"[W]hile Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid." - Ron Paul
Pro-choice for states. Not pro-unalienable, God-given, right to life. Same as a Stephen A. Douglas Democrat. Same as a Gerald R. Ford or a John McCain Republican.
As opposed to Ronald Reagan, who believed every child is a person and therefore protected by the simple, clear provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment.
I didn’t see this one.
I’ve had this argument with you before.
There is no category called “Pro-choice for states”
That category is one you or someone else made up.
The way it works today, in the US, is that there’s Pro-Life and Pro-Choice.
If you’re in favor of Roe v Wade, you’re Pro-Choice.
If you’re against Roe v Wade, you’re Pro-Life.
Because Ron Paul is against Roe v Wade, he’s Pro-Life.
That’s just how it works.
If Roe v Wade were overturned, it would be great, and there would be a heck of a lot fewer abortions in the US.
People might still want more laws after that. But the key thing is getting rid of Roe v Wade.
Once Roe v Wade is gone, any time after that federal laws can be passed.
The important thing for Pro-Life is that Roe v Wade be overturned. And Roe v Wade is still in place. It’s important that the right judges be nominated. And Ron Paul would nominate the right judges.