Explain the unconstitutionality of the Republican Party position. Failing in that, explain why Paul should be considered a pro-life champion if he doesn't support it.
Human Life Amendment to the ConstitutionWe must keep our pledge to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence. That is why we say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation to make it clear that the 14th Amendment's protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions. We oppose using public revenues for abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it.
We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life.
We oppose abortion, but our pro-life agenda does not include punitive action against women who have an abortion.
We salute those who provide alternatives to abortion and offer adoption services, and we commend Congressional Republicans for expanding assistance to adopting families and for removing racial barriers to adoption.
Murder is not a proper focus of the federal government.
Uh, look back at my post and see what I said about a Constitutional amendment banning abortion. I don't see how you can construe from that statement that I think the Republican Party position is unConstitutional. And if Ron Paul opposes such an amendment, then he should properly be excoriated.