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.
Yes, we do have way too many other problems to worry about, but that does not stop Ron Paul and Republicans from taking the time away from those problems to focus on taking away women's personal rights and liberties.....does it?
Why do women need to give up their rights to improve the economy?
Answer......they don't......but the Republicans and Ron Paul just don't seem to see it that way.
Republicans and Ron Paul are not willing to give up their agenda to take away a woman's freedoms to concentrate on the economy and foreign policy......so.....I guess they are the problem......not the women, like me, who refuse to vote for someone who is bound and determined to take away my personal freedoms.
Democrats, on the other hand, are focusing on the real problems facing this country......instead of trying to overturn Roe v Wade.
You make many statements here that you are looking for answers for...none of your questions relate to things I proposed, so I can't help you, sorry.
I steer way clear of the abortion issue because it often becomes an emotional rather than logical argument and like I said before, I can see both sides of the issue having merit.
You make many statements here that you are looking for answers for...none of your questions relate to things I proposed, so I can't help you, sorry.
I steer way clear of the abortion issue because it often becomes an emotional rather than logical argument and like I said before, I can see both sides of the issue having merit.
And, I am just pointing out that Ron Paul and the Republicans have other agendas that are watering down their supposed commitment to concentrate on the economy and foreign affairs.
And, I am just pointing out that Ron Paul and the Republicans have other agendas that are watering down their supposed commitment to concentrate on the economy and foreign affairs.
Well, I am not a Republican, and Ron Paul really is not one either. I wont comment on what Republicans do/don't want, but I do strongly believe that Ron Paul's main focus is on the economy and our foreign policy, and that him having "other agendas" is a bit misleading. He recently wrote two books titled:
"A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship"
and
"End the Fed"
Notice neither was called "A Policy of No Abortions" or "End all Abortions"
Clearly the abortion issue is not the driving factor of his political goals.
Well, I am not a Republican, and Ron Paul really is not one either. I wont comment on what Republicans do/don't want, but I do strongly believe that Ron Paul's main focus is on the economy and our foreign policy, and that him having "other agendas" is a bit misleading. He recently wrote two books titled:
"A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship"
and
"End the Fed"
Notice neither was called "A Policy of No Abortions" or "End all Abortions"
Clearly the abortion issue is not the driving factor of his political goals.
Then he should do himself a favor and drop his agenda to dismantle Roe v Wade so he can turn it over to the states.
Or.....maybe he sees the issue as too important for him to just let it go.
And, I am just pointing out that Ron Paul and the Republicans have other agendas that are watering down their supposed commitment to concentrate on the economy and foreign affairs.
Do you have any idea what Dr. Pauls plans for foreign policy and the economy are? And can you tell me what Obamas plans are?
Then he should do himself a favor and drop his agenda to dismantle Roe v Wade so he can turn it over to the states.
Or.....maybe he sees the issue as too important for him to just let it go.
I personally believe it belongs at the state level, and that would give people the choice to live in a state where it is/isn't allowed based on their personal beliefs.
I personally believe it belongs at the state level, and that would give people the choice to live in a state where it is/isn't allowed based on their personal beliefs.
According to the constitution it is a state issue not a federal issue. Many people just pick and choose what part of the constitution they agree with. I know a few who would use it for toilet paper ... and one of them is in office at present.
If you don't like Ron Paul, is not sure about his stand on a certain issue, or just unsure about him in general, please explain your position about it and/or why some other candidates' position is better in your view.
Often times what I have found is that, people who didn't like Ron Paul did so because they were believing the myths and lies mainstream media puts out, or because they seen/heard some out of context quote somewhere and it stuck to their head. Whenever they have had it explained to them in detail, they have walked away with an appreciation of Ron Paul.
Please ask, I am sure a lot of us would be glad to clear up any confusions you may have. I am hoping we can have an honest and civil discussion here without any name calling, personal insults or prejudice.
I am not A Ron Paul hater, I in fact am very Libertarian in my views and agree with very much of what Paul says........I just refuse to go full retard and jump on the crazy train when he starts talking foriegn policy and national defense.......the truth is he is unelectable and it is not necesarrily his message but himself, I look forward to the day his son decides to run he is much more rational.
I am not A Ron Paul hater, I in fact am very Libertarian in my views and agree with very much of what Paul says........I just refuse to go full retard and jump on the crazy train when he starts talking foriegn policy and national defense.......the truth is he is unelectable and it is not necesarrily his message but himself, I look forward to the day his son decides to run he is much more rational.
What are the differences between Ron and Rand's views on foreign policy and national defense?
I found this on Rand's 2010 campaign page:
Rand Paul: A Strong National Defense and a Pro-American Foreign Policy | Rand Paul 2010 | U.S. Senate (http://www.randpaul2010.com/2010/02/rand-paul-a-strong-national-defense-and-a-pro-american-foreign-policy/ - broken link)
The main points seem incredibly similar to Ron Paul's stance on similar issues.
I ask because I am truly curious because I've had the same thoughts as you regarding Rand possibly being the "presidential" Paul.
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.
