Mike Huckabee Pledges Support for Constitutional Amd Banning Abortions

[SeraphymCrashing]

In terms of pro-life advocacy, Governor Huckabee is the real deal.

Wake up, America.

Statistics show that there are about 1.3 million abortions performed in the US each year, even though:



http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/3781.html

If 87% of US counties don't have any abortion providers at the moment and we have that many abortions, how will overturning Roe v Wade make that much of a difference. Many states will still permit abortions, and many women who want to have abortions will be willing to travel a little bit further.

Only a Human Life Amendment will give civil rights to babies at conception.

But I don't think it will mean an end to premarital or extramarital sex, or huge families. The most widely used contraceptive is sterilization, which would not be affected by a Human Life Amendment. And, among teens, the most widely used contraceptive is condoms, which would not be affected.

IUD's would be affected, and perhaps oral contraceptives, although they might still be permitted for medical reasons--which could range from cramps to fibroids to endometriosis to ovarian cysts to any type of female problem.

Yes, premarital sex would still go on, but legal abortion would not.

wait, what part of any of this has anything to do with birth control pills? Are we talking about making birth control pills illegal?

I thought this was about abortion being banned (which it won't be, but keep hoping... you might feel better).

 

[OttovonBismarck]

He's not the media's pick, but I do believe He's number one or at least two with conservatives. If they turn out, he wins the nomination.

But as for the OP, this is a hot button political issue and has nothing to do with the office he seeks.

It takes more than one bloc to get someone elected. Religious conservatives might like him, but I just don't think there's enough repentant soccer moms to get him elected.

 

[aeroz22]

Praise be to God! I hope and pray that Roe vs. Wade is overturned and that there is a Constitutional amendment banning abortions.

The problem here is that banning abortion does not protect human life. To the contrary. Unwanted children live terrible lives and grow up to disrupt social harmony and are a burden to society. There are not enough stable loving homes to take all these children.

Another problem here is that people who want to ban abortion are trying to insert their will where it does not belong. If the social consciousness of America does not agree on a moral issue, one side does not have the right to insert its will on the other side.

In this instance, the collective American conscience does not agree that abortion is murder. Those that do are a very small group, and believe so due to religious reasons. This makes the opposing side an institution of religion.

Legislating religion is unconstitutional, un-American, and against the intents of the founding fathers of this nation.

Furthermore, the only solution I've seen by conservative Christians, assessing the problem of unwanted pregnancies is, "Just don't have sex." But the reality is, they are going to have sex. So what do you propose? You don't have a solution, so you say that they deserve what they get, a baby they do not want and can't take care of. But guess who's going to have to help pay for that baby? You and me, through taxation. And guess what kind of a life that baby is going to have? Well, what do you think? How do you think an unwanted child grows up?

 

[eldermike]

It takes more than one bloc to get someone elected. Religious conservatives might like him, but I just don't think there's enough repentant soccer moms to get him elected.

We shall see. My guess, Hillary loses the south and most of the middle in the real election, if that becomes true, and I think it will, the republicans need to pick a true conservative because whoever it is, becomes the next president.

 

[Fantine]

Speculators say that if a Human Life Amendment was passed indicating that human life (and civil rights) begin at conception, then any birth control device that could interfere with implantation (the pro-lifers call these birth control devices abortifacient) could no longer be sold.

IUD's work by preventing implantation. They would definitely be affected.

Birth control pills work primarily by suppressing ovulation, but in the unlikely event that fertilization should occur, the hormonal changes birth control pills cause create a uterine environment that is less hospitable to implantation. Thus they could also be considered abortifacient in rare instances.

A Human Life Amendment could state that life begins at whatever juncture the crafters of the Amendment determined. It could say, "Human life begins at implantation...." (Considering how many embryos from in-vitro fertilization attempts are suspended cryogenically, I suppose it is possible the amendment would indicate implantation.)

What I was just saying is that, if abortion is already unavailable in 87% of United States counties, and 1.3 million fetuses are aborted, it is obvious that those seeking abortions would be willing to travel domestically to obtain one...

So ending Roe v. Wade, which would cause abortions to end in conservative states and remain legal in liberal states, would make abortions marginally more inconvenient. Maybe they would only be available in 8% of counties, instead of the 13% where they're available currently.

Whether the Human Life Amendment would be difficult to enact or not, it remains the only way to end legal abortion effectively.

And Governor Huckabee's saying he would throw the weight of the Presidency behind such an effort doesn't mean he WOULDN'T back smaller measures in the meantime...

 

[trunks2k]

He's considered a major candidate in most polls I've heard.

He's polling about 8.2%, lower than Thompson, Guilliani, McCain, and Romney.

 

[simplicity]

He doesn't have to succeed. He only has to try. That's something I respect. In a field of rather weak presidential hopefuls, what little I know of Huckabee I'm starting to like. One thing is his groovy surname. But certainly taking an early risk on an issue like abortion shows a bit of backbone. So I'm casting my Canadian vote for Huckabee. Free-trade rules apply.

 

[clarksided]

I support a constitutional amendment banning mike huckabee

 

[platzapS]

I'm not going to be voting for him anyway, but I will defend Huckabee. Even if his views are silly/repugnant, he seems like one of the few Republican candidates I wouldn't mind being friends with (I would, of course, still hate him being President). The other two candidates I might like to hang out with being McCain (sold his soul to the far right and got nothing in return) and Ron Paul (some pretty crazy views, but seems like an interesting person to talk to).

 

[ClaireZ]

Doubt there would be any chance of this amendment passing, but I do believe that Huckabee is the real deal, in that he truly believes what he says and is not just pandering to voters.

 

[Steezie]

Better stock up on coat hangers now, theres gonna be a shortage if this amendment passes

 

[eldermike]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,315264,00.html

He's now in the lead.

 

[Trevorocity]

Doubt there would be any chance of this amendment passing, but I do believe that Huckabee is the real deal, in that he truly believes what he says and is not just pandering to voters.

uhhhhh what? He's just throwing a bone to the far-right of the Republican party. That's what we in the know call: pandering.

 

[Caitlin.ann]

Great, so now we can begin to overpopulate. He won't win, there are too many people who want to keep their constitutional rights and its too soon to tell who's going to win the party nominations.

 

[Maynard Keenan]

1: Roe v. Wade isn't getting overturned.
2: An amendment has a snowball's chance in hell of getting 2/3 of congress and 3/4 of the states.

You MIGHT be able to hope and pray for an overturning of Roe, with the ball being returned to the states. Then instead of having to drive halfway across the state for an abortion you'd just have to drive a few states away to one that has a clinic.

 

[Billnew]

Constitutional amendment to ban abortions or to allow states to decide?

The road for a contitutional amendment is long and very hard. It must pass congress with a(super?) majority(not going to happen with the current split)
Then it would have to passed by 3/4's States in an election. Many States would fail. So this is a lost cause.

BTW, If Constitutional Amendment passes, Roe v Wade wouldn't matter.

I believe abortion should not be decided by the Federal Goverment. But as the original Constitution meant, the States to decide for themselves.
LIke the Anti-gun groups always say, I support sensible restrictions on abortions. (Pro-choice people, now you understand why us gun people never listen to someone that ses that phrase.)
IMO abortion should be limited and restricted by State laws.
Decide what is legal and illegal for the Doctors to do in that state. Including how far into the pregnacy a viable baby can be terminated.
I am not pro-choice, but limited choice.
IMO no abortion after mid 2nd trimester.
c-section removal for any baby post mid 2nd trimester in emergencys.
It is alot easier to change State laws, then Federal laws. So either side could get restriction eased if attitudes change.

 

[Billnew]

Great, so now we can begin to overpopulate. He won't win, there are too many people who want to keep their constitutional rights and its too soon to tell who's going to win the party nominations.

One month away?
In 2 months we will know who will be running for President.
It won't be official, but we'll know.
Thats when the real campaigning starts and the... fur will fly.