The purpose of this is to debate a Bill before it is added. Debate can center on whether the Bill should be passed or not, or it can center over which lobbyists care about the Bill in question. Some Bills are unconstitutional or simply redundant, so if this Bill is one of those, it won't be added in the first place, so feel free to debate that, too. Have fun.
June 1, 2010

Justice for Our Children's Act

(submitted on behalf of Brent Jackson)

A BILL to ban partial-birth abortions and for other purposes,

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

Section 1- Short Title

(a) This bill may be cited as the "Justice for Our Children's Act."

Section 2- Findings

(a) Whereas aborting a fetus is immoral; and,

(b) Whereas abortion is still legal in a number of states.

Section 3- Partial-Birth Abortion Ban

(a) No partial-birth abortions shall be allowed to take place unless used to remove a deceased fetus that is developed enough to require dilation of the cervix for its extraction

(b) For the purposes of this act, an abortion shall be considered partial-birth if the fetus is removed from the mother's womb surgically via the cervix.

(c) No provision in this act shall be construed as to prohibit the abortion of a fetus when it is the product of rape, incest, when the mother's life is endangered, or when the mother is nineteen years old or younger.


Section 4- Abstinence Education Program

(a) An immediate fund of $15,000,000 shall be established to offer grants to states to offer an abstinence education program in their state.

(b) This program must be developed in conjunction with the responsible federal department.

(c) Three years after the passage of this act, the responsible federal department shall report before congress as to the effectiveness of the program.

(d) No grant shall be for more than $300,000.

Section 5- Protected Sex Program

(a) An immediate fund of $10,000,000 shall be established to offer grants to states to offer a sexual protection education program in their state.

(b) This program must be developed in conjunction with the responsible federal department.

(c) Three years after the passage of this act, the responsible federal department shall report before congress as to the effectiveness of the program.

(d) No grant shall be for more than $300,000.


Section 6- Enactment

(a) This act shall take effect upon its constitutional passage.

Submitted 7:03 PM by Pileup
No title
NOTE: This bill is from the ON THE Hill Game but I am the creator.
Posted By Brent Jackson on 6/1/10 at 7:20 PM | Reply
I support this!
If I was Governor I would vote FOR this bill, it is much needed!
Posted By Darth Wolvex on 6/3/10 at 1:25 PM | Reply
Vote World Ruler
I shall support the ban on abortion except where it threatens the mother's life. I shall not support any sex or abortion education campaigns for youth.
Posted By World Ruler on 6/3/10 at 3:41 PM | Reply
I support this Bill
I shall support to go against abortion except where it has a negative impact on the mother like rape ect is when I support abortion.
Posted By Obama Biden on 4/8/12 at 7:52 AM | Reply
I support this also
If I was a senator I would COMPLETLY support this bill. It is barbaric to abort childeren.
Posted By Cody Holmes on 6/8/10 at 11:01 PM | Reply
I Agree
This bill would be very important though i disagree with spending more money... money which might i add we do not have. Instead i would support more in depth sexual educations in the classroom not in the gymnasium
Posted By Dr Hill on 6/11/10 at 9:55 PM | Reply
i agree
I agree with bill 100% we need more people like you!
Posted By mccain on 6/17/10 at 9:36 PM | Reply
I support with an asterisk
Does no one have an actual point to make other than i support/I don't support?

The 1st and second semester you approve of the abortions, but not the third, I agree with this based on a personal view on when a child becomes a child, but the public may oppose the movement. We need to consider what the people want.

Did everyone else miss the pathetic funding for abstinence education? The numbers may look big, but when it's spread accross all the schools in the state they get no real funding, and it's back to a horrible system.

I support the protected sex program, I like where it's funding is and support the idea.
Posted By USMCSmith1044 on 7/24/10 at 6:34 PM | Reply
I agree with some parts
I do not agree with funding for abstinence programs, in my opinion this will not deter a person from engaging in sex.

I would think it would be appropriate to extend abstinence teaching into regular classroom curriculum, it that.
Posted By Tiffany Mason on 8/10/10 at 11:16 AM | Reply
Agree but cut some things
I totally agree, but Section 4 is a money waster. Students will not listen if you stand in front of a classroom and say DO NOT HAVE SEX. It needs to be better than that. The Sexual Protection part would be something to invest in. I love the idea. See, students just need to be aware of what is going on, and that's what parents, churches, guidance counselors, and other influences are for. If students want to have sex then they will. So instead take out Section 4 and leave Sections 1, 2, 3, and 5. This way, we save needed money by cutting out something useless.
Posted By john290 on 8/11/10 at 3:26 AM | Reply
Cut Section 4
I agree with John290, I agree but get rid of Section 4 it's a waste of money.
Posted By Kieran Kennedy on 8/14/10 at 12:11 PM | Reply
No title
I agree with Kieran Kennedy.
Posted By Techoni on 7/6/12 at 1:36 PM | Reply
Ugh.
This is a disgusting bill. Why should there be any distibnction between normal and partial abortions? There is not one sentence in the bill that deserves consideration.
Posted By EricSmythe on 8/18/10 at 5:25 PM | Reply
I Disagree
Where has our respect for women's rights gone? Are we honestly planning on banning partial birth abortions? We give women a time period to decide if they want an abortion or not? Plus we're going to spend $15,000,000 on abstinence programs? What happened to just plain old Sex Ed in schools? We cannot honestly consider this bill for passage.
Posted By Tim Bennett on 8/29/10 at 11:33 AM | Reply
I Disagree
I agree with Mr.Bennett completely.
Posted By Kris McNally on 8/29/10 at 5:21 PM | Reply
I disagree
I third Mr. Bennett's motion. Woman should have a right to choose. Plus, even if abortions were banned, woman in certain circumstances would still attempt to abort their fetus/embryo, but they would be doing it in unsanitary conditions, under the knife of a badly skilled individual, with a coat hanger. It is better to provide a safe, inexpensive way for woman to have their procedures.
Posted By bashku2 on 8/31/10 at 8:37 PM | Reply
Are you crazy?
Are you crazy?You are tring to raise our debt and we all ready have a debt of about 88 trillion deficit.I urge all of you to say NAY to this bill.
Posted By Nigel O.J. Walton on 9/11/10 at 11:31 PM | Reply
Nay!
What foolish republican talk is this? Abortions should be legal in all states.
Posted By Benjamin Disraeli on 10/6/10 at 2:19 AM | Reply
No title
i support this completly abortion is morally wrong
Posted By ronald regan on 10/10/10 at 10:43 AM | Reply
No title
I fully support this bill
Posted By Randy Darrah on 10/24/10 at 4:51 PM | Reply
No title
Abortion should only be legal in rape, incest, or life of a mother. Once elected I will make sure that that is the case, but I believe that we must allow freedom in these cases.
Posted By Jim Tracy on 11/24/10 at 5:26 PM | Reply
from Joshua Crowder (R)
I believe that abortion of any kind and for any reason should become illegal through a Constitutional Amendment. And for the life of a mother I believe that God should decide which life if any should perish.
Posted By Joshua Crowder on 12/12/10 at 8:51 PM | Reply
from Joshua Crowder (R)
john290 makes a point about students most likely not listening to a person if they in front of a class saying to not have sex. But sex is a GOOD thing as long as the parents are married when they have the interaction.
Posted By Joshua Crowder on 12/12/10 at 8:55 PM | Reply
Separation of Church and State
We should not let our own moral beliefs take away the individual right of a woman
Posted By Redsinkervunkel on 4/22/11 at 3:23 AM | Reply
Cont
So I would not support this bill
Posted By Redsinkervunkel on 4/22/11 at 3:24 AM | Reply
No title
I concur with Joshua Crowder.
Posted By justinbarbour1 on 6/9/11 at 4:10 AM | Reply
Do not support.
I do not support this bill.
Posted By immutablelight on 6/18/11 at 1:19 PM | Reply
i support this bill
i support this bill...why should a full grown male and female decide the fate of their unborn baby boy/girl who have absoulutley no say in the matter whats so ever?
Posted By nicolae carpathia on 6/24/11 at 10:00 PM | Reply
I agree
I support this bill and its attempt to protect the life of the unborn.
Posted By Mr. Progressive on 7/10/11 at 1:57 PM | Reply
I Agree
I will definitely support this bill!We cannot afford to lose the unborn because they are our future!1
Posted By Inshath on 7/27/11 at 10:46 AM | Reply
I disagree, but I understand
I'd agree that I don't see why abortion should ideally happen outside the cases you've exempted, but if it does happen, sad story but I feel the mother's need. We might need more than free birth control, we might want to give benefits to couples who deem themselves not prepared to have kids. I'd also agree that sex needs to be taught in the schools, but much more openly!
Posted By Knud Birkholm on 8/9/11 at 8:26 AM | Reply
Big Spender!!!
this bill will cost way to much. I also disagree on the $15,000,000. so many schools teach sex-ed that we dont need the abstinence education program. if elected i would vote NAY!!!
Posted By Ryan White on 8/11/11 at 2:17 PM | Reply
Let States Decide
I oppose this bill for a number of reasons.

1) It undermines a states right to decide to draft its own laws and decide what is best for the people within its borders.

2) National policies forced on the entire nation may serve as a creator of instability. The purpose of state rights is to ensure that 1 law that does not fit all 50 states is not pushed on the entire country collectively, but rather each state can decide based on the democratic views of their people. A blanket approach creates a situation where an individual can not move from one state to the next, but has to outright rebel against the system.

3) If this bill is to be passed, it must consist of federal funding for foster homes. Women who will no longer be able to abort their unborn children are likely to place those children in government care. This places an unfair expense on the state governments who did not even pass such legislation. Therefore, federal funding for the indirect cost should be added to the bill. Considering all 50 states, the number of abortions that currently take place, and the potential of government waste, a good estimate would be 5-10 billion at minimum.

4) Sex education should not be an issue that is dictated by federal policy, and opens the door for the federal government to control state policy on education. Therefore, the funding for such programs should be only implemented if states are in control of the content of such programs along with an option to op-out.

Posted By Seth Jackson on 10/3/11 at 2:07 AM | Reply
I do not support this bill.
I am a conservative, but i do not support this. I do not agree with elective abrtion, but even i think it is neccesary, and in some cases, merciful, like Rape. I do not support this bill at all.
Posted By James Perry on 3/5/12 at 9:45 AM | Reply
Amendment Request - Full Support
I wholly agree with this proposed new law and its underlying principles, but I am requesting some amendments be done on this law.

The main underlying principle of this law is that it is immoral to abort a fetus, this is highly controversial and will face many problems in the future. Maybe instead we could relate it to unprotected sex and the increase chance of passing on a STI. By having a prohibition on certain abortions it will make individuals think twice before having unprotected sex.

Secondly under s.3(c) I would like to see stricken the part that allows mothers under 19yrs to have an abortion. This is contradictory to the immoral principle and to the need of protected sex.

Lastly I would like to see s.4 removed, as it is a high cost on a cash strapped country and would be highly unproductive due to our sex based culture.
Posted By JOE101 on 4/11/12 at 10:41 PM | Reply
No title
I rise in support of this bill.

Although I have my objections to section 3 subsection c because I believe abortion is illegal in all it's forms. However the government is not a church and I feel this is great for reestablishing of morality.

I strong urge my colleges to vote yes
Posted By Publius21 on 4/26/12 at 9:10 PM | Reply
Thomas B. Borough
I see the preposition that we need restrictions on abortion. Also, we need to give women FREEDOM. I say you should be 20 years or younger to have an abortion. The women can be older than 20 only if she is raped, assaulted, or distressed. Second, we do not have money to support this bill. We are in a deficit of TRILLIONS of dollars.


I STRONGLY SAY NO! NO! NO! TO THIS BILL!!!
Posted By Thomas B. Borough on 4/28/12 at 12:56 PM | Reply
CHENDERSON
I strongly agree with this bill as abortion in any case is immoral and murder!!!
Posted By CHENDERSON on 6/7/12 at 2:54 AM | Reply
No title
I support this bill. This is exatully what we need to put our country on the RIGHT spot morally, spiritually, and politically. And besides a partial birth abortion is murder!!! the child is half alive!
Posted By CEO Quinn on 7/5/12 at 11:02 PM | Reply
Huckabee
Pileup, I fully support this bill. I hope to move it to a vote, once we've re-booted the game.
Posted By Mike Huckabee on 7/15/12 at 10:03 AM | Reply
Paul
This bill is totally unnecessary. Is extra government control really needed over something based solely on morals? The decision should lie with the ones involved in the abortion, as they're the ones most affected by it.
Posted By Richard Stevens on 7/16/12 at 8:32 AM | Reply
No title
Supported
Posted By sootie8 on 7/31/12 at 7:28 PM | Reply
No title
Everyone has the right to bodily autonomy, and this bill would strictly deny that right for many women and trans men.

Religion should stay out of our government and remain in our churches.

Abstinence only education also has not proved to be effective in any manner at all. The best way to prevent unwanted pregnancy (which is the leading reason for abortions) is to provide a good sex education to all citizens. This bill is an unnecessary attack on women.
Posted By Nerdymouse on 11/9/12 at 12:10 AM | Reply
No title
No.
Posted By Erin Belcher on 4/14/13 at 12:00 PM | Reply
No title
Too many earmarks in this bill. I am opposed to abortion, because it is murder, but we must alter this bill. I would be interested in supporting the bill, but only once it is altered.
Posted By nf130 on 5/23/13 at 2:41 PM | Reply
I support this 100%
Abortion is WRONG and the protection of human life is on the top of my agenda. This bill IS NOT an attack on women. The "right" to choose is not freedom.
Posted By Ed Torres on 6/22/13 at 7:42 PM | Reply
We canĀ“t decide that.
We can't decide what people should be allowed to do with there body, the government cannot interfere in this kind off matters.
Posted By varun on 7/4/13 at 11:51 AM | Reply

Post New Comment

Title:
Comment (tags allowed: <b>,<i>,<u>,<a>):