To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
And just for the record, I don’t doubt that Paul is pro-life, I just believe, based on his votes and the excuses people make for these votes, that Paul is more concerned about the semantics of the commerce clause that may have been vaguely related to these bills than on actually voting to restrict abortions.
62 posted on
09/05/2007 5:31:38 PM PDT by
mnehring
(Cox/Craig 2008! Don't stall!!! (At least it makes more sense than Ron Paul.))
To: mnehrling
Paul is more concerned about the semantics of the commerce clause that may have been vaguely related to these bills than on actually voting to restrict abortions.And you think the end justifies the means.
65 posted on
09/05/2007 5:33:11 PM PDT by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: mnehrling
You can believe what you want. The man is pro-life. He introduced the sanctity of life act in 2005. Those “no” votes against those two pro-life bills means nothing and those bills would have been shot down by activist judges anyway. For this to even come up for discussion is beneath FR.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson