Tag Archives: Personhood

Contact Legislators Personhood

SC Personhood Amendment – For 2nd Time Senate Judiciary Committee Fails to Reach S.719 on Meeting Agenda – April 5, 2016

Published by:

Christians for Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
April 6, 2016

SC Personhood Amendment – For 2nd Time Senate Judiciary Committee Fails to Reach S.719 on Meeting Agenda – April 5, 2016

_____________________________

_____________________________

1) S.719 SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment was #13 ( item “M.” ) on  the Agenda for the Tuesday, April 5th, 3PM  meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee ( 13 R, 9 D ).

2) However, there were also two Statewide Appointment  nominations for appointed positions which were scheduled for consideration by the Judiciary Committee and which were placed at the beginning of the meeting.

3) The meeting lasted just over two hours, however nearly all the time was taken up with the second of the two appointments, which was contested and took over 1 hour and 50 minutes.
[ For the record, there were eight abstentions by Senators on the final vote for the second appointee. ]
Then, in the last three minutes of the meeting, only the first item on the Agenda ( item “A.” ), was explained and voted upon before the Judiciary Committee meeting was ended by the Chairman, Senator Larry A. Martin ( R-Pickens ).

Note: Video of the entire April 5 meeting is posted here: http://scstatehouse.gov/video/videofeed.php

Video Archives by meeting time
Video – 2:04:47
Tuesday, April 5, 2016  3:00 pm
Senate Judiciary Committee — Judiciary Committee

4) The next regular Tuesday meeting of the full Senate Judiciary Committee will likely be Tuesday, April 12  at 3pm.  Once  again,  it  is  expected  that  S.719 will be taken up at that meeting.  S.719 SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment should be #12 ( item “L.” ) on the agenda for that April 12th, 3PM  meeting, unless the Chairman, Senator Larry A. Martin either: a) places something else at the beginning of the meeting, or b) places something at
the top of the agenda, both of which circumstances occurred on April 5th.

5) The meeting will likely be in Room 105 in the Senate Gressette Office Bldg., State House grounds, Columbia, South Carolina, however it is advised to check the meeting details as posted here.

______________________________
______________________________

Considerations moving forward to likely April 12th Senate Judiciary Committee Meeting:

Contact made directly with Senator Greg Hembree ( R – Dillon, Horry ), and with Sean Bennett ( R – Berkeley, Charleston, Dorchester ) prior to the April 5th Judiciary Committee meeting indicated each is generally favorable to S.719, however neither would commit to vote for S.719, apparently positing themselves as wishing to see what is said in the Senate Judiciary Committee when the bill is finally taken up.  It should be noted that while
both Senator Greg Hembree and Senator Sean Bennett were co-sponsors of a Personhood statutory bill ( S.457) in the 2013-2014 Session of the SC Legislature, that neither Greg Hembree nor Sean Bennett are co-sponsors of S.719 Personhood Constitutional Amendment now.  In the opinion of this writer neither Greg Hembree nor Sean Bennett can be confidently counted upon to cast their vote for S.719 Personhood Constitutional Amendment,
at this time.

The filing period for candidates for election in South Carolina ended March 30, 2016.  Several Senators who are members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who have not co-sponsored and/or pledged to support S.719 Personhood Constitutional Amendment have Primary and/or General Election opposition, according to information and candidate filings posted here on the SC Election Commission website ( www.scvotes.org ), including:

1.  Rex Rice, Don Joslyn, and Allan Quinn have all filed to run as Republicans for SC Senate District #2, the seat currently occupied by 23-year incumbent Senator Larry A. Martin ( R – Pickens ).  [ June 14 Primary opponents (3) ]

Notes:  a) Rex Rice is reported to have pledged his support and vote for S.719 Personhood Constitutional Amendment. b) Don Joslyn is reported to be a Personhood legislation supporter also.

2.  Scott Pyle has filed to run as a Republican for SC Senate District #33, the seat currently occupied by 23-year incumbent Senator Rankin ( R – Horry ).  [ June 14 Primary opponent ]

3.  Evan Guthrie has filed to run as a Republican for SC Senate District #38, the seat currently occupied by freshman incumbent Senator Sean Bennett ( R – Berkeley, Charleston, Dorchester ).  [ June 14 Primary opponent ]

Note:  Evan Guthrie has said he would support and vote for S.719 Personhood Constitutional Amendment.

4.  Glen Robinson has filed to run as a Republican for SC Senate District #7, the seat currently occupied by freshman incumbent Senator Karl Allen ( D – Greenville ).  [ November 8 General Election opponent ]

5.  Mark Palmer has filed to run as a Republican for SC Senate District #17, the seat currently occupied by two-term incumbent Senator Creighton Coleman ( D – Chester, Fairfield, York ).  [ November 8 General Election opponent ]

Note:  Mark Palmer has said he would supports S.719 Personhood Constitutional Amendment.

6.  Leon Winn has filed to run as a Republican for SC Senate District #36, the seat currently occupied by freshman incumbent Senator Kevin L. Johnson ( D – Chester, Fairfield, York ).  [ November 8 General Election opponent ]

One last point, under normal procedures, legislation from one chamber must be passed and sent to the other chamber by May 1 in any particular year for the legislation to be taken up on the floor of the receiving body.

For example, S.719 Personhood Constitutional Amendment needs to be passed by the SC Senate and sent to the SC House by May 1, 2016 to be considered on the floor of the SC House in the 2016 Session.  We are in the second year of the 2015-2016 Session.  Any legislation that is not passed in 2016 is dead, and would need to be re-filed for the 2017-2018 Session.

NOTE:  This May 1st rule could be waived by a 2/3 vote of those present and voting in the House ( or vice versa if a bill ( e.g., H.4093 ) was being sent from the House to the Senate.

Senate Rule 47 ( 2015 SC Legislative Manual, p. 251 ), House Rule 5.12 ( 2015 SC Legislative Manual, p. 299)

__________________________________
__________________________________

As explained in the previous April 3 e-mail below:

Please continue to contact or re-contact one or all of these seven ( 7 ) Senators, asking them:

Sean Bennett ( R – Berkeley, Charleston, Dorchester )  [ freshman Senator 2013 – 2016 ]

Greg Hembree ( R – Dillon, Horry ) [ freshman Senator 2013 – 2016 ]

Paul Thurmond ( R – Charleston, Dorchester ) [ freshman Senator 2013 – 2016, not running for re-election ]

Luke A. Rankin ( R – Horry ) [ 23-year incumbent Senator 1993 – 2016 ]

George E. “Chip” Campsen, III ( R – Beaufort, Charleston, Colleton ) [ 11-year incumbent Senator 2005 – 2016 ]

J. Thomas McElveen, III ( D – Kershaw, Lee, Richland, Sumter )  [ freshman Senator 2013 – 2016 ]

Ronnie A. Sabb ( D – Berkeley, Florence, Georgetown, Horry, Williamsburg )  [ freshman Senator 2013 – 2016 ]

 

1) To please vote to pass S.719 SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment next Tuesday, April 12th in the Senate Judiciary Committee, to move forward the effort to put S.719 on the ballot in the November 8, 2016 General Election and let the people of South Carolina have the opportunity to vote on what is in our own State Constitution!

2) And if they cannot vote ‘Yes’ to pass S.719, then ask them to at least not vote against S.719, and to please abstain.

_____________________________

If you are a Bible-believing, born again Christian, please pray for the Lord to turn the hearts of these seven ( 7 ) SC State Senators above, as well as each of the other eight ( 8 ) Senate members of the 22-man Senate Judiciary Committee ( 13 R, 9 D ) who are not signed on as  co-sponsors, or who have not pledged to support S.719 [ SC Senators Larry A. Martin, Chairman, Brad Hutto, Gerald Malloy, Creighton B. Coleman, Karl B. Allen, Kevin L. Johnson, Marlon E. Kimpson, and Margie Bright Matthews ].

“The king’s heart is in the Hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water:
He turneth it whithersoever He will.”
Proverb 21:1, KJV ( with deity capitalized )

“… with God all things are possible.”  Matthew 19:26, KJV

In Christ,

Steve Lefemine
Christians for Personhood

PO Box 12222
Columbia, SC 29211

2016 Elections Personhood

(Video) Even Hillary Clinton knows Unborn Child is a Person – Meet the Press, April 3, 2016

Published by:

Christians for Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
April 4, 2016

(Video) Even Hillary Clinton knows Unborn Child is a Person

– Meet the Press, April 3, 2016

Hillary Clinton: “The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights.”

____________________________

____________________________

Meet the Press – April 3, 2016
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-april-3-2016-n549916

Transcript excerpt ( emphasis added ):

CHUCK TODD:

When, or if, does an unborn child have constitutional rights?

HILLARY CLINTON:

Well, under our laws currently, that is not something that exists. The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights.

__________________________
__________________________

Video
Clinton: Unborn Children Have No Constitutional Rights
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_keodvXFNUI
Video – 1:03
Views – 21,467

__________________________
__________________________

Re: SC Personhood Amendment ( S.719 ) on Senate Judiciary Committee April 5 Agenda:

What about all 22 SC Senators ( 13 R, 9 D ) on the Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled to take up S.719 SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment in April 5 Meeting ?  Will they all acknowledge the unborn child is a ‘Person’ as even pro-‘abortion’ extremist Hillary Clinton did April 3 ?  So far only seven out of 22 SC Judiciary Committee Senators have done so !

Of these 22 SC Senators, only seven are co-sponsors and/or have signed pledges to support S.719.  See the list* posted here of the 22 SC Senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and these Members’ Positions on the S.719 SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment.

[ *Update to List: Judicial supremacist, SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment opponent, selectively pro-‘abortion’ for certain ‘exceptions’, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Larry Martin ( R – Pickens ) has three opponents in the June 14, 2016 Republican Primary for SC Senate District #2. ]

Of the 22 Judiciary Committee Senators, 14 ( 6 R, 8 D ) are lawyers, yet only two ( 2 R ) of these 14 are S.719 co-sponsors.  And yet,  Black’s Law Dictionary (2009), used by attorneys, defines “Person” as “A Human Being”.  So, Person = Human Being.  Why is not every attorney in the SC Senate a co-sponsor of S.719 ?

_________________________
_________________________

Hillary Clinton: ‘The Unborn Person Doesn’t Have Constitutional Rights’
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cnsnewscom-staff/hillary-clinton-unborn-person-doesnt-have-constitutional-rights
April 3, 2016

[ emphasis added ]

(CNSNews.com) – Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on NBC’s “Meet the Press today that “the unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights.”

Clinton made the statement in response to a question from “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd. Clinton also said that an unborn child’s constitutional rights are “not something that exists.”

Todd asked: “When, or if, does an unborn child have constitutional rights?”

“Well, under our laws, currently, that is not something that exists,” said Clinton. “The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights. Now that doesn`t mean that we don’t do everything we possibly can in the vast majority of instances to, you know, help a mother who is carrying a child and wants to make sure that child will be healthy, to have appropriate medical support.

“It doesn’t mean that you don’t do everything possible to try to fulfill your obligations, but it does not include sacrificing the woman’s right to make decisions,” Clinton continued. “And I think that’s an important distinction that under Roe v. Wade we’ve had enshrined under our Constitution.”

continued…

_____________________
_____________________

Selected Legal Experts Supporting Constitutionality of State-Level Personhood Legislation:

LEGAL EXPERTS SUPPORTING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF STATE-LEVEL PERSONHOOD LEGISLATION IN SC (2001), MISS (2009), ALA (2011), and OK (2012):
– Herb Titus is an attorney, constitutional scholar, author, the founding Dean of College of Law/Gov’t at Regent University
– Mathew Staver is present Dean of the School of Law at Liberty University; and Liberty Counsel founder and chair
– Judge Roy Moore, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, is President Emeritus of Foundation for Moral Law
  May 26, 2015

Excerpts:

“PERSONHOOD” is the key to ENDING child-murder-by-‘abortion’.  A plain reading of the 5th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, and analogous due process and equal protection language in the State Constitutions [ for example, Article I., Section 3. of the South Carolina Constitution ], indicates that legal status and therefore protection of constitutional rights, is granted to ’PERSONS’ in these provisions. The issue of personhood for the ‘fetus’ as being the preeminently critical issue was specifically addressed by a US Supreme Court Justice during the October 11, 1972 Roe v. Wade Oral Reargument.
[ Go to these internet links to both a transcript and the actual audio of the October 11, 1972 Roe v. Wade Oral Reargument. ]


continued…


THE KEY, CRITICAL, FIRST, CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE IN ROE V. WADE (1973) WAS WHETHER OR NOT THE ‘FETUS’ ( PRE-BIRTH HUMAN BEING ), WOULD BE RECOGNIZED IN LAW AS A LEGAL ‘PERSON’:
[ Note:  American Constitutional Law even recognizes Corporations as legal ‘Persons’, but not preborn Human Beings !!! ]

Excerpt from transcript (edited) of Reargument ( October 11, 1972 ) of Roe v. Wade before the US Supreme Court:

US Supreme Court Justice:
“And the basic constitutional question, initially, is whether or not an unborn fetus is a person, isn’t it ?”  [ p. 827 ]

Mr. Robert Flowers (Assistant Attorney General, State of Texas):
“Yes, sir, and entitled to the constitutional protection.”  [ p. 827 ]

US Supreme Court Justice:  “And that’s critical to this case, is it not?”  [ p. 828 ]

Mr. Robert Flowers (Assistant Attorney General, State of Texas):  “Yes, sir, it is. … (continued).”  [ p. 828 ]

Constitutional Amendment Personhood

SC Personhood Amendment passes Senate Judiciary Subcommittee favorably by 2Y-1N vote – March 17, 2016

Published by:

Focus on the SC pro-personhood effort now shifts to the 22-man SC Senate Judiciary Committee. See list here of SC Judiciary Committee members ( 13 R, 9 D ) and the Members’ Positions on the S.719 SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment.  Please contact especially these eight Senators, below who are not presently listed as S.719 co-sponsors, asking for their support and their ‘Yea’ vote for S.719 in the full Judiciary Committee, which could possibly vote on S.719 as early as Tuesday, March 22 in their next regular meeting:

See these Senators’ individual webpages and contact information posted here:

1) Sean Bennett ( R – Berk, Chas, Dorch ) – not presently co-sponsor of S.719, co-sponsored S.457 in 2013-2014

2) Greg Hembree ( R – Dillon, Horry ) – not presently co-sponsor of S.719, co-sponsored S.457 in 2013-2014

3) Larry A. Martin, Chairman ( R – Pickens ) – not presently co-sponsor of S.719,  but says will vote for S719

[ Note: This is seen as a pragmatic position of political survival; Larry Martin has two Republican opponents in the June 14, 2016 Republican Primary, BOTH of whom are personhood supporters.  Judiciary Chairman Larry Martin has been a judicial supremacist opponent of S719, and has delayed assigning S.719 to a Judiciary Subcommittee for over 10 months after S719 was introduced in the SC Senate on April 28, 2015 ! ]

4) Luke A. Rankin ( R – Horry ) – non-supporter of S.719

5) Paul Thurmond ( R – Chas, Dorch ) – not presently co-sponsor of S.719

6) J. Thomas McElveen, III ( D – Kershaw, Lee, Rich, Sumter ) – non-supporter of S.719

7) Ronnie A. Sabb ( D – Berk, Flor, George, Horry, Williams ) – not presently co-sponsor of S.719
[ occupies Senate seat previously held by Yancey McGill ( D ); McGill co-sponsored S.457 in 2013-2014 ]

8) George E.”Chip” Campsen, III ( R – Beau, Chas, Coll ) anti-personhood judicial supremacist, professing Christian ( Baptist )

___________________
___________________

Summary of Recent Events:

1) With the pressure building for a Recall vote on the floor of the Senate, which would have potentially put all 45 SC Senators on the record, one way or another, as to their stand on the SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Larry Martin ( R – Pickens ) agreed last Thursday ( March 10 ) to finally assign S.719 to a Judiciary Subcommitte ( over 10 months after S.719 was introduced on April 28, 2015 ). As requested, he assigned S.719 to a favorable subcommittee ( two S.719 co-sponsors and one opponent ), with Senator Lee Bright ( R-Gvl/Spart ), the primary bill sponsor, as the Subcommittee Chairman, and Senator Larry Martin also agreed to vote for S.719 in the full Judiciary Committee [ He has also said since then that he intends to vote against S.719 on the floor of the full SC Senate. ]

2) On Wednesday, March 16, Personhood South Carolina conducted a Personhood Day in Columbia, urging personhood supporters to meet with SC Representatives and SC Senators, followed by an energizing rally in the First Floor Lobby of the SC State House at which several evangelical and protestant Christians pastors spoke strong messages of exhortation and challenge, well received by pro-personhood supporters, adults and children, present.

3) Also as of March 16, Senator Larry Martin’s agreement from the previous week to assign S.719 to a favorable Judiciary Subcommittee was posted on the www.scstatehouse.gov website here.

4) The Judiciary Subcommittee public hearing was held today, March 17, with several speakers for and against.  At the conclusion of the testimony, the vote of the subcommittee was taken, and S.719 passed favorably by a voice vote of 2 Yea ( Bright, Corbin ) to 1 Nay ( Bright Matthews ). Thank God for the righteous votes of Senators Lee Bright and Tom Corbin to establish justice !

5) The next step will hopefully be the full Judiciary Committee at its regular meeting next Tuesday, March 22 as should be posted here by Friday ( March 18 ) COB.

Contact members from 22-man Judiciary Committee listed posted here, especially these Senators:

Sean Bennett ( R – Berk, Chas, Dorch )

Greg Hembree ( R – Dillon, Horry )

Larry A. Martin, Chairman ( R – Pickens )

Luke A. Rankin ( R – Horry )

Paul Thurmond ( R – Chas, Dorch )

J. Thomas McElveen, III ( D – Kershaw, Lee, Rich, Sumter )

Ronnie A. Sabb ( D – Berk, Flor, George, Horry, Williams )

George E.”Chip” Campsen, III ( R – Beau, Chas, Coll ).

* Edited March 18, 2016

Personhood

March 16th – Personhood Day at the SC Capitol in Columbia [ Flyer ]

Published by:

After 43 years of baby killing under Roe v. Wade, including 375,000 killed in South Carolina, pro-lifers in SC have a unique window of opportunity to give legal personhood status to the unborn. Here’s how you can participate! 

What: Come to Columbia and talk to your state Senator and Representative to let them know that you support the Personhood Amendment Bill (H4093 in the House, S719 in the Senate). These bills must be passed so that we can vote in November to amend our South Carolina Constitution to protect life beginning at conception.

When: Wednesday, March 16, which happens to be the day that filing opens for all candidates for the June primary. We need to get our legislators on record as to whether they support personhood before the filing period ends on March 30th.

Why: We have made great progress on these bills already. However, without a lot of visible, vocal support from the public, these bills will not get passed, and in fact, will not even get a vote. We must apply pressure NOW in order to get a vote by June.

Where: We will go to their offices in the House office building (Blatt) and the Senate office building (Gressette) first, and then rally in the Capitol building lobby at 1:30 as the Senate goes into session.

Who: You, your family, your friends, your church members. Coordinate with some people in your area to make a GROUP appointment to speak  for 10-15 minutes with your Senator and/or Representative sometime between 9-1:30 on March 16th. Making an appointment now is the key to seeing them.

Click here to register to participate.

Source: https://personhood.sc/personhood-day/

 

2016 Elections GOP Candidates Personhood

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, 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

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 ]