Amash ignores Constitution, backs big-government bill to infringe on DC women's lives

Think Justin Amash is all about getting government out of our lives? Wrong.

Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) lauded the introduction of a fetal pain bill, H.R. 3803. The bill, introduced to coincide with the National March for Life this week, outlaws abortions in the District of Columbia when the unborn child is at least 20 weeks old, the age at which babies can feel pain. Amash is an original cosponsor of the bill.

Well, in his defense, it IS an election year, so he better start pandering to the so-called "pro-life" crowd.

“The most fundamental right is the right to life,” said Amash. “Surely, aborting a baby late in a pregnancy—when the baby would have to suffer through the pain of being killed—should not be permitted in a civilized society.”

The "pain of being killed?" I didn't know you could feel anything while you are still in the womb. I don't remember feeling anything while I was still in Mom's womb.

Under the bill, D.C. abortion providers must make a determination of the probable age of the unborn child. If the child is at least 20 weeks old, the provider is barred from performing an abortion unless necessary to prevent the death or substantial and irreversible physical impairment of the woman. The bill includes privacy protections for the women involved.

So this bill would infringe upon free enterprise by requiring that abortion providers make a guess as to how old an unborn baby is? That right there should sound alarm bells in the minds of conservatives, who usually think the government should not tell businesses how to behave.

The Constitution authorizes Congress to “exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever,” over the District of Columbia. Amash serves on the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which has jurisdiction over D.C.

Ah, the Constitution. That document Amash often likes to trot out in order to defend his out-in-right-field positions. Except that, first of all, I think we'd all agree that just because Congress can do something, doesn't mean Congress should do it. You'd think a guy like Amash would oppose wanting the federal government infringe on people's lives.

Second, while he quotes one section of the Constitution, his bill ignores another section: the Equal Protection Clause found in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

If we assume, therefore, that the unborn are people, then Amash is violating the Equal Protection Clause by introduce a bill that would restrict abortions in DC if the fetus is 20 weeks along. If the fetus is not 20 weeks along, an abortion would still be okay. Either the unborn are people, and Amash is violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution, or the unborn are not people.

Look, I don't believe in abortion. I just don't. That's why I support Democrats, whose policies lead to a decrease in abortions (while so-called "pro-life" Republicans enact policies that increase abortions).

But like it or not, Roe v. Wade is the law of the land. And whatever Justin Amash really believes about abortion, the point is, he's being quite hypocritical. He claims to oppose big-government intervention, yet he co-sponsors a bill to have the government infringe on what the Court itself has ruled is a right. And while he portrays himself as a defender of the Constitution, he backs legislation that, if the unborn are people, would violate the Constitution.

Congressman, do you or do you not oppose government intrusion on people's rights?

Congressman, do you or do you not support the Constitution?

No comments: