Perhaps you are right about that. Do you see a distinction between having respect for authority and being authoritarian?
Other than your response, all the other responses to my latest post, showed, once again, exactly the anti-authoritarian attitude of the typical Ron Paul supporter.
There is often a very blurred distinction between having respect for authority and allowing authoritarianism. I guess that is what bothers me about Ron Paul. He picks fights against even legitimate authority. If he were a little more selective, I might respect him more but IMO he too often comes across as a contrarian crank. I would love to see some of the abusive laws of our country repealed but I wouldn't trust Ron Paul to eliminate only the abusive ones. I would prefer someone who seems to hate only illegitimate laws and policies than someone who simply has an issue with authority.
You mentioned living under God as the ultimate authority. I whole-heartedly agree. However, there are other authorities which we must recognize as well. The New Testament, including the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ, make it clear that we must live under authorities. The Apostle Paul explicitly commands us to obey civil authorities in Romans 13 - even stating that failing to do so is disobedience to God. As bad as we might perceive it today, I'm sure that our current laws are far more just than the laws of Nero who was Caesar at the time that Paul wrote the Book of Romans.
I agree, and when his voice breaks about something he really cares about, like war, he comes across as hysterical. I like the essence of what he says or what I believe he is saying (we can't trust our secular humanist socialist leaders and social engineers with fighting extravagant and adventurous wars [nation building]) but I can't stand the way he says it with trite "do unto others..." or "If I were an Iranian..." moral equivalence arguments.