Ron Paul

What part of Texas is Ron Paul from?

 

South of Houston in the Lake Jackson not far from Bay City where I graduated from high school.

If I recall correctly Ross Perot is in the Dallas area.

 

Parsing evil is evil Kenny.

 

Obviously, you and I disagree about the idea of the government criminalizing every act that you and I consider to be a sin.

 

Such a sad view. we should find no comprimise on the lives of innocent unborn children. this is what your suggesting, correct? When it comes to the lives of children it should very well be all with no comprimise and no defeat excepted.

 

So unless 100% can be saved(not counting illegal abortions that would take place if abortion was criminalized) you won't support an effort that has a better chance of implementation that might save, for example, 50%?

 

Ron Paul is a conservative from the standpoint that he is a strict constructionist with regards to the constitution. I am also a constructionist.
I agree with the post that said if you want to see abortion curtailed elect Ron Paul,you see we have God given rights as well as a responsibility to God,all Ron Paul is trying to do is to get the Gov't out of personal decision making.
If it isn't outlined in the Consitution,then it should be left to the states,and as well if the states don't address it ,it should be left to the individual,and their personal deeply held beliefs. If a majority do not wish to allow a certain action outlaw it,(as long as the law isn't unconstitutional).
All we need to do is to look at what representaives and senators have given us to see that they flip flop like a bad pancake.......whoever has the most to offer our legislators has their ear as well as their vote. PAC's ,Lobbyists,special interest groups you name it they have provided us with laws that are clearly against what GOD would have us to do,IE gay rights ,same sex marraige,abortion on demand,partial birth abortion.Need I go on?
We can see that many elected officials are CINO"S (christians in name only)because it benefits them (to gain the support)of the christian right who do not look for fruit from professing christian senators and representatives.

Most christians refuse to take the correct biblical stand (if it goes against something)that they want to do.
We have the right to be wrong in America,as long as we are held to account; our actions should be our actions,and if mans law causes me to disobey GODS law then I will disobey both any man as well as my Government...

 

What I will not do is accept the idea that we must comprimise the lives of unborn children and find an acceptable level of slaughter. Do you Kenny think there is an acceptabloe level of slaughter?

As far as illegal back alley abortions those are the result of people acting illegally and immorally. they should be convicted of murder. And of course the number of them actually happening was always inflated.

 

I agree with Ron Paul, on this. I believe abortions would become less frequent with his approach.

 

I could be wrong but wasn't it you who was one of a number of folks who said that they were done voting for the lesser of two evils with regards to the President?

And yet you are willing to vote for the lesser of two evils when it comes to the lives of unborn children?

 

No, but just because we cannot save all does not mean we should not avail ourselves of the opportunity to save some.

 

This is not a matter of voting but a matter of influencing government policy. One quite rarely, if ever, gets 100% of his/her policy desires enacted.

 

Looks like old Timmy is giving new meaning to the term, stubborn!

Personally, I think Ron Paul's idea is great. Too bad it will never see the light of day. He is not mainstream enough to matter to the leaders in the Republican Party.

 

How sad it is that my position is dismissed and belittled as "stubborn' when the lives of innocent unborn children are involved.






How many lives of unborn children is an exceptable level? I bet this question goes unanswered.

 

The acceptable level is zero. However, I am not going to tell, say, 50% of those that could be saved, "Sorry, but since we can't save all of you then the half of you that could be saved will just have to die as well."

We should not allow the best to be the enemy of the good.

 

So, if one buys the argument that abortion is murder, and if one can prevent half from happening and does not, they have blood on their own hands.

 

Then I'll answer it!!!!!

The answer is none. Which, quite frankly, makes me completely perplexed as to why you ould not want to implement a policy such as Ron Paul's which would immediately cut abortion numbers in this country by half, and maybe even more, while all the time supporting candidates who promise pipe dreams and make promises that are out of the realm of possibility.

I'll tell you what, how about we implement Ron Paul's realistic plan to stop hundreds of thousands of abortions over the next year while you spend the rest of your life trying to convince 2/3s of the Congress and the 3/4s of the state legislatures in this country that an abortion amendment to the Constitution must be passed. When your life is over, I wonder how many babies you will have saved and how many Ron Paul's solution would have saved.

Ron Paul has previously put forth bills in the Congress to declare that unborn children are legally human, and therefore have a right to life under our Constitution, yet we couldn't even get it passed with a majority. And you want to go beyond that and settle for only an amendment? That really puzzles me.

I am tired of pipe dream promises. I want to see action. Ron Paul's actions demostrate his opposition to abortion and his attempts to curtail and/or stop abortions. The rest just pay lip service, and sadly, most conservatives buy into it.

 

There are 8 children trapped in a burning vehicle. The man next to you tells you to grab two and get out of there. What do you do?

Of course, you leave them all to die while you argue with the man for several minutes that there is plenty of time to save all of them. :BangHead: