Del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Reddit
Newsvine
co.mments
Life at Conception Act
A bill to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution for the right of life of each born and preborn human person.
Other Bill Titles (2 more) 6/11/2008--Introduced.
Life at Conception Act - Declares that the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human being beginning at the moment of fertilization, cloning, and other moment at which an individual comes into being.
See Full Bill Text
Committees
Amendments
This bill has no amendments.
Bill Status
| Introduced |  | Voted on by Senate | | Voted on by House | | Considered By President | | Bill Becomes Law |
| June 11, 2008 |
Users tracking S.3111 (15) are also tracking:
| People | Bills | Issues |
|---|---|---|
|
In the News
We are not currently finding any news articles on this topic using our daily automated search of Google News. However, if you know of a relevant news article to display here, OpenCongress site editors have the ability to add it manually. Simply e-mail us the web address of this page and the web address of your suggested news article: We'll post relevant links as quickly as possible. Also, if this topic is important to you, you could write a letter to the editor -- if a news article refers this specific topic by name, a link to that news article is likely to appear here soon.
Information made available by:
Blog Coverage
September 18, 2008 Summer Wonderland at BEL
24th: Personhood Bill Introduced in US Senate (BEL promotes Republican Mississippi US Senator Roger Wicker's S.3111 Life at Conception Act) 26th: Megan's Call (Wow!) July 2008 1st: Press Conference Against Colorado Censorship (BEL ...
Source: Theology Forum | Theology Online
September 10, 2008 Christians: Repent ! (2 Chronicles 7:14)
John McCain is NOT a co-sponsor of the US Senate âPersonoodâ bill, S.3111, a bill which would END all âlegalizedâ abortion in America - John McCain has supported âexceptionsâ to a ban on abortion. - John McCain has.
Source: lefemineforlife.net
September 04, 2008 pro Life missionary reports from RNC regarding McCain(abortion)/Dobson
S.3111 ( HTTP://THOMAS.LOC.GOV) - JAMES DOBSON HAS ONCE AGAIN BROKEN HIS VOW NEVER TO SUPPORT A CANDDIATE WHO WOULD KILL EVEN ONE BABY - JUST AS DOBSON DID IN 2004 IN ENDORSING BABY-KILLER BUSH - JAMES DOBSON ...
Source: The Fighting Fundamental Forums
8 more posts...
See most useful blog posts
Information made available by:
Rating Filter: 5
Comments
First, I'd like to say that I support this bill. But, I want to know what it would accomplish. If at conception, human babies would protected by the Constitution, what would that mean for the legality of abortion? Wouldn't some claim the law to be unconstitutional? Not that agree, but what would the bill accomplish?
I would strongly suggest that you read "The Pro Life Conundrum" blog before going much farther with this foolish bill. http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-2TjBrmQlabMmkPXFrSmHjB_fBgzsyDOJmsQ-?cq=1
The blog reveals the conundrum that if a woman chooses to have sex, then she has choosen to have an abortion. So such a bill as this would lead to the making of women into murderers simply though the act of procreation.
<B> I would strongly suggest that you read Fr. Frank Pavone's article "Will Women Go To Jail For Abortions?"
http://www.catholicexchange.com/2008/02/01/90528/
so that you will have the other side of the Great Bill.....it reveals the truth about how the Bill will HELP WOMEN NOT put them in jail as you so MISTAKINGLY represent!
All you are representing is free sex not treating women fairly and HELPING women. Women like myelf say NO to your way of thinking.
I choose not to have sex like an animal. I choose to have sex in a relationship that has proven to be stable and loving and one that will be long lasting not one that will be gone if I do become pregnant with a BABY HUMAN!!!
Women weren't allowed to go and get abortions before Roe v Wade, and America flourished just fine. Perhaps people should be responsible for themselves for a change and be selective about whom they have sex with? If abortion isn't killing a baby- what is it? Women are prosecuted every day for child neglect, child abuse, abandonment, shaken baby syndrome, and so forth. Why is killing their baby 'not' a crime in your mind?
rcrawford: 'procreation' isn't the same thing as casual sex without responsibility. There's no conundrum. Her choice was to have sex. She can also choose to keep the baby she made or give it up for adoption, but killing it hardly seems fair to the innocent baby. Do you go around to preschools stabbing children in the skull or sawing off arms and legs for profit? What difference is it if the preborn has it done?
There are two proper purposes of sexual intercourse. One to bring the woman and man closer together - a bond of love and giving of each other. Two, that's how babies are made. Either of these two factors missing and it's out of order and wrong. Plus, having sex is fun. Where would the babies be if it wasn't fun? The trouble is responsibility, and if I can say to myself that the life now conceived from having sex is not life at all, then responsibility goes out the window. If you don't want to conceive a child, then don't have sex. It's not rocket-science.
This bill raises more questions than it answers. If a mother miscarries, would she be tried for manslaughter? How do we deal with artificial insemination, a process which often fertilizes more eggs then it uses? What recourse would a woman have who falls ill while pregnant and cannot risk carrying the child to full term?
I am against this bill because it doesn't address the issue at hand and makes broad, clumsy scientific claims that restricts the freedoms of average citizens. It needlessly intertwines issues of cloning and abortion with that of murder and abortion.
It is ludicrous- and legally unsound-- to define life as beginning at conception.
Recognizing a collection of undifferentiated cells as a human being would mean that it is entitled to protections offered by the US Constitution ("life, liberty" etc.). Which would make any action against that mass of cells (deliberate or otherwise) a form of assault, or even murder.
So, if a woman decided to get an abortion- even prior to those cells dividing and differentiating, that woman could be prosecuted for murder.
Even if the woman did not abort, but engaged in any behavior that would not provide the optimum gestational environment for those cells, she could be charged with assault, and child endangerment and/or abuse. So if a pregnant didnt eat a nutritious diet, if she worked too hard or for too many hours, if she drove too fast...she could be prosecuted as a child endangerer. And she might even lose custody of that child, having been deemed an unfit mother- and what if custody was revoked while she was still carrying the fetus?
Women, stand UP for your rights to manage your own reproductive lives! You can still be pro-life and be pro- women's rights. Keep the government off our bodies and out of our bedrooms.
Add A Comment