Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul Repeats Commitment to Overturning Roe v. Wade
LifeNnews.com ^ | August 8, 2007 | Steven Ertelt

Posted on 08/08/2007 8:22:47 PM PDT by CenTexConfederate

Ron Paul Repeats Commitment to Overturning Roe v. Wade Abortion Ruling

by Steven Ertelt LifeNews.com Editor August 8, 2007 Lawton, IA (LifeNews.com) -- Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul restated his commitment on Tuesday to overturning the landmark abortion decision that allowed virtually unlimited abortions. He said he would work to overturn the Supreme Court ruling if he is nominated as the Republican candidate for president and elected to the White House.

Paul said he was pro-life and would make reversing the decision a top priority.

He also said that more people should be exposed to what abortion does to an unborn child and women who have them.

“The country should see what is happening and when they see the violence of abortion and what it really means, maybe they too would change their attitude about abortion,” said Paul.

Paul, a Texas congressman, also said he would make sure that taxpayer funds are not used to pay for abortions and explained that his training as a gynecologist taught him that human life is valuable.

"Life is sacred. The most obscene thing government could do is to ... use your money to commit abortion," he said to loud applause.

(Excerpt) Read more at lifenews.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: asseenonstormfront; ohgodnomore; paulestinians; ronpaul; ronpaulconstitution; ronpaulpresident; ronpaulrepeal16th
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-184 next last
To: Arthur McGowan

It isn’t necessary to have a constitutional amendment to oveturn RvW but it WOULD prevent any future activist courts from flip flopping on the decision again.

The Supreme Court has changed their view (or a subsequent seated court did) numerous times. They are neither infalible nor consistent in their decisions.


41 posted on 08/08/2007 10:08:50 PM PDT by weegee (NO THIRD TERM. America does not need another unconstitutional Clinton co-presidency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CJ Wolf
I think he has introduced this many a session, only to be ignored.

Well, then, just elect this guy president and everyone will pay attention. Nobody will be elected President just because he professes a pro-life position.

42 posted on 08/08/2007 10:09:22 PM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CenTexConfederate
Mr. Paul may have positions on some things with which I disagree. But this one area, the area of a commitment to overturn the slaughter of abortion, helps bolster my respect for him. Even if not elected, he will have helped many to take a much strong stand.

The practice of abortion in this country affects the nation’s blessings and its future in a most negative way.

43 posted on 08/08/2007 10:14:31 PM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JoinJuniorAchievement
He has introduced legislation to define life at conception EVERY year he has been in office.

This is not at all well-known except to Paulites

Wake up.

I am awake, I just don't follow Paul's every move---he's so far out of touch with reality he's in la-la land.

He is the only candidate worth voting for.

You also live in la-la land.

don't waste your vote on Hillary.

Thanks for the sage advice. You ARE out of touch.

44 posted on 08/08/2007 10:15:19 PM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: CJ Wolf

This was not written by, or endorsed by, any crazy man.


45 posted on 08/08/2007 10:18:57 PM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789
The practice of abortion in this country affects the nation’s blessings and its future in a most negative way.

Who seeks abortion? Pregnant Women.

Target them not some pandering, male politician.

46 posted on 08/08/2007 10:19:44 PM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: All; Rudder

Ron Paul is very pro-life, but not as pro-life as Sam Brownback and Duncan Hunter.

Sometimes Ron Paul’s libertarian views get in the way:

From this site,
http://senate.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm

Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005

Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999

SHOULDN’T PARENTS DECIDE WHAT IS BEST FOR THEIR MINOR CHILDREN??


47 posted on 08/08/2007 10:21:04 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: DreamsofPolycarp; The_Eaglet; Irontank; Gamecock; elkfersupper; dcwusmc; gnarledmaw; ...

Ron Paul campaign website

Ron's weekly message [5 minutes audio, every Monday]
PodcastWeekly archive • Toll-free 888-322-1414 •
Free Republic Ron Paul Ping List: Join/Leave


Ron Paul pro-life ping
48 posted on 08/08/2007 10:21:54 PM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun
The Republican Party is not yet ready or capable of electing people on principle. “Electability” is the standard, regardless of how low that standard drags us.

Duncan Hunter should be way up at the top of the polls scaring Rudy’s socks off. But “electability” keeps Rudy up and Mr. Hunter down.

49 posted on 08/08/2007 10:22:52 PM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Sun

See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1878515/posts#17 which is the latest incarnation of Dr. Paul’s bill as introduced every session probably since he’s been in congress. Can Dunc say the same?


50 posted on 08/08/2007 10:23:13 PM PDT by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: dcwusmc
Dr. Paul’s bill as introduced every session probably since he’s been in congress...

Apparently a waste of time.

51 posted on 08/08/2007 10:25:39 PM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Rudder
A well-kept secret then

Perhaps you could propose someone else.

One who, say, has actually been in the position of delivering newborns, and also having been in the position where he legally might have been able to do such a thing as abortion, but refused. Which was not such a common attitude in the 1970s, as you must know, if your homepage information is true.

Pray propose such an individual from the magnificent ranks of ideologically pure candidates whom we are now confronted with.

52 posted on 08/08/2007 10:27:40 PM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

Define reality... I think it is YOU out of touch with the reality of the Constitutional Republic handed us by the Founders and screwed up so badly by our current fedgov, this administration and 95+% of the current crop of congress critters. EXCLUDING Dr. Paul. But you strike me as just another Big Government “Conservative.”


53 posted on 08/08/2007 10:28:09 PM PDT by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: mountainbunny

It still means much in his influence on others, pressure on other candidates and the process as a whole. Therefore, I’m very glad to see it highlighted, and highlighted by a Republican candidate.

I am not saying that he is the only one, I know that he is not. But I’m glad for as many as possible, who are in the public eye, take this stand. It is good for our nation. Whether he has a chance or not, would to God that the entire list of Republican candidates would be working together to make this the REPUBLICAN PARTY position.


54 posted on 08/08/2007 10:29:32 PM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Sun
From this site, http://senate.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm

Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005) Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)


Didn't you forget the part where he was rated 0% by NARAL? Maybe you overlooked that.
55 posted on 08/08/2007 10:30:44 PM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

Yep. Because mindless morons wrongly call him a kook and ignore what he’s saying... but NO ONE ELSE wants to point out all the Unconstitutional CRAP that’s going on because too many big gov’t “conservatives” want their slice of the federal pie.


56 posted on 08/08/2007 10:31:09 PM PDT by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789

Maybe the RINOs will make themselves unelectable, and one of the so-called dark horses will move to the top tier.

Somebody told me that on the radio they heard that Romney said Rudy turned NYC into a sanctuary for illegal aliens. Rudy responded by saying he did not turn NYC into a base of any illegality. Rudy DID choose not to target illegals.


57 posted on 08/08/2007 10:33:16 PM PDT by Sun (Duncan Hunter: pro-life/borders, understands Red China threat! http://www.gohunter08.com/Home.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Sun

“SHOULDN’T PARENTS DECIDE WHAT IS BEST FOR THEIR MINOR CHILDREN??”

Exactly correct... NOT FEDGOV. Which is what Dr. Paul is saying... in a MOST CONSISTENT way, unlike too many of you.


58 posted on 08/08/2007 10:33:25 PM PDT by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Regulator
Perhaps you could propose someone else.

a politician is NOT going to solve your problem. Changing the minds of people who seek abortions (do you know who that is?) is the only way.

59 posted on 08/08/2007 10:33:46 PM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Rudder
The man is a flake and a phony. Don’t buy the Ron Paul solution on pro-life unless you’re willingly to give into a lot of other immoral Paulisms that are equally anti-life.
60 posted on 08/08/2007 10:33:48 PM PDT by elhombrelibre (Democrats have plenty of patience for anti-American dictators but none for Iraqi democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-184 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson