[nitzy]

That is simply not correct.

He said this one month ago

You don't talk with that conviction and depth of understanding unless you believe it or you are a sociopath.

Now, will he highlight and emphasize abortion during a general campaign....I doubt it. It is not what makes him stand out. It will drive away some of his younger libertarian voters who have never voted before or who used to vote Democrat before they realized that government is the problem.

I have no doubt that he would govern strongly pro-life.

While other social issues like gay marriage are important they don't even fall into my top 10. I don't care what those people do. I realize that the whole thing is about getting their hands on my money and having me endorse their behavior. My money is being stolen from me everyday in much larger amounts than they could come close to. I will never endorse their behavior. In the grand scheme of things there are bigger fish to fry.

In a more libertarian world with no Social Security, no federal funding of Hollywood or other arts, the diminished power of academia, free unregulated markets that don't require vast HR departments to comply with every government diktat, free market health care systems that require consumers to pay their share for what they consume, etc...the homosexual's power would be drastically reduced anyhow. So, electing Paul may accomplish the things you want without specifically even trying to.

[SoConPubbie]

I have no doubt that he would govern strongly pro-life.

Sorry, but your belief is not consistent with his position of putting the Social Issues on the back burner:

"08/07/2014: The party can’t become the opposite of what it is," the libertarian-leaning senator said. "If you tell people from Alabama, Mississippi or Georgia, 'You know what, guys, we’ve been wrong, and we’re gonna be the pro-gay-marriage party,' they’re either gonna stay home or -- I mean, many of these people joined the Republican Party because of these social issues."

"So I don’t think we can completely flip. But can we become, to use the overused term, a bigger tent?" he added. "I think we can and can agree to disagree on a lot of these issues. I think the party will evolve. It’ll either continue to lose, or it’ll become a bigger place where there’s a mixture of opinions."

"03-14-2014: I think that the Republican Party, in order to get bigger, will have to agree to disagree on social issues," Paul told vocativ.com. "The Republican Party is not going to give up on having quite a few people who do believe in traditional marriage. But the Republican Party also has to find a place for young people and others who don’t want to be festooned by those issues."