The National Rifle Association and the National Republican Campaign Committee announced today a new initiative for the 2020 elections and beyond. In a move that consolidates two major Republican campaign themes — guns and abortions — the initiative proposes arming fetuses, or, as Republican literature prefers to call them, "preborn voters."
This proposal dovetails with the stand of some anti-abortion activists who have sought to declare "personhood" as beginning at the moment of conception; therefore, preborn voters have, from the moment of conception, all of the constitutional rights of post-born voters, including the right to bear arms.
NRA researchers are working on miniaturizing AR-15 assault rifles so that they can be inserted into the womb. After such an implant, the preborn voter would be able to defend himself/herself against an abortion doctor, just as post-born voters can defend themselves from burglars, rapists and IRS agents.
"We see this as a combining of two great cultural movements," said a spokesman for the NRA's Guns for the Preborn Committee, who asked not to be named.
Showing posts with label gun rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gun rights. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 27, 2018
Sunday, October 18, 2015
New political strategy: Arm the pre-born
Memo
From: Pre-Birth Liberation League
Subject: Synthesis of Personhood and Gun Rights
Conservative America's two most popular issues are opposition to abortion, including the declaration (thank you, Mike Huckabee) that the Second and 14th Amendments extend to pre-birth Americans from the moment of conception, and the God-given right of all Americans to carry firearms of all calibers and firing frequency whenever and wherever they choose.
The time has come to meld these two liberties into one highly effective and irrefutable right: It is time extend concealed carry rights to pre-born infants. It is time to arm fetuses!
No murderous abortion doctor will dare to crush the skull of an armed pre-born infant. No abortion doctor will dare to go into battle carrying a curette against a 9mm Glock! Forty-two years of abortion protests have shown that God-fearing protesters alone cannot stop the Murder of the Innocents. It's time to allow the pre-born to defend themselves.
We should support legislation requiring every mother to insert a firearm of no less than .25 caliber into the uterus at the moment that pregnancy is detected for the purpose of fetal self-defense. This legislation would have the immediate support of the National Rifle Association, which contends that there are never enough guns to go around, and the gun manufacturers, who will see a whole new market for their products. This will bring together to Right to Life Movement and the Bound to Die Movement, forming an insurmountable political force.
From: Pre-Birth Liberation League
Subject: Synthesis of Personhood and Gun Rights
Conservative America's two most popular issues are opposition to abortion, including the declaration (thank you, Mike Huckabee) that the Second and 14th Amendments extend to pre-birth Americans from the moment of conception, and the God-given right of all Americans to carry firearms of all calibers and firing frequency whenever and wherever they choose.
The time has come to meld these two liberties into one highly effective and irrefutable right: It is time extend concealed carry rights to pre-born infants. It is time to arm fetuses!
No murderous abortion doctor will dare to crush the skull of an armed pre-born infant. No abortion doctor will dare to go into battle carrying a curette against a 9mm Glock! Forty-two years of abortion protests have shown that God-fearing protesters alone cannot stop the Murder of the Innocents. It's time to allow the pre-born to defend themselves.
We should support legislation requiring every mother to insert a firearm of no less than .25 caliber into the uterus at the moment that pregnancy is detected for the purpose of fetal self-defense. This legislation would have the immediate support of the National Rifle Association, which contends that there are never enough guns to go around, and the gun manufacturers, who will see a whole new market for their products. This will bring together to Right to Life Movement and the Bound to Die Movement, forming an insurmountable political force.
Monday, December 17, 2012
What will we do about gun massacres?
President Obama, speaking before a grieving crowd at Newtown, Conn., said America is not doing enough to protect its children, and that must change. He received a standing ovation after his speech.
But talk is cheap. What will change? What will we do about the easy access to deadly firearms with nearly unlimited firepower? What will we do about the mentally ill who suddenly flash before our collective eyes in tragic rages?
The massacre of 20 first-graders at idyllic Newtown could be a tipping point. It could move the needle of public opinion. It could shame the members of Congress who have sold themselves and their integrity to the gun lobby. It could bring about sensible restrictions on gun purchases and the types of firearms and ammunition available to the general public.
It is not necessary to repeal or revise the Second Amendment, which guarantees a "right to bear arms." But no right is absolute. Free speech and free press do not ban legal protections of privacy and recourse for defamation or libel. Religious freedom does not permit the sacrifice of human life. Gun ownership cannot be banned, but sensible restrictions can be imposed on gun purchases and the types of weaponry available to private citizens.
National and state sovereignty — and civilized society — require that government holds a monopoly on the use of deadly force. Weapons available to private citizens must not equal or exceed the power of those held by the army or police. Private citizens' right to bear arms does not extend to anti-aircraft missiles, heavy artillery or attack helicopters. As part of our contract with the government we elect, we expect the government to protect us from "all enemies, foreign and domestic." We do not have to rely on our own six-shooter or Glock or AR-15. The police have superior firepower and are authorized to use it to protect the public.
Congress should consider again an assault weapons ban, including a ban on high-capacity magazines, such as those used by Adam Lanza. Armor-piercing bullets and body armor, which would give individuals an advantage over police, should be banned. Combat weapons should likewise be restricted. And no firearms should be sold to anyone with a history of mental illness or violent actions.
And America must do something about its mental health system that allows people with violent rages to walk the streets and unleash their fury against the innocents, even little children. Not all mental patients are violent — only a minuscule number are dangerous to others — but everyone with mental illness should get the help he needs to live a non-disruptive and, if possible, productive life. Until we do a better job in treating the mentally ill, we will all suffer.
The Second Amendment absolutists will rage against sensible limits on gun ownership and sales, but when they do, let them explain to the parents of Newtown why their right to buy and use guns is worth more than the life of even one 6-year-old.
But talk is cheap. What will change? What will we do about the easy access to deadly firearms with nearly unlimited firepower? What will we do about the mentally ill who suddenly flash before our collective eyes in tragic rages?
The massacre of 20 first-graders at idyllic Newtown could be a tipping point. It could move the needle of public opinion. It could shame the members of Congress who have sold themselves and their integrity to the gun lobby. It could bring about sensible restrictions on gun purchases and the types of firearms and ammunition available to the general public.
It is not necessary to repeal or revise the Second Amendment, which guarantees a "right to bear arms." But no right is absolute. Free speech and free press do not ban legal protections of privacy and recourse for defamation or libel. Religious freedom does not permit the sacrifice of human life. Gun ownership cannot be banned, but sensible restrictions can be imposed on gun purchases and the types of weaponry available to private citizens.
National and state sovereignty — and civilized society — require that government holds a monopoly on the use of deadly force. Weapons available to private citizens must not equal or exceed the power of those held by the army or police. Private citizens' right to bear arms does not extend to anti-aircraft missiles, heavy artillery or attack helicopters. As part of our contract with the government we elect, we expect the government to protect us from "all enemies, foreign and domestic." We do not have to rely on our own six-shooter or Glock or AR-15. The police have superior firepower and are authorized to use it to protect the public.
Congress should consider again an assault weapons ban, including a ban on high-capacity magazines, such as those used by Adam Lanza. Armor-piercing bullets and body armor, which would give individuals an advantage over police, should be banned. Combat weapons should likewise be restricted. And no firearms should be sold to anyone with a history of mental illness or violent actions.
And America must do something about its mental health system that allows people with violent rages to walk the streets and unleash their fury against the innocents, even little children. Not all mental patients are violent — only a minuscule number are dangerous to others — but everyone with mental illness should get the help he needs to live a non-disruptive and, if possible, productive life. Until we do a better job in treating the mentally ill, we will all suffer.
The Second Amendment absolutists will rage against sensible limits on gun ownership and sales, but when they do, let them explain to the parents of Newtown why their right to buy and use guns is worth more than the life of even one 6-year-old.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
