Correction/Revision – Ted Cruz on Personhood? – Views of American Right to Life, Christians for Personhood, PersonhoodUSA

Published by:

Christians for Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
February 20, 2016

Correction/Revision –

Ted Cruz on Personhood? – Views of American Right to Life, Christians for Personhood, PersonhoodUSA

______________________
______________________

Correction/Revision –

Add:

Later in this same new video Ted Cruz did pledge, as President of the United States, “That I will sign any legislation put on my desk to defend the least of these including legislation that defends the rights of all persons without exception other than [ i.e., EXCEPT ] the life of the mother, from conception to natural death.”

Note however, any “exceptions” to legal personhood nullify, destroy the legal concept, destroy the personhood legal argument.

Ted Cruz is an intelligent Harvard trained lawyer.  Most certainly he knows the significance of the legal term “person”.

Even Black’s Law Dictionary (2009), used by attorneys, defines “Person” as “A Human Being”.  So, Person = Human Being.

[ See ‘Additional Links’ below for several postings dealing with the so-called “life of the mother” issue from a medical standpoint. ]

So while Ted Cruz says in his new video, “I enthusiastically support that Resolution”, referring to a June 2014 Republican Primary Advisory Question, does he also support these present 2015-2016 SC Bills/Resolutions ( i.e., S.719, H .4093 ) to actually amend the South Carolina State Constitution ( i.e., not just the 2014 Advisory Question ) ?

If he does, then he would be supporting something that contradicts with what he says later in this same video, as addressed above, about supporting an exception for the life of the mother; because S.719, H .4093 do not have an exception for the life of the mother. If they did, they would cease to be true “personhood” bills, and they would become meaningless, as any exception to personhood nullifies, destroys, the personhood legal concept.

Add:

“Pro-Life is Pro-Personhood” !

Christians for Personhood:

The standard for identifying whether or not a candidate is “Pro-Life” is whether or not the candidate commits to support the
legal Personhood of pre-birth human beings IN LAW, at fertilization (conception), and that without “exceptions”, because
God’s Word says, “Thou shalt not kill ( murder ).”  Exodus 20:13, KJV.

Being “Pro-Life” is agreeing with God regarding the Sanctity of Human Life which He created.

Add under: Additional links:

8)  Pro-Life Without Exception
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwazODlTOBk
Video – 58:33
Is abortion helpful in cases of rape or incest? What about fetal deformity? What about threats to the life or health of the mother?
     Hear the stories of those who have actually been involved in these difficult circumstances.

9)  No Exceptions
Dr. Patrick Johnston, Abortion and Healthcare
     http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/no-exceptions/
Video – 6:18

10)  Dr. Patrick Johnston, Director, Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians, Statement S.457 Senate Judiciary Subcomm. Hearing
       March 13, 2014
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2014-03-13-Dr-Patrick-Johnston-Statement-S457-SJSubcomm-Hearing-March-13-2014.pdf
[ Written statement of Dr. Patrick Johnston introduced during testimony by Dr. Henry Jordan before SC Senate Judiciary
Subcommittee at public hearing on SC Personhood Bill S.457 on March 13, 2014 – video (21:48) ]

11)  Life of the Mother “Exception” by American Right to Life – http://americanrtl.org/life-of-the-mother-exception

12)  Are There Rare Cases When an Abortion Is Justified? – By Dr. Patrick Johnston, D.O., Dir., Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians
       http://prolifephysicians.org/app/?p=59

_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________

Christians for Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
February 19, 2016 / Corrected/Revised February 20, 2016

Ted Cruz on Personhood? – Views of American Right to Life, Christians for Personhood, PersonhoodUSA

Ted Cruz has posted a new video where he says “I enthusiastically support that Resolution”, referring to a June 2014 Republican Primary Advisory Question which asked voters to vote “Yes” or “No” on language adding a personhood amendment to the South Carolina Constitution.  Statewide, this Advisory Question passed by over 78%, with over 240,000 Republican Primary voters saying “Yes”.

However, neither Ted Cruz in his new video, nor PersonhoodUSA in their Feb. 17, 2016 MEDIA ADVISORY below, say anything about the ACTUAL SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment ( S.719, H .4093 ) which has nearly the identical, verbatim language of the 2014 Republican Primary Advisory Question; which bills are being currently promoted by Christians for Personhood, Personhood South Carolina, and Voice of the Unborn, RIGHT NOW, in February 2016 !

Later in this same new video Ted Cruz did pledge, as President of the United States, “That I will sign any legislation put on my desk to defend the least of these including legislation that defends the rights of all persons without exception other than [ i.e., EXCEPT ] the life of the mother, from conception to natural death.”  [ emphasis, comment added ]

Note however, any “exceptions” to legal personhood nullify, destroy the legal concept, destroy the personhood legal argument.

Ted Cruz is an intelligent Harvard trained lawyer.  Most certainly he knows the significance of the legal term “person”.

Even Black’s Law Dictionary (2009), used by attorneys, defines “Person” as “A Human Being”.  So, Person = Human Being.

[ See ‘Additional Links:’ below for several postings dealing with the so-called “life of the mother” issue from a medical standpoint. ]

So while Ted Cruz says in his new video, “I enthusiastically support that Resolution”, referring to a June 2014 Republican Primary Advisory Question, does he also support these present 2015-2016 SC Bills/Resolutions ( i.e., S.719, H .4093 ) to actually amend the South Carolina State Constitution ( i.e., not just the 2014 Advisory Question ) ?

If he does, then he would be supporting something that contradicts with what he says later in this same video, as addressed above, about his support for an exception for the life of the mother; because S.719, H .4093 do not have an exception for the life of the mother. If they did, they would cease to be true “personhood” bills, and they would become meaningless, as any exception to personhood nullifies, destroys, the personhood legal concept.

In fact, in a YouTube video posted January 8, 2016 recording Ted Cruz while campaigning in Iowa, Ted Cruz specifically said,  “I have not supported personhood legislation because I think, and the pro-life community is divided on this, but I think personhood legislation can be counterproductive because it focuses on issues that are unrelated to protecting unborn children [ sic ], …”  [ At 10:45 into YouTube video ]


In over three years as a United States Senator, Ted Cruz has never sponsored, nor co-sponsored any Personhood Bills in the United States Senate.  [ Presently, there are two principled Personhood Bills in the US House: HR 426  and HR 2761 – each bill can be viewed at www.Congress.gov. HR 2761 has the added feature of invoking the authority and power of the United States Congress to restrict the appellate jurisdiction of the US Supreme Court, as per Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution. ]

American Right to Life has posted a detailed report and analysis of the contradictory positions taken by Ted Cruz on “abortion”
at: http://prolifeprofiles.com/ted-cruz-abortion

[]
Ted Cruz
Presidential Candidate
Tier 2 – Personhood Whenever

As a Republican primary candidate, Ted Cruz has taken contradictory positions on abortion and it is sobering to realize that his effort to get votes from the Republican base could explain this behavior.

__________________________
__________________________

“Pro-Life is Pro-Personhood” !

Christians for Personhood:

The standard for identifying whether or not a candidate is “Pro-Life” is whether or not the candidate commits to support the legal Personhood of pre-birth human beings IN LAW, at fertilization (conception), and that without “exceptions”, because God’s Word says, “Thou shalt not kill ( murder ).”  Exodus 20:13, KJV.

Being “Pro-Life” is agreeing with God regarding the Sanctity of Human Life which He created.

____________________________
____________________________

Additional links:

1) Introduction of S.719 in SC Senate – April 28, 2015Christians for Personhood press release

2) Introduction of H.4093 in SC House – April 30, 2015 Christians for Personhood press release

3) Personhood Questionnaire for 2016 Republican Presidential Candidates
    December 29, 2015 – Christians for Personhood report

4) No Completed Personhood Questionnaires Received from 2016 Republican Presidential Candidates
January 27, 2016 –
Christians for Personhood report

5) Open Letter to REPUBLICAN South Carolina Senators ( 27 )
Subj: County Results for Republican Advisory Q #1, June 2014 Republican Primary
February 5, 2016 –
Christians for Personhood Open Letter

6) Ted Cruz Does Not Support Personhood Legislation
February 6, 2016 –
Christians for Personhood report

7) SC Personhood Amendment – 52 House, 13 Senate members in support but 2/3 needed [ 83 in House, at least 30 in Senate ]
February 15, 2016 –
Christians for Personhood report

8)  Pro-Life Without Exception
     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwazODlTOBk
Video – 58:33
Is abortion helpful in cases of rape or incest? What about fetal deformity? What about threats to the life or health of the mother?  Hear the stories of those who have actually been involved in these difficult circumstances.

9)  No Exceptions
Dr. Patrick Johnston, Abortion and Healthcare
     http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/no-exceptions/
Video – 6:18

10)  Dr. Patrick Johnston, Director, Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians, Statement S.457 Senate Judiciary Subcomm. Hearing
       March 13, 2014
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2014-03-13-Dr-Patrick-Johnston-Statement-S457-SJSubcomm-Hearing-March-13-2014.pdf
[ Written statement of Dr. Patrick Johnston introduced during testimony by Dr. Henry Jordan before SC Senate Judiciary Subcommittee at public hearing on SC Personhood Bill S.457 on March 13, 2014 – video (21:48) ]

11)  Life of the Mother “Exception” by American Right to Life – http://americanrtl.org/life-of-the-mother-exception

12)  Are There Rare Cases When an Abortion Is Justified? – By Dr. Patrick Johnston, D.O., Dir., Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians
       http://prolifephysicians.org/app/?p=59

_____________________________
_____________________________
_____________________________

PersonhoodUSA press release:

79% of South Carolina GOP Voters Support Personhood
http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/1216777437.html

____________________________________

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016
From: Christian Newswire <newsdesk@christiannewswire.com>
Subject: 79% of South Carolina GOP Voters Support Personhood

79% of South Carolina GOP Voters Support Personhood

Contact: Jennifer Mason, Personhood USA, 303-803-0598

MEDIA ADVISORY, Feb. 17, 2016 / Christian Newswire/ — A new video from Senator Ted Cruz affirms South Carolina’s Personhood resolution, in which 79% of Republicans called for a Personhood amendment to the state constitution.

Cruz states that he would support legislation like South Carolina’s Personhood resolution, which he mentioned specifically. In a crowded Republican race, it’s noteworthy that Personhood USA’s resolution passed with a higher percentage than any presidential GOP candidate has ever won with in South Carolina.

The question read: “Should Article I, Section 3 of the South Carolina Constitution be amended to include the following language? The privileges and immunities of citizens of South Carolina and the United States shall not be abridged, so that no person shall be deprived of life without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. These rights shall extend to both born and pre-born persons beginning at conception.”

Personhood USA’s resolution in South Carolina passed by a landslide majority, gathering nearly a quarter of a million affirmative votes, and was the largest show of support by percentage in any public vote held on personhood.

“Candidates in the presidential race cannot forget that 79% of the base in South Carolina believes that preborn children deserve full legal protection,” stated Jennifer Mason, Personhood USA Communications Director. “Truly pro-life candidates must not lose sight of the fact that the majority of South Carolina voters in the primary have already voted in support of full personhood rights for unborn children.”

Ted Cruz Video Link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQlmvEQFgV4

[ Edited ]

Ted Cruz on Personhood? – Views of American Right to Life, Christians for Personhood, PersonhoodUSA

Published by:

Ted Cruz has posted a new video where he says “I enthusiastically support that Resolution”, referring to a June 2014 Republican Primary Advisory Question which asked voters to vote “Yes” or “No” on language adding a personhood amendment to the South Carolina Constitution.  Statewide, this Advisory Question passed by over 78%, with over 240,000 Republican Primary voters saying “Yes”.

However, neither Ted Cruz in his new video, nor PersonhoodUSA in their Feb. 17, 2016 MEDIA ADVISORY below, say anything about the ACTUAL SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment ( S.719, H .4093 ) which has nearly the identical, verbatim language of the 2014 Republican Primary Advisory Question; which bills are being currently promoted by Christians for Personhood, Personhood South Carolina, and Voice of the Unborn, RIGHT NOW, in February 2016 !

In fact, in a YouTube video posted January 8, 2016 recording Ted Cruz while campaigning in Iowa, Ted Cruz specifically said,  “I have not supported personhood legislation because I think, and the pro-life community is divided on this, but I think personhood legislation can be counterproductive because it focuses on issues that are unrelated to protecting unborn children [ sic ], …”  [ At 10:45 into YouTube video ]

In over three years as a United States Senator, Ted Cruz has never sponsored, nor co-sponsored any Personhood Bills in the United States Senate.  [ Presently, there are two principled Personhood Bills in the US House: HR 426  and HR 2761 – each bill can be viewed at www.Congress.gov.  HR 2761 has the added feature of invoking the authority and power of the United States Congress to restrict the appellate jurisdiction of the US Supreme Court, as per Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution. ]

American Right to Life has posted a detailed report and analysis of the contradictory positions taken by Ted Cruz on “abortion” at: http://prolifeprofiles.com/ted-cruz-abortion

[]
Ted Cruz
Presidential Candidate
Tier 2 – Personhood Whenever

As a Republican primary candidate, Ted Cruz has taken contradictory positions on abortion and it is sobering to realize that his effort to get votes from the Republican base could explain this behavior.

_________________________
_________________________

Additional links:

1) Introduction of S.719 in SC Senate – April 28, 2015 – Christians for Personhood press release

2) Introduction of H.4093 in SC House – April 30, 2015 Christians for Personhood press release

3) Personhood Questionnaire for 2016 Republican Presidential Candidates
    December 29, 2015 – Christians for Personhood report

4) No Completed Personhood Questionnaires Received from 2016 Republican Presidential Candidates
January 27, 2016 –
Christians for Personhood report

5) Open Letter to REPUBLICAN South Carolina Senators ( 27 )
Subj: County Results for Republican Advisory Q #1, June 2014 Republican Primary
February 5, 2016 –
Christians for Personhood Open Letter

6) Ted Cruz Does Not Support Personhood Legislation
February 6, 2016 –
Christians for Personhood report

7) SC Personhood Amendment – 52 House, 13 Senate members in support but 2/3 needed [ 83 in House, at least 30 in Senate ]
February 15, 2016 –
Christians for Personhood report

_______________________________
_______________________________

PersonhoodUSA press release:

79% of South Carolina GOP Voters Support Personhood
http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/1216777437.html

_______________________________________

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016
From: Christian Newswire <newsdesk@christiannewswire.com>
Subject: 79% of South Carolina GOP Voters Support Personhood

79% of South Carolina GOP Voters Support Personhood

Contact: Jennifer Mason, Personhood USA, 303-803-0598

MEDIA ADVISORY, Feb. 17, 2016 / Christian Newswire/ — A new video from Senator Ted Cruz affirms South Carolina’s Personhood resolution, in which 79% of Republicans called for a Personhood amendment to the state constitution.

Cruz states that he would support legislation like South Carolina’s Personhood resolution, which he mentioned specifically. In a crowded
Republican race, it’s noteworthy that Personhood USA’s resolution passed with a higher percentage than any presidential GOP candidate
has ever won with in South Carolina.

The question read: “Should Article I, Section 3 of the South Carolina Constitution be amended to include the following language? The privileges and immunities of citizens of South Carolina and the United States shall not be abridged, so that no person shall be deprived of life without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. These rights shall extend to both born and pre-born persons beginning at conception.”

Personhood USA’s resolution in South Carolina passed by a landslide majority, gathering nearly a quarter of a million affirmative votes, and was the largest show of support by percentage in any public vote held on personhood.

“Candidates in the presidential race cannot forget that 79% of the base in South Carolina believes that preborn children deserve full legal protection,” stated Jennifer Mason, Personhood USA Communications Director. “Truly pro-life candidates must not lose sight of the fact that the majority of South Carolina voters in the primary have already voted in support of full personhood rights for unborn children.”

Ted Cruz Video Link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQlmvEQFgV4

[ Edited ]

SC Personhood Amendment – 52 House, 13 Senate members in support but 2/3 needed [ 83 in House, at least 30 in Senate ]

Published by:

SC Personhood Amendment Status Summary:

1.  SC Senate Judiciary Chairman Larry Martin ( R-Pickens ) has still failed to assign S.719 to a Judiciary Subcommittee.
S.719 was introduced in the SC Senate on April 28, 2015.  Senator Larry Martin has been repeatedly asked to assign  S.719 to a favorable subcommittee.  

2.  This year 2016 is an election year for all 46 SC Senate seats.  The SC Election Commission 2016 Election Calendar lists the beginning of the filing period for all candidates seeking a political party nomination for the office of SC State Senate and SC State House of Representatives ( and other federal and local offices ) to be March 16, 2016. This filing period closes at 12 noon on March 30, 2016.

3.  The SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment is filed in the SC House ( H.4093 ) and the SC Senate ( S.719 ).

a.  SC House of Representatives H.4093

 (1)  In the SC House of Representatives, H.4093 has 50 co-sponsors, plus two more Representatives who have signed the SC Pastors Alliance Pledge, but who have not signed on yet as co-sponsors, for a total of 52 members of the SC House of Representatives who are supporting the SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment. Two-thirds of the elected Representatives are needed ( 2/3 of 124 ) to pass H.4093 to place the SC Personhood Amendment on the General Election Ballot in South Carolina on November 8, 2016, for the people to vote.

(2)  Two-thirds of 124 rounds up to 83 Representatives.  Presently 52 have indicated their support, leaving 31 more who are needed out of the remaining 72 Representatives in the SC House.  [ The SC House is currently made up of a total of 78 Republicans and 46 Democrats. ]

b.  SC SenateS.719

 (1)  In the SC Senate, S.719 has 10 co-sponsors, plus three more Senators who have signed the SC Pastors Alliance Pledge, but who have not signed on yet as co-sponsors, for a total of 13 members of the SC Senate who are supporting the SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment.  Two-thirds of the elected Senators are needed ( 2/3 of 45 presently, with one seat vacant; normally 2/3 of 46 ) to pass the S.719 to place the Personhood Amendment on the General Election Ballot in South Carolina on November 8, 2016, for the people to vote.

(2)  Two-thirds of 45 is 30 Senators [ 2/3 of 46 rounds up to 31 Senators. ]  Presently 13 have indicated their support, leaving at least 17 currently [ possibly 18 later ] more who are needed out of the present remaining 32 Senators [ possibly 33 remaining Senators later if the vacant seat is filled ] in the SC Senate.  [ The SC Senate is currently made up of a total of 27 Republicans and 18 Democrats, with one seat vacant. ]

4.  List of all FOURTEEN ( 14 ) REPUBLICAN SC SENATORS who have neither yet co-sponsored S.719, nor have they signed the
SC Pastors Alliance Pledge in support of S.719.  The Senator’s District Number, and the Counties which are included in that Senate District, are listed after each Senator’s name.  ( Most Counties are divided between Senate Districts. )

[ Members of the SC Senatehttp://www.scstatehouse.gov/member.php?chamber=S ]

Thomas C. AlexanderDistrict 1 – Oconee & Pickens Counties – Map

Sean BennettDistrict 38 – Berkeley, Charleston & Dorchester Counties – Map

Paul G. Campbell, Jr.District 44 – Berkeley, Charleston & Dorchester Counties – Map

George E. “Chip” Campsen, IIIDistrict 43 – Beaufort, Charleston & Colleton Counties – Map

Raymond E. Cleary, IIIDistrict 34 – Charleston, Georgetown & Horry Counties – Map

John E. CoursonDistrict 20 – Lexington & Richland Counties – Map

Tom DavisDistrict 46 – Beaufort & Jasper Counties – Map

Greg HembreeDistrict 28 – Dillon & Horry Counties – Map

Hugh K. Leatherman, Sr.District 31 – Darlington & Florence Counties – Map

Larry A. MartinDistrict 2 – Pickens County – Map

Harvey S. Peeler, Jr.District 14 – Cherokee, Spartanburg, Union & York Counties – Map

Luke A. RankinDistrict 33 – Horry County – Map

Paul ThurmondDistrict 41 – Charleston & Dorchester Counties – Map

Tom Young, Jr.District 24 – Aiken County – Map

________________________

Pro-Life is Pro-Personhood

If your SC State Senator is listed above among the 14 Republican State Senators who have neither yet co-sponsored S.719, nor have they signed the SC Pastors Alliance Pledge in support of S.719, please contact / visit them immediately and continually, reminding them that the language of this Personhood Amendment is virtually identical verbatim to the language of Republican Advisory Question #1 on the June 2014 Republican Primary Ballot, which passed by over 78% statewide ( 2014 Statewide Primary Election, go to page 10 ), with over 240,000 Republican Primary voters voting in favor.

Tell your Senator,  Let the People Vote !!!

( See February 4, 2016  “Open Letter to REPUBLICAN South Carolina Senators ( 27 )” below and posted here. )

Even if an individual Senator is personally opposed to SC Personhood Legislation
( e.g., Senator Larry Martin ( R-Pickens ) and Senator George “Chip” Campsen, III ( R – Beaufort, Charleston & Colleton ), remind them, in the concluding words of the February 4, 2016 letter sent to them:  LET THE PEOPLE VOTE !!!

Open Letter to REPUBLICAN South Carolina Senators ( 27 )”
[ Excerpt ]

“Over the past 17 years of introducing Personhood BILLS in the SC Legislature ( 1998-2015 ), the General Assembly has failed to establish justice for pre-birth human beings by actually passing any of these bills in both chambers.  S.719 introduced on April 28, 2015 is the first time a proposed Personhood Constitutional AMENDMENT has been introduced.  It is time to LET THE PEOPLE VOTE !!!”

Ted Cruz Does Not Support Personhood Legislation

Published by:

(Video) Iowa   [ “Pro-Life is Pro-Personhood” ! ]   – Ted Cruz does NOT support Personhood legislation !!!

– Ted Cruz supports “legal, and unencumbered” birth control (child-prevention);

   Cruz notes he and wife Heidi have (only) “two little girls”, says he is “very glad

   we don’t have seventeen [ seven ?].” ***

__________________________

Canadian Ted Cruz takes TOUGH questions in IA. Gas Station https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfB7ShwtCZw Video – 17:10 Views – 45,322  ( as of Feb 6, 2016 ) Published on Jan 8, 2016

__________________________

Question to Ted Cruz on Personhood legislation ( At 10:45 into YouTube video below ):

[ commentary added in brackets [  ]  ]

Female questioner (recording with mobile device): “And I was wondering if you could tell me real fast what your stance is on so-called personhood legislation.”

[Cruz campaign worker in close proximity with arm extended prepared to move Cruz to next questioner.]

Ted Cruz:  “Um, I believe we should protect every human life, from the moment of conception to the moment of death. [ ? ] I have not supported personhood legislation because I think, and the pro-life community is divided on this, but I think personhood legislation can be counterproductive because it focuses on issues that are unrelated to protecting unborn children [ sic ], and I think our focus should be valuing and cherishing every human life.” [ sic – that is exactly what personhood legislation does !!! ]

[Cruz campaign worker moves in closer to move Cruz on to next questioner, and speaks to female questioner.] 

Female questioner: “OK, and will that impact what kind of birth control you think should be legal?”

Ted Cruz:  “I believe that birth control should be legal, and unencumbered.  And, and there are a lot of folks in politics that try to paint a false picture, they try to scare people to suggest that their politician’s trying to go after their birth control.  It’s not true.  It is a made-up threat.  As I have observed more than once, my wife Heidi and I, we have two little girls. I’m very glad we don’t have seventeen [ seven ?].”

[ *** It is believed he said seventeen, Cruz married Heidi in 2001 ]

Cruz campaign worker now actually breaks in and says “Thank you, appreciate it” to break off her conversation with Ted Cruz. As Cruz walks to next questioner, the Cruz campaign worker whispers something in Cruz’s ear. 

Cruz says back, appearing annoyed, “Yes, I know that.” [ Total time with this female questioner was just over one minute: 10:45 – 11:50 on YouTube video ]

_________________________

_________________________

 

– DID TED CRUZ LIE TO GEORGIA RIGHT TO LIFE WHEN HE SIGNED PERSONHOOD PLEDGE ?

Georgia Right to Life PAC Endorses Ted Cruz for President http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/822076498.html [ Excerpts, emphasis added ]

NORCROSS, Ga., Aug. 8, 2015 –  

Senator Cruz received the endorsement after reviewing his activities supporting personhood and receiving his signed GRTL PAC Personhood Affirmation, which asks that candidates support a personhood amendment  to the U.S. Constitution.    

Such an amendment would guarantee a constitutional right to life for every innocent human being, from earliest    biological beginning until natural death.   [ continued… ]                                            

Open Letter to REPUBLICAN South Carolina Senators ( 27 )

Published by:

 Christians for Personhood

 P.O. Box 12222, Columbia, S.C.  29211

ChristiansforPersonhood.com

God says: “Thou shalt not kill (murder).”   Exodus 20:13, KJV     

 

February 4, 2016

To: Open Letter to REPUBLICAN South Carolina Senators ( 27 )

Cc:  Mark Cheslak, Chairman / Jim Schirmer, Vice Chairman, Christians for Personhood, Columbia, SC

Richard Cash, Executive Director, Personhood South Carolina, Piedmont, SC

Subj: County Results for Republican Advisory Q #1, June 2014 Republican Primary

Dear REPUBLICAN South Carolina Senators,     

Attached to this letter is a print-out from the South Carolina Election Commission website which shows the Official Results by County for Republican Advisory Question #1, in the June 2014 Statewide Primary Election.

The raw vote totals are displayed, which totaled 240,453 ( 78.6% ) in favor of Republican Advisory Question #1, out of a total of 305,726 votes cast. Each and every County of the 45 Counties which reported showed a large majority in favor of Republican Advisory Question #1, ranging from a high of 88.1% of the voters to a low of 69.2% of the voters in these 45 Counties.

The text of Republican Advisory Question #1 on the Official Ballot, read as follows:

“Should Article I, Section 3 of the South Carolina Constitution be amended to include the following language?” 

“The privileges and immunities of citizens of South Carolina and the United States shall not be abridged, so that no person shall be deprived of life without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. These rights shall extend to both born and pre-born persons beginning at conception.”    Yes [   ]    No  [   ]

 On the reverse side of this letter is a list of the County Results for Republican Advisory Q #1, June 2014 Republican Primary ( by Percentage ), calculated from the raw vote data on SC Election Commission website.

On April 28, 2015, a Joint Resolution ( S.719 ) was introduced in the South Carolina Senate to place virtually the identical, verbatim language which appeared in Republican Advisory Q #1, in the June 2014 Republican Primary, as an actual proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot in November 2016.

[The only difference is the removal of the hyphen in the word ‘preborn’. ]

There are presently nine Senate co-sponsors of S.719, the SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment:

Bright, Bryant, Cromer, Fair, Grooms, S. Martin, Massey, Shealy, Turner. [ If you have not signed on yet as a co-sponsor, please do so as soon as possible. Why should there not be 27 Republican Senate co-sponsors ? ]

In addition, the SC Personhood Project led by Personhood South Carolina, has received the pledges ( https://personhood.sc/pledge/ ) of eight SC Senators:  Bright, Bryant, Corbin, Fair, Gregory, Hayes, Shealy, Verdin [ If you have not yet signed the pledge, please go to https://personhood.sc/ to download pledge. ]

Over the past 17 years of introducing Personhood BILLS in the SC Legislature ( 1998-2015 ), the General Assembly has failed to establish justice for pre-birth human beings by actually passing any of these bills in both chambers. S.719 introduced on April 28, 2015 is the first time a proposed Personhood Constitutional AMENDMENT has been introduced.  It is time to LET THE PEOPLE VOTE !!! 

Jesus Christ is “the King of kings, and Lord of lords” ( 1 Timothy 6:15, KJV ),

Steve Lefemine

exec. dir., Christians for Personhood  ( CP@spiritcom.net )

 

County Results for Republican Advisory Q #1, June 2014 Republican Primary ( by Percentage ):

[ Calculated from raw vote data on SC Election Commission website ] 

Abbeville: Yes – 85.4%; No – 14.6%

Aiken: Yes – 79.7%; No – 20.3%

Allendale: Yes – 73.8%; No – 26.2%

Anderson: Yes – 81.8%; No – 18.2%

Bamberg: Yes – 80.0%; No – 20.0

Barnwell: Yes – 81.4%; No – 18.6%

Beaufort: Yes – 74.4%; No – 25.6%

Berkeley: Yes – 77.5%; No – 22.5%

Calhoun: Yes – 79.5%; No – 20.5%

Charleston: Yes – 69.7%; No – 30.3%

Cherokee: Yes – 84.9%; No – 15.1%

Chester: Yes – 88.1%; No – 11.9%

Chesterfield: Yes – 85.2%; No – 14.8%

Clarendon: Yes – 82.5%; No – 17.5%

Colleton: Yes – 74.3%; No – 25.7%

Darlington: Yes – 81.5%; No – 18.5%

Dillon: Yes – 85.2%; No – 14.8%

Dorchester: Yes – 75.8%; No – 24.2%

Edgefield: Yes – 83.2%; No – 16.8%

Fairfield: Yes – 82.3%; No – 17.7%

Florence: Yes – 82.2%; No – 17.8%

Georgetown: Yes – 72.4%; No – 27.6%

Greenville: Yes – 82.9%; No – 17.1%

Greenwood: Yes – 82.1%; No – 17.9%

Hampton: Yes – 79.8%; No – 20.2%

Horry: Yes – 77.0%; No – 23.0%

Jasper: Yes – 76.2%; No – 23.8%

Kershaw: Yes – 76.7%; No – 23.3%

Lancaster: Yes – 81.2%; No – 18.8%

Laurens: Yes – 84.2%; No – 15.8%

Lee: Yes – 83.6%; No – 16.4%

Lexington: Yes – 77.0%; No – 23.0%

Marion: Yes – 81.9%; No – 18.1%

Marlboro: Yes – 81.9%; No – 18.1%

McCormick: Yes – 79.4%; No – 20.6%

Newberry: Yes – 76.9%; No – 23.1%

Oconee: Yes – 76.6%; No – 23.4%

Orangeburg: Yes – 81.2%; No – 18.8%

Pickens: Yes – 82.1%; No – 17.9%

Richland: Yes – 69.2%; No – 30.8%

Saluda: Yes – 82.1%; No – 17.9%

Spartanburg: Yes – 82.5%; No – 17.5%

Sumter: Yes – 82.7%; No – 17.3%

Union: Yes – 87.3%; No – 12.7%

York: Yes – 81.6%; No – 18.4%

_____________________________

Total: Yes – 78.6%; No – 21.4%