Carl Wimmer, Republican of the Utah House of Representatives, has an interesting view on the scope of his work. As Angry Mouse explains here http://www.dailykos.com/... he has written a law that would "remove prohibitions against prosecution of a woman for killing an unborn child or committing criminal homicide of an unborn child."
Today, I sent an e-mail to Rep. Wimmer, explaining that it is not his job to control women's wombs. This was his reply: "Ah, but your wrong. The founding fathers said that government's are instituted among men to protect certain unalienable rights. Among them are LIFE, liberty and property/pursuit of happiness. Life was recognized as the first and foremost right in which all people are endowed. Abortion ends life. Therefore it IS the proper role of government to control the ending of life."
When I responded that, by law, abortion does not end a life, he asked, "Can you site the exact and precise law which states abortion does not end a life?"
I am clearly in over my head. I have neither the legal background, nor the experience, to argue law with a former police officer. But neither does it feel right to allow him to continue his crusade against women without debate. So I am asking for help. I will search for the information, of course, but I would also like as many people as possible to assist me in letting this man know that he can not redefine the law to suit his own needs.
You can reach him here: cwimmer@utah.gov
UPDATE: I responded with this message: Roe v Wade says that abortion is legal, and therefore, does not take a life. I think it's safe to assume that the Supreme Court knows a bit more about the law than you do.
As for your other statements:
- The Founding Fathers listed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the Declaration of Independence, which does not have any legal standing.
- If life is the foremost priority because it is listed first, does that mean that the First Amendment is more important than the Second?
- If protecting life is so important to you, why do you support the death penalty, or oppose health care for the children of illegal immigrants? Are not those lives worth protecting?
When you start passing laws to protect those who are already alive, then you might be able to argue that life really matters to you. Until then, you're still a hypocrite.
I'm sure he'll have more to say soon. Thanks for the help!