Science has produced another marvel. It has created an artificial womb that can be used to provide a more suitable environment for preemie babies who cannot stay in the mother’s natural womb. It’s just one more way we as a race have advanced to better protect life.
But that’s were the confusion starts. What is life and when is it worth saving? If it is not viable life, then why expend the money and resources to preserve non-viable life when those resources can used upon viable life or more important issues.
For years now, the field of medical science has been able to perform life saving procedures for children within the womb surrounded by amniotic fluid. When the child later is born, the baby has little to no scarring from the procedure. Amazing to some.
But is it life saving? The same child in that womb that went under the surgical knife for a “life saving procedure” could have it’s life terminated by a surgeon’s knife if the Mother had a change of heart about the viability of that child’s life. Is it life? Where and when is the standard for life? Is there a fixed point we can use as litmus, a mooring?
Our Founders called it “The Quickening” and declared the taking of child from the moment of “The Quickening” as murder. It was the soonest they could know with the technology of the day, when the Mother knew she was with child. We know much sooner but we feel, also, that we know much better then our Founding Fathers.
The argument today is that the baby’s life is not viable until it is born, so much later than “The Quickening”. That’s the premise of the Pro-Choice argument to validate and reason the taking of the life or the “goo” that is in the womb. These arguments certainly call into question the Founder’s claim that we are “endowed with certain unalienable rights”. If life is only a matter of our perception then so are the rights as explained in the Founding Documents.
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness endowed by our Creator is the premise of the Constitution. Thus the desire for such and the right to such is wired in us at our conception, or our beginning, an endowment from on High according to the Framers. But was it conception or is it perception?
So if life does not begin in the womb neither do our rights. So when do our rights begin? Is it when our life is proven viable? Who is the final authority on viability? Who now validates my achievement of rights?
Whole civilizations have risen and fallen based on the philosophy that some life is viable and others are not. Whose perception of life can be so trusted as to validate and invalidate the existence of life? Is it the medical field or government?
Both our political parties have conceded to perception rather than conception. Democrats have declared that only once a child is born is it living, except when a Doctor is performing a life saving procedure in the womb, a child has been killed in the womb because of a accident, or now that we have artificial wombs to save the life of preemie babies. Republicans can’t decide what they believe until its a few months out from election and the whole GOP suddenly gets Religion. They have personal beliefs but there are the laws of land.
So law cancels life? Or is it life? If it’s not, then why are we saving it? If life is just your perception based on what you believe, and Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness were never endowed in the first place, than this great Republic is based upon a fraudulent idea. With all of our advances, the question still is simple but the more stark in its clarity: Is it a “life saving” procedure or “goo saving” procedure?
After all the prognostication and hand wringing, there is really one simple reason why the AHCA failed. The Republicans, once again, did not keep their word. They campaigned repeatedly for months pounding the mantra of “repeal and replace”. This “plan” did not repeal so it had zero chance to replace, because without repeal there is no need to replace. Not once did I hear Republicans campaign on “revamp and retool”. So now the GOP needs to “reset and regroup” and find the intestinal fortitude to do what they said they would do.
Poliquin calls on Speaker Ryan to bring heroin legislation to House Floor
WASHINGTON – Maine’s Second District Congressman, Bruce Poliquin, sent a letter to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan urging him to bring the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA), a bill that will provide critical resources to Maine to combat the growing heroin epidemic in our State, to the House Floor for a vote. The Senate passed the bill earlier this month.
In the letter, Congressman Poliquin writes:
“One of the most serious problems impacting Maine and America is the heroin and opioid epidemic that is taking the lives of hundreds people and causing unthinkable harm to our families, friends and communities,” writes Congressman Poliquin.
“It is now time for the House to act so that we can pass this crucial legislation and send it to the President’s desk for signature. Doing so will boost the efforts of our Maine families to better help their addicted loved ones with the treatment and long-term recovery to live drug-free and healthy lives.”
Since joining Congress, Poliquin has made it a top priority to use the full-weight of his Congressional Office to combat the growing heroin epidemic crippling Maine, including serving as an original cosponsor to the Cradle Act, a bill that would help the nearly 1,000 babies born addicted to heroin in Maine each year. Congressman Poliquin is also a founding member of the Bipartisan Task Force to Combat the Heroin Epidemic, a Congressional body that aims to develop best practices and foster interagency collaboration to address this growing epidemic.
The following is the full text of Congressman Poliquin’s letter to Speaker Ryan:
March 25, 2016
The Honorable Paul Ryan
Speaker of the House of Representatives
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Speaker Ryan,
I write to urge you to bring H.R. 953, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA) to the House floor for a vote. One of the most serious problems impacting Maine and America is the heroin and opioid epidemic that is taking the lives of hundreds people and causing unthinkable harm to our families, friends and communities.
This important bipartisan legislation was introduced by Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner and would provide emergency federal funding and other needed resources for Maine, along with a number of other states that are in desperate need to curtail this drug epidemic. As our law enforcement agencies, treatment centers, social service networks and families work together to curb this dangerous and deadly drug problem, this legislation would provide critical steps to help end this tragedy. It would establish a comprehensive and coordinated approach through enhanced grant programs that would expand prevention and education efforts while also promoting treatment and recovery.
The Senate passed its version of the CARA Act on March 10, 2016 by a vote of 94-1. It is now time for the House to act so that we can pass this crucial legislation and send it to the President’s desk for signature. Doing so will boost the efforts of our Maine families to better help their addicted loved ones with the treatment and long-term recovery to live drug-free and healthy lives.
Again, I urge you to bring the CARA Act to the House floor. On behalf of all the Maine victims of this terrible and heartbreaking epidemic, I thank you for your consideration of this request.
Click HERE to see a PDF version of Congressman Poliquin’s letter to Speaker Ryan
Items to Note: