that allow the rearing children in the way they should go.  What I want to propose is that the combination of the higher abortion rate along with the promotion of welfare programs, which has become prominent amongst the African American community because they have a higher poverty rate, is contributing to the really high fatherlessness in their community.  For if it is more likely that bad mothers are the ones keeping their children they are also unlikely to choose good role models for mates either.

 

Sources:

 

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

 

http://www.christianliferesources.com/article/u-s-abortion-statistics-by-year-1973-current-1042

_________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

54 arrested (so far) outside White House in protests against HHS mandate


Pro-Life Protesters in Front of White House

 

Beware! Do not protest in the name of Jesus in front of the White House with a Democratic Party incumbent President. YOU WILL BE ARRESTED!

 

Check out this headline from LifeSiteNews: 54 arrested (so far) outside White House in protests against HHS mandate

 

This protest was not Leftists decrying the war or homosexuals demanding their abomination get equal treatment or Radical Muslims demanding Sharia Law (cancelled due to uncertainty of participants) be recognized in the USA. All three of those groups use disruption and violence when protesting in front of the White House.

 

The Christian protest involved prayers and signs and maybe a little preaching of the Word of God followed by arrests.

 

JRH 10/5/12 (Hat Tip: Justin O. Smith)

Please Support NCCR

Get Over the Gaffe and STILL Support Akin for Senate


Todd Akin Family

John R. Houk

© August 22, 2012

 

GOP Rep. Todd Akin is running for the Senate Seat currently held by the Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill. Akin has enjoyed an ever widening poll lead over McCaskill until a gaffe moment made him out to be an uncaring male concerning the issue of rape and abortion.

 

Democrats jumped on Akin like flies on manure. That was to be expected from Leftist hypocrites. The irony has been is that many big dog Republicans including presumptive Republican Nominee for President Mitt Romney.

 

Now I think I can guess why these Establishment Republicans sold Akin out.

 

I am certain at the top of the list is Political Correctness and the ability of the Democratic Party to control (or at least manage) the Media talking points when it comes to Republicans, Tea Party Candidates and Social Conservatives. Establishment Republicans are ever concerned on the damage the Left Mainstream Media (MSM) can form in the mind of voters concerning image.

                                                       

Next on the list of the Establishment sell-out of Akin is an actual Establishment Republican dislike of the ever growing Conservative wing of the GOP that primarily dedicated to Tea Party politics and Social Conservatism. In essence it is my belief the Establishment Republican power base are the Crony Capitalists that Tea Party Conservatives are weary of being associated.

 

For a little clarity’s sake, what is Crony Capitalism?

 

Crony capitalism and genuine capitalism, if not opposites, are fundamentally opposed. Unfortunately the broader public, to date, is largely unaware of this.

 

Crony capitalism is the marriage of the state and private special interests. Some people have called it corporatism, mercantilism, fascism, or even Communism.

 

We will call it crony capitalism.

 

By whatever name, it is phony capitalism.

 

Over the years the public has been taught that many of the problems it faces on a day to day basis such as the lack of jobs, rising prices, corruption in Congress, and so on are a result of capitalism.

 

If so, it is a perverted capitalism.

 

These unsavory realities are largely the result of government/private “partnerships.”

 

Whether in banking, agriculture, housing, energy, transportation, manufacturing, or nearly any other facet of the economy, the “unsavory” parts are often the result of public/private collusion.

 

Why can’t you get any kind of return on … READ THE REST (What is Crony Capitalism; website AgainstCronyCapitalism.org)

 

These are my thoughts on why Akin’s own Republican Party has sold him out on a gaffe.

 

As I said, I am not surprised the Dems went after Akin’s gaffe because Dems are hypocrites when it comes to the moral high ground. If I Googled enough I can come up with a number of Dems that had moral or near criminal behavior that the Dems and the MSM never called for a resignation or not to run an election campaign. However I like to point out one of the biggest Dem dog the Democrats protected from political fall-out.

 

That big dog Dem is former President Slick Willie (Bill or William) Clinton. Clinton’s behavior at the least was an adulterous skirt chaser and at the worst a serial rapist. When Clinton’s sperm was proven to be on the skirt of then intern Monica Lewinsky, it was indisputable proof an unfaithful husband. Clinton should have resigned and of course he refused. AND the Dems and the MSM backed Clinton’s desire to remain in the Office of President of the United States.

 

Rep. Todd Akin in his campaign to unseat Claire McCaskill from the Senate is a Pro-Life Social Conservative. He believes life begins at conception (as do I). His thoughts on abortion and the right to life run so deep that he is in the crowd that rape should not be a reason for killing a baby (I waver back and forth on this issue). In explaining his Pro-Life stance he used the words “legitimate rape” in an interview. Of course there is no such thing as a legitimate rape. So what other phrase could Rep. Akin have used?

 

Perhaps there is a difference between rape and consensual rough sex. In which case, a better word for “legitimate” would be actual rape. Statistics do show that actual rape produces far less pregnancies than consensual sex. Do the statistics line up with Akin’s thought that a woman’s biology somehow prevents male sperm from fertilizing a female egg in rape? This is where Akin screwed up. The statistics and the alleged science Akin refers to are not a match.

 

The statistics refer more to the occasions of rape and pregnancy has more to do with the sexual prowess of the rapist. An example I read runs something like – a rapist is impotent or prematurely ejaculates – hence the statistics implicates a failure of planting the male seed rather than the female body rejecting a rapist’s sperm.

 

Below are three WND articles that defend Rep. Todd Akin’s right to stick to his guns and continue to run for the Office of Senator from the State of Missouri based on his politics rather than a gaffe – really the first if not only gaffe in Akin’s campaign to unseat a Liberal Democratic Party Senator.

 

JRH 8/22/12

Please Support NCCR

Constitutionally Overrule SCOTUS on Abortion


jesus-crucified-in-the-womb

John R. Houk

© August 16, 2012

 

How do we overturn the abortion flood opened by Roe v. Wade? Take the Supreme Court out of the equation by Congress defining life begins at conception just as the Bible declares. Congress can do this without an Amendment to the Constitution by enacting a Bill.

 

1 “Listen, O coastlands, to Me,
And take heed, you peoples from afar!
The Lord has called Me from the womb;
From the matrix of My mother He has made mention of My name.
2 And He has made My mouth like a sharp sword;
In the shadow of His hand He has hidden Me,
And made Me a polished shaft;
In His quiver He has hidden Me.” (Isa. 49: 1-2
NKJV)

 

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you;
Before you were born I sanctified you;
I ordained you a prophet to the nations.” (Jer. 1: 5
NKJV)

 

Senator Rand Paul is circulating a petition to show Congress that voters are more Pro-Life than kill the unborn baby. Now we all know the purpose of the petition is a fund raiser; nonetheless imagine if there was viral Internet support to work around the Supreme Court constitutionally. You can read Rand Paul’s stand on abortion/Pro-Life from his Senate-Govt. website HERE.

 

VIDEO: Rand Paul on the Life at Conception Act

 

 

Senator Rand Paul petition sign-up HERE

 

Left Wing liar-crook Senator Reid is the current Senate Majority leader by virtue of the Dems being the majority in the Senate. As you know the Dems elicit their pro-abortion stance by not recognizing a fetus is a human life and thus a woman has a right to choose to get rid of that nuisance organ produced by sex with a male. Senator Reid has made no bones about it – he will block any Life Begins at Conception legislation in the Senate.

 

The NPLA information below is a little dated yet still is a good description on how a Life Begins at Conception Act would work.

 

JRH 8/16/12

Please Support NCCR

***************************

Legislatively Overturning Roe v. Wade with a Life at Conception Act

A Frontal Assault on Roe v. Wade’s Protection of Abortion-on-Demand

 

 

By National Pro-Life Alliance

 

For more than thirty years, nine unelected men and women on the Supreme Court have played God with innocent human life.

  

The result has been a brutal holocaust that has claimed the lives of more than 55 million innocent and helpless unborn children in America.

  

In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling forced abortion-on-demand down our nation’s throat.

   

As a result, many pro-lifers resigned themselves to protecting a life here and there — passing laws which slightly regulate abortion in the most outrageous cases. Others tiptoed around the Supreme Court, hoping they wouldn’t be offended.

 

Life at Conception Act Follows the High Court’s Instructions by Defining When Life Begins

   

Now the time to grovel before the Supreme Court is over.

   

Working from what the Supreme Court ruled in Roe, pro-life lawmakers can pass a Life at Conception Act and end abortion by using the Constitution instead of amending it.

   

A simple majority vote in both houses of Congress is all that is needed to pass a Life at Conception Act as opposed to the two-thirds required to add a Constitutional amendment.

   

When the Supreme Court handed down its now-infamous Roe v. Wade decision, it did so based on a new, previously undefined “right of privacy” which it “discovered” in so-called “emanations” of “penumbrae” of the Constitution.

   

Of course, as constitutional law it was a disaster. But never once did the Supreme Court declare abortion itself to be a Constitutional right.

   

Instead the Supreme Court said:

 

“We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins . . . the judiciary at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.”

 

Life at Conception Act Would Dismantle Roe Using the Supreme Court’s Own Language

   

Then the High Court made a key admission:

 

“If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case [i.e. “Roe” who sought the abortion], of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment.”

   

That’s exactly what a Life at Conception Act would do.

   

A Life at Conception Act changes the focus of the abortion debate. It takes the Supreme Court out of the equation and places responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the elected representatives who, unlike life term judges, must respond to grass-roots pressure.

  

National Pro-Life Alliance members have led the fight to end abortion-on-demand by passing a Life at Conception Act. They have generated over 1.5 million petitions to Congress to date urging lawmakers to cosponsor and fight for passage of a Life at Conception Act.

 

Fight to Overturn Roe v. Wade Heats Up in Congress

   

Those continued efforts have led to ever-increasing support for a Life at Conception Act in Congress. In the 112th Session of Congress, Pro-life Members of Congress introduced Life at Conception Acts – in both the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.

   

Thanks to the grassroots lobbying of National Pro-Life Alliance members, the Life at Conception Act was introduced with an all time record number of cosponsors, in both houses. And NPLA members will continue to hold the politicians accountable, pushing for an up or down vote on a Life at Conception Act.

   

In the U.S. Senate, pro-life floor leader Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) introduced the Life at Conception Act, S. 91.

   

Behind the two Life at Conception Act bills in the House are Congressman Duncan D. Hunter (R-CA) and Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA). By introducing H.R. 374, Congressman Duncan D. Hunter, the son of former Life at Conception Act sponsor Duncan L. Hunter, is following in his father’s footsteps.

   

Hunter serves as the Representative of the 52nd Congressional District of California, the post held by his father prior to his retirement in 2007.

   

Congressman Paul Broun, the author of H.R. 212, is a former medical doctor who entered the political arena in 2007.

   

Congressman Broun has since sought to use his medical expertise to legally establish the scientific fact that conception marks the creation of a genetically unique human being, who should be guaranteed Constitutional protection under the 14th Amendment.

   

An up or down vote on the Life at Conception Act will put politicians on record either for or against ending abortion-on-demand.

  

Pro-lifers are urged to call (202) 224-3121 and insist that their Congressmen cosponsor H.R. 374 and H.R. 212, and that their Senators cosponsor S. 91 today…

 

§  Click here to download talking points on the Life at Conception Act

 

§  Click here to see if your Senator is a co-sponsor of the Life at Conception Act

 

§  Click here to see if your Congressman is a co-sponsor of the Life at Conception Act

 

§  Click here to download Roger Wicker’s Life at Conception Act, S. 91

 

§  Click here to download Duncan Hunter’s Life at Conception Act, H.R. 374

 

§  Click here to download Paul Broun’s Life at Conception Act, H.R. 212

 

______________________________

Constitutionally Overrule SCOTUS on Abortion

John R. Houk

© August 16, 2012

_______________________________

Legislatively Overturning Roe v. Wade with a Life at Conception Act

 

National Pro-Life Alliance Homepage

 

NPLA Mission:

 

Because every human life is precious in the eyes of God, and science and common sense dictate that life begins at conception, it is clear that abortion is the wanton taking of human life and no truly great nation can allow this practice to take place.

   

Ever since the dreadful Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, more than 55 million precious unborn babies have lost their lives.

   

The National Pro-Life Alliance’s members, staff and volunteers are dedicated to halting this slaughter once and for all. And despite the many remaining obstacles, there is light at the end of the tunnel.

 

National Pro-Life Alliance’s Focus Is Passing Substantive Pro-Life Legislation

   

The National Pro-Life Alliance occupies a unique and important role in the pro-life movement. The focus of READ THE REST

Facebook shuts down pro-life message


Facebook Censorship

With my recent experience with censorship this article caught my attention. The WND article is about how Facebook allowed information about do-it-your-self abortion but censored a Pro-Life Pastor that countered with images of what abortion looks like after the life in a woman’s womb is murdered.

 

Censorship of Christian Morality is increasing in America.

 

JRH 2/19/12

Using Federalism to Nullify Roe v. Wade


Aborted Baby

 

John R. Houk

© July 2011

 

I am unapologetically a Pro-Life person. I believe children have more rights to be protected than a woman has a right over her own body. I believe life begins at conception. I believe life is the result of the Creator. I believe killing an unborn life merely as a form of birth control is reprehensible, evil and murder.

 

Now this is where I may disagree with many of my fellow Pro-Lifers. I believe a pregnancy that resulted from rape should be provided with the abortion pill or whatever they are calling it these days because rape is the act brutal pathological violence even if it is a onetime snap of judgment. Because the trauma of a rape on a woman is taking away her right to safety and quite probably scarring her psychological ability to deal with a healthy romance or interpersonal relations with the opposite sex I favor the female victim to make a choice of abortion, adoption or keeping the child.

 

I believe if it is a choice between the life of an unborn child or the life of a pregnant woman, then the choice of life should go to the woman.

 

I know in these two instances I might be in trouble with my fellow Pro-Lifers.

 

Yet I have to reassert that abortion as the mere act of birth control IS HEINOUSLY AN UNGODLY ACT OF MURDER.

 

Having said all this I found an interesting tidbit of information from the Tenth Amendment Center (TAC) about the law and abortion. TAC evidently has been tracking proposed legislation in the great State of Ohio that might “nullify” Roe v. Wade which opened wide the gates of unborn infanticide in America. Those gates were swung open by the United States Supreme Court by deciding 7 to 2 to legalize abortion as a right to privacy issue which can loosely be interpreted that a woman’s decisions over her body weighs more than the unborn human life to have the right to live.

 

The TAC reports that the Lower House of the Ohio State General Assembly has passed legislation that would define human life to begin with a viable heart beat. If the General Assembly Senate follows suit and the Ohio Governor signs such a Bill into law there certain to be an Appellate and probable Supreme Court weigh-in on such a law.

 

According to the TAC report it seems that many Pro-Lifers believe such an Ohio law will hand more nails in the coffin of the Right to Life when the Federal Court system makes a decision which might use Roe v. Wade as part of judicial history to overturn such a law on the State level.

 

I on the other hand believe that if an anti-abortion law comes into existence on the State level it will be the opportunity to reaffirm the principle of Federalism that our great nation was founded upon. We are talking States’ Rights and the Federal Court to uphold the principle of the Tenth Amendment:

 

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

 

Allowing sovereign States in the Union of the United States of America to decide the legality or illegality of abortion would fit closer to the Tenth Amendment and the right of the States to make law that is not specifically written in the U.S. Constitution. Keep in mind U.S. Congressional Bills are not the same as the U.S. Constitution.

 

The Federalist path to Pro-Life may not be the perfect picture of God creating life at conception; however it would be a great beginning to reverse Roe v. Wade.

 

JRH 7/15/11

Are the Unborn Human?


Lia is a fifteen year old gal defending babies from being butchered by abortion. Below is a brief United Families International blog post introducing Lia which I will follow by the video on the UFI blog post. This was posted at UFI on June 24, 2011.

 

Lia is one smart gal. God bless her pro-Life video and may those who hear, listen with the eyes and ears of their spirit opened to understand.

 

JRH 7/5/11

**************************

Are the Unborn Human?

 

The answer to some questions seem so straightforward and simple.  Are the unborn human?   As 15-year-old Lia points out, that question is the crux of the abortion debate.   With amazing easy and articulation, Lia lays out the pro-life arguments for you in this video.  Enjoy and share.

 

Do Abortions Bring Down Crime Rates?


Unborn Baby 2

 

By Adam David Houk

Edited by: John R. Houk

© March 15, 2011

 

You know how pro-choice people are always saying that abortions are good for crime rates.  Well I looked up some things and made a chart that would throw that idea out of the water.  I have made a chart of crimes per Population as a percentage and the number of abortions per Population as a percentage.  I also included and offset of 10 years to allow for children to come to an age of crime-worthiness.  The results are profound. Look at the chart.

 

Year

Population

# Crimes

Percentage per Population

Abortions

Percentage per Population

PPP offset by 10 years

1960

179,323,175

3,384,200

1.89

     

1961

182,992,000

3,488,000

1.91

     

1962

185,771,000

3,752,200

2.02

     

1963

188,483,000

4,109,500

2.18

     

1964

191,141,000

4,564,600

2.39

     

1965

193,526,000

4,739,400

2.45

     

1966

195,576,000

5,223,500

2.67

     

1967

197,457,000

5,903,400

2.99

     

1968

199,399,000

6,720,200

3.37

     

1969

201,385,000

7,410,900

3.68

     

1970

203,235,298

8,098,000

3.98

     

1971

206,212,000

8,588,200

4.16

     

1972

208,230,000

8,248,800

3.96

     

1973

209,851,000

8,718,100

4.15

744,600

0.35

 

1974

211,392,000

10,253,400

4.85

898,600

0.43

 

1975

213,124,000

11,292,400

5.30

1,034,200

0.49

 

1976

214,659,000

11,349,700

5.29

1,179,300

0.55

 

1977

216,332,000

10,984,500

5.08

1,316,700

0.61

 

1978

218,059,000

11,209,000

5.14

1,409,600

0.65

 

1979

220,099,000

12,249,500

5.57

1,497,700

0.68

 

1980

225,349,264

13,408,300

5.95

1,553,900

0.69

 

1981

229,146,000

13,423,800

5.86

1,577,300

0.69

 

1982

231,534,000

12,974,400

5.60

1,573,900

0.68

 

1983

233,981,000

12,108,600

5.18

1,575,000

0.67

0.35

1984

236,158,000

11,881,800

5.03

1,577,200

0.67

0.43

1985

238,740,000

12,431,400

5.21

1,588,200

0.67

0.49

1986

240,132,887

13,211,869

5.50

1,574,000

0.66

0.55

1987

242,282,918

13,508,700

5.58

1,559,100

0.64

0.61

1988

245,807,000

13,923,100

5.66

1,590,800

0.65

0.65

1989

248,239,000

14,251,400

5.74

1,566,900

0.63

0.68

1990

248,709,873

14,475,600

5.82

1,608,600

0.65

0.69

1991

252,177,000

14,872,900

5.90

1,556,500

0.62

0.69

1992

255,082,000

14,438,200

5.66

1,528,900

0.60

0.68

1993

257,908,000

14,144,800

5.48

1,495,000

0.58

0.67

1994

260,341,000

13,989,500

5.37

1,423,000

0.55

0.67

1995

262,755,000

13,862,700

5.28

1,359,400

0.52

0.67

1996

265,228,572

13,493,863

5.09

1,360,160

0.51

0.66

1997

267,637,000

13,194,571

4.93

1,335,000

0.50

0.64

1998

270,296,000

12,475,634

4.62

1,319,000

0.49

0.65

1999

272,690,813

11,634,378

4.27

1,314,800

0.48

0.63

2000

281,421,906

11,608,072

4.12

1,312,990

0.47

0.65

2001

285,317,559

11,876,669

4.16

1,291,000

0.45

0.62

2002

287,973,924

11,878,954

4.13

1,269,000

0.44

0.60

2003

290,690,788

11,826,538

4.07

1,250,000

0.43

0.58

2004

293,656,842

11,679,474

3.98

1,222,100

0.42

0.55

2005

296,507,061

11,565,499

3.90

1,206,200

0.41

0.52

2006

299,398,484

11,401,511

3.81

   

0.51

2007

301,621,157

11,251,828

3.73

   

0.50

2008

304,374,846

11,160,543

3.67

   

0.49

2009

307,006,550

10,639,369

3.47

   

0.48

           

0.47

           

0.45

           

0.44

           

0.43

           

0.42

           

0.41

 

I took the population of the year and divided it by the parameter and multiplied it by 100.  This gave me a percentage of acts done per person per year (whether it is crime or abortions).

 

My first point to make is that there is no way anyone could use abortions as a means to lower crime as an excuse to legalize it.  This just is not true.  I made an offset of the abortions rate of 10 years because I believe that children are at an age where they are smart enough to get themselves into a lot of trouble, and is also an age in which parents may start to let children roam around more freely.  Looking at this 10 year offset I noticed that both abortions and crime rates steadily increase from (5.18, .35) percent to (5.90, .69) percent.  Where on this offset both start to decrease never again increase for more than 1 consecutive year.

 

This therefore makes more of a connection to abortions increasing the rate of crime than decreasing it.  This should be mind boggling.

 

The only possible reason that I can think of for the opposite connection of the suggested crime rates and abortions is that the suspected people having abortions aren’t the ones having them.  This is those that don’t really want the children.  While it is true that those that have abortions are mostly among the poorer communities we must remember that abortion clinics target those areas purposefully.

 

I would like to make a new suggestion.  Those having abortions are people that have an actual interest in their future, not really the ones that don’t really care about their children, and it is these people that if they had children that have a tendency to change their attitude of self interest in their future to interest in the children’s future and those things that affect their children’s future while those that really only care about now, probably don’t care enough about the future to even bother changing when they have children and have the children anyway.  Therefore those that might have influenced drops in crime rates are not longer being produced while those who add to crime rates aren’t changing their contribution.  As usual no one can make a blanket characterization for all and there will always be exceptions to the rule, but I would like to suggest that this is the majority of abortions.  While it is important to remember this is speculation, I think it is a good one.  I challenge others to come up with a different reason why abortion statistics might be connected with the increase rather than decrease of crime rates.

 

I will always take the stand that Life starts at conception, and I think it has been a callous disregard for life that we sided with the selfishness of convenience. Giving rights for the choice to destroy life while giving scientists the time to prove scientifically whether it is a life or not rather than side on the caution that it might be a life is very tragic.   For when we find out later that it is a life we will have already murdered tens of millions of unborn babies if not hundreds of millions.  That is genocide.