Posted on 03/05/2008 1:35:29 PM PST by samrig
Ron Paul is pro-choice state by state: "While Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid." 1-31-06. ... If Ron Paul lived in Berlin in 1944 and had said, "While killing Jews is invalid, a federal law banning the holocaust across all of Germany's 16 states would be equally invalid," his wicked claim would be immediately obvious to most people, but abortion has so dehumanized babies that even pro-lifers are vulnerable to lies that promote tolerance of the slaughter.
(Excerpt) Read more at kgov.com ...
Why are you worried about, Paul, he’s out?
Wow, your first day on FR.
Don’t respect the Constitution much do ya???
Godwinned right from the start.
He got only 56 from NRLC, 0 from NARAL.
* Paul Promotes the Immoral Libertarian Party: Libertarian Ron Paul is running for the Republican nomination and remains on "good terms" with the Libertarian Party and spoke at its 2004 national convention and he has never repudiated them even though the Libertarian Party is viciously immoral and officially: pro-legalized abortion, pro-legalized homosexuality, pro-legalized pornography, pro-legalized adultery, pro-legalizing crack cocaine, pro-legalized suicide, and pro-legalized euthanasia, pro-legalizing prostitution, and against protecting marriage between a man and a woman, The Libertarian Party is based on a humanist rather than on a Judeo-Christian worldview and thus has misguided notions of governance and no compass for righteousness in law.
A federal law may be invalid but a constitutional amendment would not.
Just like we did with slavery.
Paul is still in his Congressional district. He won his GOP primary.
They obviously don't know the meaning of the word "unalienable," and I guess they never read the Declaration, the Preamble to the Constitution, or the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments. OR the Reagan pro-life platform...
“Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states, so do I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states.” - John McCain, This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Nov. 19, 2006
I'm pro-life. I support overturning Roe vs. Wade. But I oppose a federal law banning abortion. However, I personally believe it should be each states' right to choose if they shall have legal abortions in their states. It should be the choice each states' people via their elected state representatives.
Wow the Paul haters came out fast for this thread, I guess it makes them feel better about the RINO who has the party nomination?
Holy cow. Have ye no shame?
You signed up today to post this tripe?
It’s my own position as well. Pro-life...and federal laws.
And I am not a Ron Paul supporter...its a fairly typical view of conservative pro-lifers who take the constitution seriously.
To understand the State by State approach, one needs to understand the Constitutional requirements to have a Constitutional amendment passed (and the history).
To have a Constitutional amendment passed, it requires 2/3rds of all States to ratify, (23rds of those in the States voting for) and 2/3rds of Congress. Right now, the country is pretty much split 50/50 on the issue. If the trigger is pulled to soon on the Constitutional approach, it will be shot down- that, unfortunatly is reality.
Now, if you go with the State by State approach, will you have an immediate impact in some States. Once you have changed enough States, you know you have a shot at passing the Constitutional approach.
Going State by State is like playing poker, playing each hand as you get it. The Constitutional approach is like betting your entire pot on a blind draw hoping for a royal flush.
Now, there are other votes and positions Paul has taken on abortion I disagree with and believe are unconstitutional, but on going for the State by State approach, he isn’t wrong.
Ronald Reagan always said vote with your feet. Ron Paul is against the government ruling by edict. If people don’t want to live in a cesspool like NY city, they can move to a more civilized place like Charleston SC. Only when allowed to wallow in there own filth and depravity like NYC is will people truly see them for the bereft husks they are.
I too am adamant that anyone who goes to an ultrasound cannot possibly remain in favor of abortion, but until people are forced to see abominations like abortion, the holocaust, or whatever epidemic you can think of, they wont do anything about it.
Godwin’s Law (also known as Godwin’s Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is an adage formulated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states:
“As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.”
Godwin’s Law is often cited in online discussions as a caution against the use of inflammatory rhetoric or exaggerated comparisons, and is often conflated with fallacious arguments of the reductio ad Hitlerum form.
But he’s not going to be president. I don’t remember any threads on Paul before he ran for president. He’s done. He’ll crawl back into his anonymity.
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.