NEW BOARD LINK, GO TO THIS LINK FOR THE CURRENT GAME: http://virtualamerica.ipbhost.com
Welcome to Virtual America. We hope you enjoy your visit.

If you're looking to join and sign up for the first time, register here! You'll want to familiarize yourself with the rules of Virtual America which you can find here. And you'll want to read up on how to sign in and create your character here. After all than you can sign in and get to playing! We're all friends here and we're certain you'll enjoy it here at Virtual America!

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
HR 47 Geraldine Ferraro Appreciation Resolution
Topic Started: 9 Jun 2013, 09:56 PM (391 Views)
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

48 Hours for debate

Quote:
 
Rep. Kilinger, for herself, Sen. Power, Rep. Matthews, Rep. Hollingswoth, Rep. Woodward, Sen. Brenninger, Rep. Kennsington, Rep. Andrews, and Rep. Oakwood introduces a House Concurrent Resolution

To express the posthumous appreciation of the House of Representatives to Geraldine Anne "Gerry" Ferraro for her contributions to the American political process and to the nation as a whole.

Section I: Short Title

This resolution shall be known as the "Geraldine Ferraro Appreciation Resolution."

Section II: Findings

The United States House of representatives finds that Geraldine Anne "Gerry" Ferraro, from this point on referred to as Gerry Ferraro, made significant contributions to the American political process, including a more active role of women entering politics.

The United States House of representatives finds that finds that the nomination of Gerry Ferraro as the first female nominee of a major party in 1984 for Vice President has contributed to increased female involvement in government, and been a source of great national pride.

The United States House of representatives finds that Gerry Ferraro was a true American leader with a strong commitment to the middle class, women, and minorities.

The United States House of representatives finds that Gerry Ferraro's legacy hangs over the House of Representatives through the increased number of female representatives.

The United States House of representatives finds that without Gerry Ferraro, the political history of the United States would be far weaker for she was a hero to the feminist movement, a fighter for a more just America, and a believer in putting the interests of her constituents over the interests of the political action committees and special interest groups.

Section III: Provisions

Therefore, be it resolved, that The United States House of Representatives expresses their gratitude and appreciation to Geraldine Anne Ferraro, may she rest in peace.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Vissering
Member Avatar
I'm radioactive.
Madame Speaker,

I ask to be added as a cosponsor to this legislation, and also move for unanimous consent on the bill in its entirety.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

Motion recognized. 24 hours for objections
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ambrose Griffith
Member Avatar

Madame Speaker,

I object. While Mrs. Ferraro did a number of good services to the equality of women in politics and in the workplace, something that I personally find a compelling cause, all of those efforts are overshadowed by her staunch commitment to the so-called right to choose on abortion -- which are statistically more commonly performed on baby girls than boys. Abortion is an ugly and immoral procedure which asymmetrically targets girls and Mrs. Ferraro was a vocal and proud proponent of what she called the right to choose. For this reason, I cannot support this resolution and must oppose it. Unanimous consent is, therefore, inappropriate.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

Objection noted. Debate continues.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Brewer
Member Avatar
The GOP's Favorite Leech
Madame Speaker,

While I do agree with my colleague from California to an extent, as I am pro-life, I wonder how he figures that Ms. Ferraro is targeting women because she supports a procedure approved by the mothers themselves. I look with disgust at the topic of abortion, but his approach to me does not seem very thought through.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Vissering
Member Avatar
I'm radioactive.
Madame Speaker,

I find it silly that the Gentleman is objecting to UC on a bill honoring Ms. Ferraro, a champion of women's rights everywhere and inspiration to millions, myself included, simply because of her political beliefs. This is not a political issue, Madame Speaker.

I yield
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ambrose Griffith
Member Avatar

To answer my honourable friend from Minnesota's seventh district, Madame Speaker, I say that abortion targets girls because, statistically speaking, abortions are performed on baby girls more often than on baby boys. In fact, it is very common for the decision parents take on whether to have an abortion or not is deferred until after the sex of the baby is verified. To that end, abortion is a procedure which, often, targets baby girls.

To answer the honourable member from Arkansas' fourth district, I will say that I don't believe that we should make heroines out of women, nor should we make heroes of men, who support the legal status of a procedure which kills thousands of innocent human beings every year. To me, that disqualifies someone from being hailed as a champion.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Brewer
Member Avatar
The GOP's Favorite Leech
Madame Speaker,

I would indeed like some evidence to back up that claim. I certainly view it as ludicrous and believe it false, but I would rethink this is the gentleman from California showed any proof of gender being displayed commonly in parents' decisions. I also would like to state my agreement with the gentlelady from Arkansas, in saying that we are not supporting abortion here, as we are not supporting Miss Ferraro's political motives. I support her efforts to strengthen the power of women in America, and disagree with the gentleman's attacks.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ambrose Griffith
Member Avatar

Madame Speaker,

I will gladly return with the proof that the gentleman requires but first, I would like to respond to his concluding statement with a simple question: what part of Mrs. Ferraro's work to strengthen the position of women in America is not political? Conversely, what part of supporting the genocide of unborn children is political? I'm confused by the distinction.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ambrose Griffith
Member Avatar

And to the point of proof, Madame Speaker, our good friends at Protect Our Girls have created a fantastic resource for learning about the unequal way in which girls are targeted for abortion right here in the United States.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Brewer
Member Avatar
The GOP's Favorite Leech
Madame Speaker,

Civil rights are not political, and should indeed be granted unanimously by any competent government. I am now beginning to understand the gentleman's reasoning, but I still must disagree. The topic of abortion is viewed as a political issue, and is separate from the topic of women's success in our country. It is our belief that Miss Ferraro has made great strides in terms of the advancemnt of American women, and denying her that honor because of your arguments would be unruly. These are two separate issues, and should be viewed that way, until the gentleman can provide me with the proof he claims he has.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Brewer
Member Avatar
The GOP's Favorite Leech
Madame Speaker,

I thank the gentleman for providing that evidence, and while I do still reserve some belief in this bill, I am not as supportive of it as I was prior. I commend him for backing up his arguments, and, respectfully,

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ambrose Griffith
Member Avatar

Madame Speaker,

The honourable Gentleman's distinction between civil rights and politics is simply confounding. Civil rights, by their very nature, are political as they must be conferred onto a people by a body politic. Unless my understanding of theology is wrong, civil rights of the variety which were supported by Mrs. Ferraro are not God-given but, instead, are given by the government in the name of fairness. I don't oppose these civil rights, but I do say that they do not exist objectively or even separately from the body politic which has given them. If there is a distinction which deserves to be made, Madame Speaker, it is the distinction between natural rights (the right to life counting chief amongst them), and civil rights (those which Mrs. Ferraro pushed for). For Heaven's sake, the word civil in an of itself points to the necessity of political agreement being reached for their existence.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Brewer
Member Avatar
The GOP's Favorite Leech
Madame Speaker,

I speak of civil rights in a matter of morality associated with the acceptance of all people as equals, rather than its literal sense. While I feel the same argument applies to abortion, there is much debate as to whose "rights" we should be approving. I don't feel abortion is a matter of women's rights, but this is a disputed matter that I feel more than not is, in fact, political.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Nick
Member Avatar

Madame Speaker,

First, I request permission to revise and extend my remarks.

Whether the Republican Party likes it or not: women can do what they want with their bodies. I would ask the Gentleman from California why he believes he is entitled to make decisions for me. Is it because men are superior? Or maybe because men are smarter? Perhaps because they are physically stronger? Or maybe women should stay in the home and not make any choice of consequence? The argument from the Gentleman from California is morally ridiculous. Yes -- I chose my words carefully. Morally ridiculous.

Ms. Ferraro addressed her positions on abortion very clearly. She was targeted on the issue because she was a woman and because she was a Catholic. Ms. Ferraro maintained that while she supported the right to choose for women across this nation, if forced with that same choice herself, Ms. Ferraro would carry the baby. She did not personally support abortion, Madame Speaker. She did not want to see abortions happen, but what she did believe in was that it was wrong -- wrong for the government to tell a woman what to do with her body. If any of you men in suits with your tight-fitting collars and red power ties want to tell me and the other women of this nation what we can and can't do with our bodies, than I might suggest you think twice before I propose a bill to tell you what to do with yours.

The argument against this resolution is ridiculous. Geraldine Ferraro more -- far more -- for this nation than the opponents to this measure will ever dream of accomplishing in a lifetime of public service. Do not oppose this resolution based on the politics of Ms. Ferraro, support it based on who she inspired and what her achievements meant to this nation.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
JMJ
Member Avatar

Madame Speaker,

While I don't agree with many of Mrs. Ferrao's political views, she was the first female candidate for Vice President. Which is a very big accomplishment in and of it's self, and she paved the way for many women in politics in both parties. I don't have to agree with her to respect her, which I do based on that she was not affaraid to speak her mind.

I can overlook my political differences with her, and look at how she inspired many other women to run for office. For this reason I think she should be honored.

I yield
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ambrose Griffith
Member Avatar

Kim Hoynes
10 Jun 2013, 12:11 AM
Madame Speaker,

First, I request permission to revise and extend my remarks.

Whether the Republican Party likes it or not: women can do what they want with their bodies. I would ask the Gentleman from California why he believes he is entitled to make decisions for me. Is it because men are superior? Or maybe because men are smarter? Perhaps because they are physically stronger? Or maybe women should stay in the home and not make any choice of consequence? The argument from the Gentleman from California is morally ridiculous. Yes -- I chose my words carefully. Morally ridiculous.

Ms. Ferraro addressed her positions on abortion very clearly. She was targeted on the issue because she was a woman and because she was a Catholic. Ms. Ferraro maintained that while she supported the right to choose for women across this nation, if forced with that same choice herself, Ms. Ferraro would carry the baby. She did not personally support abortion, Madame Speaker. She did not want to see abortions happen, but what she did believe in was that it was wrong -- wrong for the government to tell a woman what to do with her body. If any of you men in suits with your tight-fitting collars and red power ties want to tell me and the other women of this nation what we can and can't do with our bodies, than I might suggest you think twice before I propose a bill to tell you what to do with yours.

The argument against this resolution is ridiculous. Geraldine Ferraro more -- far more -- for this nation than the opponents to this measure will ever dream of accomplishing in a lifetime of public service. Do not oppose this resolution based on the politics of Ms. Ferraro, support it based on who she inspired and what her achievements meant to this nation.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.
If that address is what accounts for choosing one's words carefully, Madame Speaker, then I would hate to see the gentle lady speak more candidly. Of course, she has done very little to address the points I've raised and instead attempted to muddy the waters of this important discussion by accusing me of having all kinds of underhanded and, as she so says, morally ridiculous premises for my belief that all human life is sacred whether it is born yet or not. Nevertheless, I will put her mind at ease and say very clearly that no, I do not believe that men are superior to women -- I believe that all people are of equal value, including those yet to be born. I also do not believe that women ought to stay at home and make no choices of consequence. First of all, women who do stay at home make choices of consequence on a very regular basis, perhaps more regular than many of their male counterparts in the workplace, and for the honourable lady to suggest any different displays a shocking lack of understanding towards what homemakers do on a day-to-day basis. Secondly, if a woman should choose to work, then she should have that right. As I stated earlier in this debate, had the lady bothered to listen instead of getting what appears to be extremely worked up she would have known this, that I am entirely supportive of the steps which Mrs. Ferraro took to secure equal working rights for women. Are men smarter then women? Almost certainly not -- although I'm afraid the honourable lady has not made an excellent case for the intelligence of women in this debate, not that she's the spokeswoman. Are men stronger than women? On average, yes, but that has nothing to do with my support of the right of unborn children to be born and not to be killed.

It seems eminently clear to me, Madame Speaker, that women may do what they will with their own bodies, but that the body of an unborn child is a genetically distinct body. It is not the woman's body; science shows clearly that it has its own genetic structure and if that isn't a case for it being a distinct body then I don't know what is. Does it depend on the mother for its health and life? Certainly it does, but so too do the poor depend on society for their health and lives. Should we give society the right to simply have the poor and anyone who might collect social assistance from time to time or be the beneficiary of charity killed? We most certainly should not. Nor, then, should we give a mother the right to have her unborn baby killed simply because it relies on her and it is inconvenient. There is no justification for killing an unborn child just as there is no justification for killing one who has been born.

Mrs. Ferraro's position on abortion was targeted because it is the wrong position on abortion, not because she was a woman or because she was a Catholic. She may have believed, as does the honourable lady, that it is wrong for the government to tell a woman that she cannot have an abortion but I believe, and I think most documents on rights and moral philosophy will back me up on this, that the government has a responsibility to protect all of the people who find themselves in that country. A position contrary to that is a position contrary to the very purpose of government; it is self-defeating and it has no place in reasoned conversation.

I have already said that Mrs. Ferraro did much for women in this country but that it is overshadowed by her commitment to a practice that has killed more girls -- the future women of America -- than any other thing that I'm aware of. If killing girls before they've even been born is something worthy of praise in this House of Representatives then we've much self-assessment to undergo. I pray for the soul of Mrs. Ferraro and hope that God Almighty will see fit to welcome her into Heaven, but as for her time on earth, I do not believe that she deserves glory or praise for the role that she played in the mass genocide of unborn children.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Nick
Member Avatar

Madame Speaker,

I begin by saying that if anyone needs help from the Lord at this hour, it is the Gentleman from California. The fact he believes he is morally superior to me, to Mrs. Ferraro, and to others who support a woman's right to choose is appalling. I can only pray for the people of California's First Congressional District.

I continue by voicing my concern over the President's opinion. In fact, if anyone is "wrong" in this debate, it is he. It is simply incorrect to say that Gerry Ferraro wanted to see young girls die. Anyone who thinks that did not know Mrs. Ferraro. I managed her two campaigns for the United States Senate, and I assure you that the last thing that Mrs. Ferraro wanted was more abortions. Her religion told her that abortion was wrong. She believed it was, but she did not believe, unlike the Gentleman from California, that it was right for her to impose that belief on anyone else. There exists, in this nation, a separation of church and state -- though I must admit that the Gentleman's lack of understanding this was previously assumed because he doesn't seem to bother with the Constitution, only the Bible.

Not only would I disagree with the Representative's elementary understanding of the issue of abortion -- an issue that affects the lives of thousands of young women across this nation -- I would disagree with his interpretation of this legislation. I ask him to find, to quote, to cite, the piece of the legislation or the provision of it that praises abortion. This act praises, specifically, the work that Geraldine Ferraro did to move this nation forward on terms of equal rights among the sexes. This resolution is not aimed at praising abortion, nor does it suggest that. I admire my colleague from West Virginia who sees this resolution for what it is: a resolution of praise -- praise for a woman who dedicated so much to the people of this nation for little, if anything, in return.

With the third anniversary of Gerry's death passing us last month, I feel ashamed that we, as a House of Representatives, are debating the merits of her honor based on her position on an issue that was long ago solved by the highest court this nation has. Perhaps, if the Gentleman from California honored the Constitution and the documents that this nation was founded on, he would understand what that means. The fact that the Supreme Court has given women the right to make their own, personal decisions, makes it abundantly clear to me that this issue is closed. Whether the Church tells the Gentleman of California it does or not should not matter to this Congress -- we are a chamber of law, not religion.

Again, I am concerned by the Gentleman's lack of understanding for this legislation. The legacy of Geraldine Ferraro is incredible. She was a tough prosecutor who, in the City of New York, helped established, and named, the Special Victims Bureau. Additionally, as a Congresswoman, she fought for equal rights among the sexes, she fought for all minorities, she fought for the middle class, and she fought for common sense. On issue after issue, Gerry spoke up. She talked about the need for common sense and her hope that cooler heads would prevail. That is the legacy we seek to honor through this resolution. After all, that is the legacy of Geraldine Anne Ferraro -- the daughter of an immigrant from Italy who rose to become the first woman to seek the second highest office in our land. How proud she would have been to see the woman who now occupies that office.

The Gentleman from California is simply mistaken. This resolution honors Geraldine Ferraro and her timeless commitment to a better America. We seek to honor her legacy and her life through this resolution. Those who object to such a resolution do not understand what it is to be a public servant who fights for so much, but faces sexism and discrimination and harassment at every turn. Of course, so far, the only ones to object to this legislation are men -- men who have not had to face the same treatment from the media that Gerry was forced to face in 1984 and 1992 and 1998. Perhaps, perhaps one day, the Gentleman from California will realize that this nation is not perfect and that we must honor those public servants who have given back to this nation.

I yield the floor, hopeful -- hopeful that this chamber will not hesitate to honor the life of a woman who fought so hard to protect our nation and to move us into the 21st Century.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ambrose Griffith
Member Avatar

I move to amend, Madame Speaker, as follows:

Quote:
 
Section III: Provisions

Therefore, be it resolved, that The United States House of Representatives expresses their gratitude and appreciation to Geraldine Anne Ferraro but deplores her commitment to the legalization of abortion, may the Lord forgive her of her sins and keep her.


I yield.
Edited by Ambrose Griffith, 10 Jun 2013, 01:07 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · House Debate Archives · Next Topic »
Locked Topic
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4


Theme by Sith of the ZBTZ