ahiromu
ahiromu
Joined: Jan 15, 2010
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 2101
June 6th, 2012 at 10:32:02 PM permalink

Quote: s2dbaker

That's everyone's position. It's the libertarian positions that will make America less free that people reject. Actually, he's all for using big government to regulate a woman's uterus.



The discussion is whether or not life begins at conception (or at what point it does begin at). We pro-lifers are simply extending the right of life to those that cannot speak for themselves - to flat out state that our side is acting in a draconian way is disingenuous and ignorant of the decades-long discussion. I understand where pro-abortion people are coming from, I just believe that their core concept (that a fetus is not a human life) is wrong.

To be completely honest I can't answer the question of whether or not a fetus is a life with 100% certainty. In twenty years if I decide that it is not, then I can switch my political views. On the other hand, if I was pro-abortion for the first 40-50 years of my life and decide that it is in fact murder... de facto supporting the murder of (currently) 50+ million since 1973... that's not something I could live with.


I agree with Ron Paul on about 2/3 of the issues, but the final third is just too dangerous to put in his hands.
Its - Possessive; It's - "It is" / "It has"; There - Location; Their - Possessive; They're - "They are"
WongBo
WongBo
Joined: Feb 3, 2012
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 2126
June 7th, 2012 at 4:10:48 AM permalink
Delete
In a bet, there is a fool and a thief. - Proverb.
s2dbaker
s2dbaker
Joined: Jun 10, 2010
  • Threads: 51
  • Posts: 3259
June 7th, 2012 at 4:16:02 AM permalink
Quote: Boney526

That's BS rhetoric.

That's the protection of a human fetus' right to life. Agree or disagree with his position on abortion, that clearly constitutes an acceptable use of government if you accept the fetus as a living person. That's almost like saying, "actually, he's all for using government to regulate a person's organs" if he's against allowing people to shoot each other (because your body has organs, and the bullets would harm them). That's a logical fallacy because it's not about the woman's uterus, it's about the life inside that uterus. And we have the god given right to life. You've basically bastardized his argument.

Like I said, though, he's very libertarian leaning, but he's a conservative. Libertarians disagree on this issue, with more right leaning libertarians generally leaning pro-life and more left leaning libertarians leaning pro-choice.

Now look who's talking BS rhetoric. I thought the Paulpeople were all about the Constitution. Well, guess who is the final arbiter of what the Constitution says. You don't have to guess if you've read it. It's the Supreme court. Until the court changes its mind, the Constitution says that abortions are legal. On this position, Ron Paul is a fraud.
Someday, joor goin' to see the name of Googie Gomez in lights and joor goin' to say to joorself, "Was that her?" and then joor goin' to answer to joorself, "That was her!" But you know somethin' mister? I was always her yuss nobody knows it! - Googie Gomez
Boney526
Boney526
Joined: Sep 25, 2011
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 366
June 7th, 2012 at 9:33:29 AM permalink
Quote: s2dbaker

Now look who's talking BS rhetoric. I thought the Paulpeople were all about the Constitution. Well, guess who is the final arbiter of what the Constitution says. You don't have to guess if you've read it. It's the Supreme court. Until the court changes its mind, the Constitution says that abortions are legal. On this position, Ron Paul is a fraud.



The Supreme Court isn't necessarily the final arbiter of the Constitution, at least not according to Thomas Jefferson, and the States' Rights Doctrine. It's also questionable how far the Founders intended the Court's power to go, but anyway, you are being ridiculous. I didn't even say I agreed with him, but I said that you're not even listening to what his argument is, you're just saying it's wrong and that's that. His argument is about protecting life, not regulating women. He's not for banning birth control or anything like that, he's just pro-life. I guess that makes him "a fraud."

And the Supreme Court's decision in the past doesn't prevent the Constitution from being changed, and it doesn't prevent the Court in the future from reversing it's decision.
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 423
  • Posts: 24078
June 7th, 2012 at 1:17:11 PM permalink
Libertarians really need to come up with somebody
under 80 who can actually get elected. Soon Ron
Paul will start to look 96 to them too, like he does to the
rest of us.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
AcesAndEights
AcesAndEights
Joined: Jan 5, 2012
  • Threads: 67
  • Posts: 4298
June 7th, 2012 at 3:04:53 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

Libertarians really need to come up with somebody
under 80 who can actually get elected. Soon Ron
Paul will start to look 96 to them too, like he does to the
rest of us.


This election was the final hurrah for RP. He's not running for reelection to the Congress this fall, and after the GOP convention is done he'll walk into the sunset...

I'd guess that Rand will pick up the standard at that point, but unfortunately he doesn't have the same name recognition yet.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 423
  • Posts: 24078
June 7th, 2012 at 3:10:27 PM permalink
Quote: AcesAndEights

This election was the final hurrah for RP. He's not running for reelection to the Congress this fall, .



But but he's so dang young for his age (92) and so full
of pep and energy, he's as healthy as men half his age!

Actually, he's as healthy as he tells you he is, which is
meaningless. You think he's going to admit he feels like
shit and is tired all the time?
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
bigfoot66
bigfoot66
Joined: Feb 5, 2010
  • Threads: 52
  • Posts: 1572
June 7th, 2012 at 3:57:19 PM permalink
Quote: s2dbaker

Now look who's talking BS rhetoric. I thought the Paulpeople were all about the Constitution. Well, guess who is the final arbiter of what the Constitution says. You don't have to guess if you've read it. It's the Supreme court. Until the court changes its mind, the Constitution says that abortions are legal. On this position, Ron Paul is a fraud.



A Fraud? Well I know most people don't agree with Dr. Paul, but this is honestly the first time in the years I have been a vocal supporter (5) that someone has questioned his integrity and I am a bit suprised. Ron Paul defended legalizing heroine and prostitution at a nationally televised debate in South Carolina, and you think the man does not honestly believe every word that he says?

You are right about the Constitution, it gave appealate authority to the supreme court, so what ever they say goes as per the Constitution. This has an interesting effect that you have identified in your post, that the constitution changes without changing. When the court changes its position on something, the constitution changes even though not one word of the constitution has changed.

Now if the words of the constitution say x=1, and the supreme court rules that the constitution say x=2, then we can have a reasonable debate about that decision, no? A lot of us feel that the plain language of the Constitution would seem to imply a much more limited government than the leviathan we currently are enslaved to. This is what we are talking about when we mention 'following the Constitution'.

Furthermore let me clarify Dr. Paul's position on abortion. He believes that abortion is a violent act. Like murder, assualt, etc, criminal law exists to deal with violent acts and is handled at the state level. Just like we do not need a federal law against murder, we do not need a federal law against abortion and he does not support them. There are pro life groups that target him http://prolifeprofiles.com/ron-paul-abortion . He supports state laws to make abortion illegal, but it makes no difference as he has never held or sought a state level office. So, actually, you are wrong across the board on your accusation here.
Vote for Nobody 2016!
Boney526
Boney526
Joined: Sep 25, 2011
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 366
June 8th, 2012 at 7:42:11 AM permalink
Quote: AcesAndEights

This election was the final hurrah for RP. He's not running for reelection to the Congress this fall, and after the GOP convention is done he'll walk into the sunset...

I'd guess that Rand will pick up the standard at that point, but unfortunately he doesn't have the same name recognition yet.



It seems that that is close to the plan. Rand isn't exactly like Ron, they actually have major policy disagreements. Rand Paul is very Libertarian-Leaning, though. I like him, but I know a lot of Ron Paul supporters don't like his son anywhere near as much. Maybe it's because Ron is more old-fashioned, "polite" about his conservatism, and Rand is more in your face (making pretty funny - or offensive, depending on your taste - jokes you wouldn't expect from a Senator) about his Right wing libertarianism.

The Paul campaign has actively supporter other members, and people running, though.
bigfoot66
bigfoot66
Joined: Feb 5, 2010
  • Threads: 52
  • Posts: 1572
June 8th, 2012 at 8:26:25 AM permalink
Rand is also a bit less committed to 100% libertarian purity, noticed that he just endorsed Willard Romney, a move dad would never make.
Vote for Nobody 2016!

  • Jump to: