Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For those who "don't get it" when it comes to Ron Paul
Oh......I get it all right.
Do you? We'll find out soon.....
Quote:
I get that Ron Paul is anit-abortion.
Ron Paul personally is against abortion, because the libertarian philosophy upholds a principle that no one's rights supersede those of another, including the rights of an unborn human child. Despite that a woman has a right to do what she chooses with her body, she does not have the right to end the life of a child that would otherwise be born and become a living, breathing, human being.
I have a question for you personally. What's your position on the death penalty?
Quote:
I get that Ron Paul has no problem with government getting involved in and regulating a woman's reproductive freedoms.....state government.
Actually, Dr. Paul is an advocate for LESS government, and he believes that states should regulate abortion laws, he thinks it is something that is not the business of the Federal Government. So someone who is clearly positioned on the pro-choice side of the fence, you should not be concerned at all with Ron Paul's stance on abortion.
Quote:
I get that Ron Paul would like to overturn Roe v Wade.....hand the abortion issue over to the states.....where it can be banned.....one state at a time.
I don't know if every state would ban it, but let's face it, you're asking the government to allow people to kill unborn children....if you think the majority of the nation will outlaw it, what is your argument that is in FAVOR of the right to kill a child?
Quote:
You can portray a rosy picture about all of the good things Ron Paul will do for this country......but those things mean NOTHING to me if I have to lose MY personal freedom to get them.
I suggest you read his books. You'll find that Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate advocating for your personal freedoms. However, the right to kill a child infringes upon the rights of the child that you are killing, therefore you should not have that right. Your rights end where the child's begins.
Quote:
If Ron Paul is serious about turning this country around.....he should concentrate on that instead of trying to overturn Roe v Wade.
He's isn't focusing on it. He's focused on the economy and constitution. He spends VERY little time on abortion or these "minor" issues. It's the media and status quo candidates that try to make abortion, gay rights, etc the spotlight issue when these are all minor issues in comparison to the big picture. You're focused on a symptom rather than focusing on the disease as a whole.
Hey, don't get me wrong. I DO think he has the right message. I just think he is alienating all the wrong people along the way.
Sometimes, Book Lover 21, to be honest and truthful is a lonely road and often times will have to stand alone in a crowd that has been going along with corruption for so long.
Ron Paul personally is against abortion, because the libertarian philosophy upholds a principle that no one's rights supersede those of another, including the rights of an unborn human child. Despite that a woman has a right to do what she chooses with her body, she does not have the right to end the life of a child that would otherwise be born and become a living, breathing, human being.
I have a question for you personally. What's your position on the death penalty?
Actually, Dr. Paul is an advocate for LESS government, and he believes that states should regulate abortion laws, he thinks it is something that is not the business of the Federal Government. So someone who is clearly positioned on the pro-choice side of the fence, you should not be concerned at all with Ron Paul's stance on abortion.
I don't know if every state would ban it, but let's face it, you're asking the government to allow people to kill unborn children....if you think the majority of the nation will outlaw it, what is your argument that is in FAVOR of the right to kill a child?
I suggest you read his books. You'll find that Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate advocating for your personal freedoms. However, the right to kill a child infringes upon the rights of the child that you are killing, therefore you should not have that right. Your rights end where the child's begins.
He's isn't focusing on it. He's focused on the economy and constitution. He spends VERY little time on abortion or these "minor" issues. It's the media and status quo candidates that try to make abortion, gay rights, etc the spotlight issue when these are all minor issues in comparison to the big picture. You're focused on a symptom rather than focusing on the disease as a whole.
I am for the death penalty.
How can Ron Paul say he is for LESS government in our lives yet advocate for state government to interfere in my personal life?
Roe v Wade and the federal government are not infringing on my personal life...... they leave the choice of whether to carry a pregnancy to me....they do not take away my right to choose. Why would I vote for anyone who wants to take away my rights.....no matter how they go about doing it?
Ron Paul can dress it up in any fancy package he wants to, but....bottom line....he is trying to take away a woman's right to choose.
A fetus is not a person and it has no rights....period.
How can Ron Paul say he is for LESS government in our lives yet advocate for state government to interfere in my personal life?
Roe v Wade and the federal government are not infringing on my personal life...... they leave the choice of whether to carry a pregnancy to me....they do not take away my right to choose. Why would I vote for anyone who wants to take away my rights.....no matter how they go about doing it?
Ron Paul can dress it up in any fancy package he wants to, but....bottom line....he is trying to take away a woman's right to choose.
A fetus is not a person and it has no rights....period.
it all comes back to property rights. The government does not own you. It does not own your life therefore it cannot take it. That is why he is against the death penalty.
On abortion the argument has been when life begins.
it all comes back to property rights. The government does not own you. It does not own your life therefore it cannot take it. That is why he is against the death penalty.
On abortion the argument has been when life begins.
But if Ron Paul believes the government does not own you.....then why does he think the government has the right to take away a woman's right to control her own body? I guess in Ron Paul's world, once a woman becomes pregnant, the government owns her. What a hypocrite.
I really don't care whether we have the death penalty or not.....as long as life without parole REALLY means life without parole, if ya know what I mean.
People like Ted Bundy and those guys that killed those women in Conneticut after raping them first {one was a child}, then burning the house down.....I have no objection to people like them being put to death.
In the video he describes a very late term abortion.....which are now severely restricted. He also still seems to believe that taxpayer dollars fund abortions.....they don't.
He uses blatant exaggeration and outright lies trying to defend his position.
Also, doesn't sound like Ron Paul looks at abortion as a minor issue that he will not even bother addressing if he is elected.....as a previous poster suggested.
But if Ron Paul believes the government does not own you.....then why does he think the government has the right to take away a woman's right to control her own body? I guess in Ron Paul's world, once a woman becomes pregnant, the government owns her. What a hypocrite.
He doesn't, you are spinning facts here. He doesn't believe the government should intervene. His personal philosophy is pro-life, his elected stance is different. I can see where it gets confusing, but he is not going to dictate whether you can or can't get an abortion. But he wants the federal government out of these decisions, and he certainly sees it as wrong, when the majority of tax payers in one state may be pro-life, but they get money taken from their revenues to fund a state that supports pro-choice.
As a man.....I can see why you would think this way.....since you will not be the one giving up any of YOUR personal freedoms if Ron Paul ever got elected.
I am willing to bet that most of the men in this country wouldn't vote for Ron Paul if he said he was going to ban football, let alone take away their right to control their own bodies.
Abortion is the only gray area because you are not just involving your own rights, but the Constitutional rights of an imminent being. The argument will never get solved, and that's why it's up to the states and not the fedgov.
Football is apples and oranges, but if it meant giving up guilty pleasures to restore this country's freedoms, you betcha! (pun intended)
Quote:
BTW....Please don't try to lay wars exclusively at Obama's door.......pro-life Republicans sure have shown themselves to be very fond of war and the building up our military to carry them out.
Have you seen Ron Paul's foreign policy compared to Obama's? Obama kills more babies than Ron would, that's a fact.
Like I said, at least the pro-choice crowd is consistent by voting baby killers to restore their baby killing rights.
How can Ron Paul say he is for LESS government in our lives yet advocate for state government to interfere in my personal life?
Roe v Wade and the federal government are not infringing on my personal life...... they leave the choice of whether to carry a pregnancy to me....they do not take away my right to choose. Why would I vote for anyone who wants to take away my rights.....no matter how they go about doing it?
Ron Paul can dress it up in any fancy package he wants to, but....bottom line....he is trying to take away a woman's right to choose.
A fetus is not a person and it has no rights....period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by summers73
Abortion is the only gray area because you are not just involving your own rights, but the Constitutional rights of an imminent being. The argument will never get solved, and that's why it's up to the states and not the fedgov.
Football is apples and oranges, but if it meant giving up guilty pleasures to restore this country's freedoms, you betcha! (pun intended)
Have you seen Ron Paul's foreign policy compared to Obama's? Obama kills more babies than Ron would, that's a fact.
Like I said, at least the pro-choice crowd is consistent by voting baby killers to restore their baby killing rights.
Either Annie can't read, or she lacks basic reading comprehension skills.
That or she can't get over the fact that an abortion is killing a life. She thinks that by spreading her legs without using contraception then pulling a living fetus out of her body is her "right". She's correct except for the last part.
She's also making a complaint about a government taking away her right to kill a child, yet she's all for the government taking away the right to live of those in prison. I guess she's somewhat consistent: She is pro murder.
I WANT someone to explain how it works. As of yet, no one has.
As for looking at history, I have. In fact I had a double major in college. HISTORY and ENGLISH... no small feat for a dyslexic who cant spell his way out of a wet papper bag... before computers were in vogue...
the American Economy during the Gold Standard days was fraught with boom/bust cycles and even some manipulation from powerful interests.
PLEASE i am begging you to provide some instruction on how RPs gold standard would work. I have listed very clear concerns and am very happy to listen to someone...anyone who can address them.
Gold standards do not cause boom and bust cycles, central banks do, inflation does. Gold itself as a standard forces the value to retain market credibility and purchasing power, it has nothing to do with booms and busts.
How can Ron Paul say he is for LESS government in our lives yet advocate for state government to interfere in my personal life?
Roe v Wade and the federal government are not infringing on my personal life...... they leave the choice of whether to carry a pregnancy to me....they do not take away my right to choose. Why would I vote for anyone who wants to take away my rights.....no matter how they go about doing it?
Ron Paul can dress it up in any fancy package he wants to, but....bottom line....he is trying to take away a woman's right to choose.
A fetus is not a person and it has no rights....period.
Ron Paul isn't making up these ideas or "advocating" anything other than is what is already in the U.S. Constitution.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
