{"id":185,"date":"2016-02-20T13:36:30","date_gmt":"2016-02-20T19:36:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/?p=185"},"modified":"2016-02-20T18:01:15","modified_gmt":"2016-02-21T00:01:15","slug":"correctionrevision-ted-cruz-on-personhood-views-of-american-right-to-life-christians-for-personhood-personhoodusa-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/2016\/02\/20\/correctionrevision-ted-cruz-on-personhood-views-of-american-right-to-life-christians-for-personhood-personhoodusa-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Correction\/Revision – Ted Cruz on Personhood? – Views of American Right to Life, Christians for Personhood, PersonhoodUSA"},"content":{"rendered":"

Christians<\/a> for Personhood<\/a> ( CP <\/a>)
\nColumbia, South Carolina
\nFebruary 20, 2016
\n
\n<\/span>Correction\/Revision –
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>Ted Cruz on Personhood? – Views of American Right to Life, Christians for Personhood, PersonhoodUSA
\n<\/span><\/b>
\n<\/span>______________________
\n______________________<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

Correction\/Revision –<\/b><\/p>\n

Add<\/u>:<\/p>\n

Later in this same new video<\/a> 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<\/b> other than [ i.e., EXCEPT ]<\/span> the life of the mother, <\/b>from conception <\/b>to natural death.”<\/p>\n

Note however, any “exceptions” to legal personhood nullify, destroy the legal concept, destroy the personhood legal argument.<\/p>\n

Ted Cruz is an intelligent Harvard trained lawyer.\u00a0 Most certainly he knows the significance of the legal term “person”.<\/p>\n

Even Black’s Law Dictionary (2009)<\/a><\/b>, <\/b>used by attorneys, defines “Person” as “A Human Being”.\u00a0 So, Person = Human Being.<\/b><\/p>\n

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

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

If he does, then he would be supporting something that contradicts with what he says later in this same video<\/a>, <\/i><\/b>as addressed above, <\/i>about supporting an exception for the life of the mother; because S.719<\/a>, H .4093<\/a> do not<\/u> 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.<\/b><\/p>\n

Add<\/u>:<\/p>\n

“Pro-Life is Pro-Personhood” !
\n<\/b>
\n<\/span>Christians for Personhood:<\/p>\n

The standard for identifying whether or not a candidate is \u201cPro-Life\u201d is whether or not the candidate commits to support the
\nlegal Personhood of pre-birth human beings IN LAW, at fertilization (conception), and that without \u201cexceptions\u201d, because
\nGod\u2019s Word says, \u201cThou shalt not kill ( murder ).\u201d\u00a0 Exodus 20:13, KJV<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Being \u201cPro-Life\u201d is agreeing with God regarding the Sanctity of Human Life which He created.<\/b><\/p>\n

Add under<\/u>: Additional links:<\/b><\/p>\n

8)\u00a0 Pro-Life Without Exception
\nhttps:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=zwazODlTOBk<\/a>
\nVideo \u2013 58:33
\nIs abortion helpful in cases of rape or incest? What about fetal deformity? What about threats to the life or health of the mother?<\/u>
\n<\/b>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Hear the stories of those who have actually been involved in these difficult circumstances.<\/p>\n

9)\u00a0 No Exceptions
\nDr. Patrick Johnston, Abortion and Healthcare
\n<\/b>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 http:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/no-exceptions\/<\/a>
\n Video – 6:18<\/a><\/p>\n

10)\u00a0 Dr. Patrick Johnston, Director, Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians, Statement S.457 Senate Judiciary Subcomm. Hearing<\/a><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/a><\/b>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 March 13, 2014
\nhttp:\/\/christianlifeandliberty.net\/2014-03-13-Dr-Patrick-Johnston-Statement-S457-SJSubcomm-Hearing-March-13-2014.pdf<\/a>
\n[ Written statement of Dr. Patrick Johnston introduced during testimony by Dr. Henry Jordan before SC Senate Judiciary
\nSubcommittee at public hearing on SC Personhood Bill S.457<\/a> on March 13, 2014 – video<\/a> (21:48) ]<\/p>\n

11)\u00a0 Life of the Mother “Exception” by American Right to Life –<\/b> http:\/\/americanrtl.org\/life-of-the-mother-exception<\/a><\/p>\n

12)\u00a0 Are There Rare Cases When an Abortion Is Justified? – By Dr. Patrick Johnston, D.O., Dir., Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians
\n<\/b>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 http:\/\/prolifephysicians.org\/app\/?p=59<\/a><\/p>\n

_______________________________
\n_______________________________
\n_______________________________<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

Christians<\/a> for Personhood<\/a> ( CP<\/a> )
\nColumbia, South Carolina
\nFebruary 19, 2016 \/ Corrected\/Revised February 20, 2016
\n
\n<\/span>Ted Cruz on Personhood? – Views of American Right to Life, Christians for Personhood, PersonhoodUSA
\n<\/b><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

Ted Cruz has posted a new video<\/a> where he says “I enthusiastically support that Resolution”, referring to a June 2014<\/b> Republican Primary Advisory<\/u> Question which asked voters to vote “Yes” or “No” on language adding a personhood amendment to the South Carolina Constitution.\u00a0 Statewide, this Advisory<\/u> Question passed by over 78%, with over 240,000 Republican Primary voters saying “Yes”.
\n
\n<\/span>However, neither Ted Cruz in his new video<\/a>, nor PersonhoodUSA in their Feb. 17, 2016 MEDIA ADVISORY below, say anything about the ACTUAL<\/u> SC Personhood Constitutional Amendment ( S.719<\/a>, H .4093<\/a> ) which has nearly the identical, verbatim language of the 2014 Republican Primary Advisory<\/u> Question; which bills are being currently<\/u> promoted by Christians for Personhood, Personhood South Carolina, and Voice of the Unborn, RIGHT NOW, in February 2016 !<\/p>\n

Later in this same new video<\/a> 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<\/b> other than [ i.e., EXCEPT ]<\/span> the life of the mother, <\/b>from conception <\/b>to natural death.”\u00a0 [ emphasis, comment added ]<\/p>\n

Note however, any “exceptions” to legal personhood nullify, destroy the legal concept, destroy the personhood legal argument.<\/p>\n

Ted Cruz is an intelligent Harvard trained lawyer.\u00a0 Most certainly he knows the significance of the legal term “person”.<\/p>\n

Even Black’s Law Dictionary (2009)<\/a><\/b>, <\/b>used by attorneys, defines “Person” as “A Human Being”.\u00a0 So, Person = Human Being.<\/b><\/p>\n

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

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

If he does, then he would be supporting something that contradicts with what he says later in this same video<\/a>, <\/i><\/b>as addressed above, <\/i>about his support for an exception for the life of the mother; because S.719<\/a>, H .4093<\/a> do not<\/u> 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.<\/b><\/p>\n

In fact, in a YouTube video<\/a> posted January 8, 2016 recording Ted Cruz while campaigning in Iowa, Ted Cruz specifically said,\u00a0 “I have not<\/u> 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<\/i> ], …”\u00a0 <\/b>[ At 10:45 into YouTube video<\/a> ]<\/p>\n


\n<\/span>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.\u00a0 [ Presently, there are two principled Personhood Bills in the US House: HR 426<\/b>\u00a0 and HR 2761 <\/b>– each bill can be viewed at www.Congress.gov<\/a>. HR 2761<\/b> 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<\/a>. ]
\n
\n<\/span>American Right to Life has posted a detailed report and analysis of the contradictory positions taken by Ted Cruz on “abortion”
\nat: http:\/\/prolifeprofiles.com\/ted-cruz-abortion<\/a><\/p>\n

\"[]\"
\nTed Cruz
\n<\/b><\/span>Presidential Candidate
\nTier 2 – Personhood Whenever<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

__________________________
\n__________________________
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>“Pro-Life is Pro-Personhood” !
\n<\/span><\/b>
\n<\/span>Christians for Personhood:<\/p>\n

The standard for identifying whether or not a candidate is \u201cPro-Life\u201d 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 \u201cexceptions\u201d, because God\u2019s Word says, \u201cThou shalt not kill ( murder ).\u201d\u00a0 Exodus 20:13, KJV<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Being \u201cPro-Life\u201d is agreeing with God<\/u> regarding the Sanctity of Human Life which He created.
\n
\n<\/span>____________________________
\n____________________________
\n<\/span>
\n<\/span>Additional links:<\/b><\/p>\n

1) Introduction of S.719 in SC Senate – April 28, 2015<\/strong> – Christians for<\/a> Personhood press release<\/a><\/p>\n

2) Introduction of H.4093 in SC House – April 30, 2015 <\/b>– Christians for <\/a>Personhood press release<\/a><\/p>\n

3) Personhood Questionnaire for 2016 Republican Presidential Candidates
\n<\/b>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 December 29, 2015 –<\/b> Christians for Personhood report<\/a><\/p>\n

4) No Completed Personhood Questionnaires Received from 2016 Republican Presidential Candidates
\nJanuary 27, 2016 –<\/b> Christians for Personhood report<\/a><\/p>\n

5) Open Letter to REPUBLICAN South Carolina Senators ( 27 )
\nSubj: County Results for Republican Advisory Q #1, June 2014 Republican Primary
\nFebruary 5, 2016 –<\/b> Christians for <\/a>Personhood Open Letter<\/a><\/p>\n

6) Ted Cruz Does Not Support Personhood Legislation
\nFebruary 6, 2016 –<\/b> Christians for Personhood report<\/a><\/p>\n

7) SC Personhood Amendment \u2013 52 House, 13 Senate members in support but 2\/3 needed [ 83 in House, at least 30 in Senate ]
\nFebruary 15, 2016 –<\/b> Christians for <\/a>Personhood report<\/a><\/p>\n

8)\u00a0 Pro-Life Without Exception
\n<\/b>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=zwazODlTOBk<\/a>
\nVideo \u2013 58:33
\nIs abortion helpful in cases of rape or incest? What about fetal deformity? What about threats to the life or health of the mother?<\/u>\u00a0 <\/b>Hear the stories of those who have actually been involved in these difficult circumstances.<\/p>\n

9)\u00a0 No Exceptions
\nDr. Patrick Johnston, Abortion and Healthcare
\n<\/b>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 http:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/no-exceptions\/<\/a>
\n Video – 6:18<\/a><\/p>\n

10)\u00a0 Dr. Patrick Johnston, Director, Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians, Statement S.457 Senate Judiciary Subcomm. Hearing<\/a><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/a><\/b>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 March 13, 2014
\nhttp:\/\/christianlifeandliberty.net\/2014-03-13-Dr-Patrick-Johnston-Statement-S457-SJSubcomm-Hearing-March-13-2014.pdf<\/a>
\n[ 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<\/a> on March 13, 2014 – video<\/a> (21:48) ]<\/p>\n

11)\u00a0 Life of the Mother “Exception” by American Right to Life –<\/b> http:\/\/americanrtl.org\/life-of-the-mother-exception<\/a><\/p>\n

12)\u00a0 Are There Rare Cases When an Abortion Is Justified? – By Dr. Patrick Johnston, D.O., Dir., Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians
\n<\/b>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 http:\/\/prolifephysicians.org\/app\/?p=59<\/a><\/p>\n

_____________________________
\n_____________________________
\n_____________________________<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

PersonhoodUSA press release:<\/p>\n

79% of South Carolina GOP Voters Support Personhood<\/a>
\n<\/b>http:\/\/www.christiannewswire.com\/news\/1216777437.html<\/a><\/p>\n

____________________________________<\/p>\n

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016
\nFrom: Christian Newswire <newsdesk@christiannewswire.com>
\nSubject: 79% of South Carolina GOP Voters Support Personhood<\/p>\n

79% of South Carolina GOP Voters Support Personhood<\/b><\/div>\n

Contact: Jennifer Mason, Personhood USA<\/a>, 303-803-0598<\/p>\n

MEDIA ADVISORY, Feb. 17, 2016 \/ Christian Newswire<\/a>\/ — 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.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

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.”<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

“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\u00a0South Carolina voters in the primary have already voted in support of full personhood rights for unborn children.”<\/p>\n

Ted Cruz Video Link: www.youtube.com\/watch?v=EQlmvEQFgV4<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

[ Edited ]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Christians for Personhood ( CP ) Columbia, South Carolina February 20, 2016 Correction\/Revision – Ted Cruz on Personhood? – Views […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[28,34,5],"tags":[12,23,24,32],"class_list":["post-185","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-2016-elections","category-gop-candidates","category-personhood","tag-personhood","tag-south-carolina","tag-state-amendment","tag-ted-cruz"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=185"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":192,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185\/revisions\/192"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=185"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=185"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=185"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}