Y'know, the irony here is that the U.S. borrows from foreign powers and then turns around and spends the borrowed funds to defend those very same foreign powers, the blood of U.S. citizens spilled in the process notwithstanding. At the same time, the U.S. slits its own economic wrists by refusing to make use of its own natural resources and by hobbling its own economy with excessive and improper taxes and regulations.
Both Rand and Ron are as pro-life as you can be.
Ron Paul delivered babies, and Rand Paul is so pro-life that he's to the right of me! (He has gone on the record as supporting an end to all abortions, with no exceptions made for rape, incest, or the life of the mother.) It seems, though, that EV's point of contention is that Rand Paul is unwilling to end abortions at the Federal level but would prefer that the matter be handled at the state level, in keeping with the Constitution and the sovereignty of the various States.
Hogwash. The Fourteenth Amendment requires the states to provide for the equal protection of the laws. Like the Fifth Amendment, it says that no person shall be deprived of life without a fair trial.
Try a little exercise: instead of the right to life, insert any other unalienable right into the Paul family’s formulation and see how well it works out for you, logically.
Do you think North Dakota, under our Constitution, could outlaw guns, or free speech, or freedom of the press, or trial by jury, or parental rights?
Let me remind you, the right to life is the supreme unalienable right; the one right without which you can never again hope to ever enjoy all the rest.