[AIPNEWS Editorial Comment: We consider this to be a historically important debate equal in importance to the mid-nineteenth century debate between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas over slavery. We have chosen to present the exchange in chronological order.]
KYWordsmith.com The Pro-life Debate Between Bill Johnson and Rand Paul -- 10:10am, EST
9.02.09 Press release from Bill Johnson's Senate Campaign...
The Bill Johnson for U.S. Senate Campaign continues to run a low cost and fiscally responsible campaign. Rand Paul, a doctor, and Trey Grayson, a lawyer, are engaged in a battle about who can raise and spend the most money in a primary campaign. This conflict is typical Capitol Hill politics where tax and spend is the norm. How much money is enough?
Instead of focusing on bank accounts, Johnson is concerned about Mr. Paul’s position on abortion as stated at the Jessamine County 2010 Republican kickoff. While Mr. Paul claimed to be pro-life, he stated that the issue of abortion should be decided by the states. Bill Johnson believes Paul’s positions are inconsistent with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, which prevents states from depriving any person of life without due process. Mr. Johnson also believes abortion is a federal issue and should be outlawed.
In addition, Mr. Paul has stated he supports his father’s (Ron Paul) positions. His father is supportive of the legalization of Marijuana and prostitution. Johnson is opposed to both and is a ‘true’ conservative on both fiscal and social issues.
2010 is an important election. Voters have never been more challenged to examine carefully each candidate and their positions on issues independent of the size of their wallets. Any other course is just letting money determine the outcome. This lesson was learned in the 2008 presidential campaigns. -- *UPDATE*
1:10pm, EST; 9.02.09
When asked by KYWordsmith for his thoughts on Bill Johnson's recent criticism, Dr. Rand Paul of Bowling Green responded with the following:
“He’s mistaken. He’s mischaracterized my position. I believe life begins at conception; I am adamantly pro-life.” --
*UPDATE*
4:32pm, EST; 9.02.09
Johnson reacts to Paul's remarks:
"Mr. Paul is attempting to take a political position on the abortion issue. He clearly stated at the Jessamine County event that abortion was a state issue. His approach to being prolife is to avoid responsibility for protecting the unborn by passing the burden to the States. As a Senator, he should up hold the constitution which is clear on the issues of due process and life at the federal level.
"Mr. Paul does not appear to be a social conservative when it comes to abortion, prostitution or legalization of drugs." -- *UPDATE*
3:00pm, EST; 9.03.09
KY Wordsmith has acquired the audio of Rand Paul's initial remarks in Jessamine County... Listen HERE . --
*UPDATE*
10:33am EST, 9.04.09
KY Wordsmith received this statement from David Adams, Rand Paul's Campaign Manager...
"Abortion is currently legal in all fifty states and we have
been treating it like a federal issue since 1973. We had
Republican majorities in Congress and a Republican in the
White House for most of this decade and failed repeatedly to
even make it illegal to transport a minor across state lines
for an abortion. Abortion activist Molly Yard at least
understood the public policy when she said "the anti-abortion
crowd in this country want (abortion) to be a states' rights
issue. We aren't going to buy into that strategy."
"Dr. Paul has stated clearly that Roe v. Wade should be overturned, that life begins at conception, and that abortion should be illegal. But holding our breath waiting for the federal government to get this issue right isn't likely to save lives any time soon. If states were to decide this issue for themselves, there can be little doubt that several states -- including Kentucky -- would respond by making abortion illegal immediately."
--
*UPDATE*
10:00am EST, 9.05.09
The saga continues with this latest statement from Senate candidate Bill Johnson...
"Rand Paul supports his father’s “Sanctity of Life Act of 2007” (H.R.
2597), which offers the worst possible response to the current
abortion problem. This act says the unborn are persons. It gives
the states the authority to limit abortion. But it does NOT REQUIRE
the states to protect unborn life. This is not pro-life and it is not constitutional..
Rather than uphold every person’s rights, this radical plan would give
the states unchecked power to deny constitutional protection to whole
classes of people. It would even prohibit the federal courts from
acting upon their sworn constitutional requirement to secure the right
to life of all innocent individuals.
Judge Blackmun, author of Roe v Wade, admitted in the text of the case that if the unborn child is a person then they are protected by the 14th amendment. Because Ron and Rand Paul admit the unborn are persons but are willing to deny them constitutional protection, their position is even worse than Blackmun's.
No State has the power to deny any person their constitutional rights, and in fact each state has a constitutionally-imposed duty to provide for the equal protection of the laws to all.
This fight over the imperative governmental obligation to protect innocent life (at every level, and in every branch) already took place within our party decades ago. At that time, the views of Gerald R. Ford, which were nearly identical to those now advocated by Rand Paul, were defeated by Ronald Reagan. That’s why, since 1984, the Reagan Republican pro-life platform has explicitly recognized the personhood of the child in the womb, and their protection therefore by the clear and straightforward provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment.
As Kentucky’s U.S. Senator, I would consider my primary duty to be the fulfillment of the crowning stated purpose of our Constitution: to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."
|
*UPDATE*
10:00am EST, 9.05.09
The saga continues with this latest statement from Senate candidate Bill Johnson...
"Rand Paul supports his father’s “Sanctity of Life Act of 2007” (H.R.
2597), which offers the worst possible response to the current
abortion problem. This act says the unborn are persons. It gives
the states the authority to limit abortion. But it does NOT REQUIRE
the states to protect unborn life. This is not pro-life and it is not constitutional..
Rather than uphold every person’s rights, this radical plan would give
the states unchecked power to deny constitutional protection to whole
classes of people. It would even prohibit the federal courts from
acting upon their sworn constitutional requirement to secure the right
to life of all innocent individuals.
Judge Blackmun, author of Roe v Wade, admitted in the text of the case that if the unborn child is a person then they are protected by the 14th amendment. Because Ron and Rand Paul admit the unborn are persons but are willing to deny them constitutional protection, their position is even worse than Blackmun's.
No State has the power to deny any person their constitutional rights, and in fact each state has a constitutionally-imposed duty to provide for the equal protection of the laws to all.
This fight over the imperative governmental obligation to protect innocent life (at every level, and in every branch) already took place within our party decades ago. At that time, the views of Gerald R. Ford, which were nearly identical to those now advocated by Rand Paul, were defeated by Ronald Reagan. That’s why, since 1984, the Reagan Republican pro-life platform has explicitly recognized the personhood of the child in the womb, and their protection therefore by the clear and straightforward provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment.
As Kentucky’s U.S. Senator, I would consider my primary duty to be the fulfillment of the crowning stated purpose of our Constitution: to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." Read the whole exchange here, along with the recording of Rand Paul admitting he's pro-choice for states.
|
