The Republican Liberty Caucus

There has been a lot of talk that the Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC) has the same platform on abortion as the Republican Party. That is not true.

Here is the statement of the RLC on the issue of abortion:

Abortion is a critical life and death choice for every pregnant woman. Whether government should intervene to influence that choice is dependent on the legal status of the fetus. We acknowledge that there can be honest and ethical differences of opinion on that status, the rights of the woman, and the proper role of government.

We favor civil discussion of this question, but take no position on the merits of conflicting legal, ethical, and religious viewpoints on either side.

We oppose any allocation of government funds or resources to facilitate abortions, advocate in the public discussion, or to jeopardize the right of any woman to defend her own life and health.

We support a resolution of this issue through the proper judicial and legislative channels specified in the Constitution.

http://www.republicanliberty.org/docs/rlc2004_principles.htm

Note the concluding statement of the RLC: "We support a resolution of this issue through the proper judicial and legislative channels specified in the Constitution."


Now let's look at the GOP platform on abortion again under the section of Promoting a Culture of Life:

As a country, we must keep our pledge to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence. That is why we say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation to make it clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions. We oppose using public revenues for abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life.

Please notice that the GOP calls for "...a human life amendment to the Constitution..."

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showplatforms.php?platindex=R2004

The problem with the RLC platform is that it does not rule out allowing the individual states to decide the issue but the GOP platform does rule out states rights on this issue.

 

I never was able to get the bold and italics to post as written. I apologize for any inconvenience.

 

The question arises why there is a Republican Liberty Caucus if it is not to outline differences with the GOP? (That is a polite way of saying it.)

 

By the way, the GOP platform against abortion dates to 1984 and to Ronald Reagan to the best of my knowledge. I would like the self-called Reagan Republicans to explain why they do not support the cornerstone of the Reagan political agenda. Never mind; I really don't want to hear their excuses.

 

One of the founders of the Republican Liberty Caucus is against the death penalty. That allies him with the Christan left.

Here is one of his statements:

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Pope’s commitment to human dignity, grounded in the teachings of Christ, led him to become an eloquent and consistent advocate for an ethic of life, exemplified by his struggles against abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty. Yet what institutions around the world sanction abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty? Governments. [/FONT]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul244.html​

 

Those of you who are saying, misleadingly, that Ron Paul is a conservative should try and explain what the Republican Liberty Caucus is all about and what kind of conservative opposes the death penalty. Some of you have even claimed that Ron Paul is the Christian candidate, so you could explain why Ron Paul is not a religious leftist on this anti-death penalty issue and this tribute to the late pope.

 

Of course, it is Ron Paul and the Republican Liberty Caucus that do not support the Reagan plank against abortion, as is quoted in the first post. By the way, Grubbs, you falsely charged that I misrepresented Paul but you can see for yourself what the Republican Liberty Caucus stands for. The RNC plank on pro-life is the same as Reagan's to this day.

Some of you seem to think that abortion should have been easier to end than slavery, for example, which took over 80 years to end. And some of you who are complaining about the GOP performance (such as you, Grubbs) are not voters for the GOP but belong to other parties and work for other parties.

However, I think that the Republican Liberty Caucus has the wrong way to go about ending abortion and same-sex marriage and they are certainly wrong about being against the death penalty for murder--an anti-Christ or religious left position--but then as Bill has pointed out, the Republican Liberty Caucus is really a bunch of libertarian party members or ex-party members. The Republican Liberty Caucus has not fully joined the GOP. Since they are not team players, they cannot be team leaders, as you can see.

Grubbs, you never voted for Bush but Peroutka, and since we are talking primary candidates here, I wonder if you are going to say that you are a Republican just to vote in a party primary where you are not a member of the party and not a member of the team?

 

Do you really think that Paul is your Christian brother?

I don't think that you understand the Republican Liberty Caucus or the fact that everyone else has agreed that I am correct on what the Republican Liberty Caucus stands for. I don't know why you bother to post if you have nothing to say but to criticize the poster on something that you don't even bother to investigate. The idea that someone who is against the death penalty is my fellow Christian brother, as you wrote, sickens me. And since you are not GOP, I don't understand why you are so concerned with dictating terms to the GOP since we have proven that we can win without you. Evidently, making false accusations yourself is no concern to you. You might as well join Ron Paul in tribute to the late pope since he is the new wave in politics and politics counts more than truth. My prayer, Grubbs, is that you will put me on your ignore list and spare me your personal attacks.

 

The end of the Reagan era?

To nominate a member of the Republican Liberty Caucus such as Ron Paul would clearly signal the end of the Reagan era in the GOP because the RLC would move to undo the GOP plank that Reagan laid against abortion. This would be considered a setback for the pro-life movement and that plank probably never would be restored to the GOP platform because it is expensive and difficult and time-consuming to keep it in place. It is impossible to think that Ron Paul, aka Dr. No, would ever agree to run on the current platform and become a team player when he also would overthrow Reagan foreign policy and allow states rights on same-sex marriage.

 

You just can't get your facts straight.

The GOP plank on pro-life is Reagan's; Ron Paul and the other members of the Republican Liberty Caucus do not support the GOP plank and are very careful to write their own plank, quoted above. No one who can read can possibly say that the two planks are the same.

As for being against the death penalty, I am surprised that the Constitution Party wants to turn all murderer out from death row from now on. I consider that religious leftism a la Barry Lynn, and I would like to see a statement on Ron Paul's theological beliefs. I think that he is to the left of Rudy on that issue.

As for same-sex marriage, Ron Paul is also wrong that the federal government cannot define marriage and I would say that his libertarian point on this issue is clear aid and comfort to all gays, lesbians, and transgendered persons.

As for your Bush-bashing, it is general and incorrect and not only shows the Constitution Party for what they are but it also shows an indifference for the actions and thinking of Reagan. Bush would be closer to Reagan than Ron Paul any day of the week. And for that matter, Rudy would, too, if he were to agree to run on the Reagan platform in spite of his past opinions, which is probably what Rudy will do.

As for the Constitution Party, it is my prayer that they will nominate Ron Paul and that they will go back to school so that they can understand plain English to learn how Ron Paul deviates from the GOP platform on life. Then maybe they will quit trying to say that Ron Paul is their Christian brother and that any criticism of his radical ideas is a direct attack on God's annointed.

 

One item in Reagan's 1984 platform was:

Restore a constitutionally valid federal death penalty;

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showplatforms.php?platindex=R1984

Contrast this with Ron Paul's well-known opposition to the death penalty and you see that Ron Paul is not a Reagan Republican.

The same is true concerning Ronald Reagan's call for a constitutional amendment to end abortion. Ron Paul clearly opposes the Reagan platform concerning abortion.

Here is what Reagan said in 1984:

The unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We therefore reaffirm our support for a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment's protections apply to unborn children. We oppose the use of public revenues for abortion and will eliminate funding for organizations which advocate or support abortion. We commend the efforts of those individuals and religious and private organizations that are providing positive alternatives to abortion by meeting the physical, emotional, and financial needs of pregnant women and offering adoption services where needed.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showplatforms.php?platindex=R1984

(Under our constitutional system).

Here is George W. Bush's platform on life in 2004, as quoted above:

Now let's look at the GOP platform on abortion again under the section of Promoting a Culture of Life:

As a country, we must keep our pledge to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence. That is why we say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation to make it clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions. We oppose using public revenues for abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life.

For over 20 years the mainstream GOP has stood for a Constitutional amendment for human life. This comes from Ronald Reagan and others.

Now Ron Paul and the Republican Liberty Caucus want to destroy the legacy of Ronald Reagan.

 

The Reagan platform of 1980 on abortion--again differing from the Libertarians inside and outside of the GOP:

Abortion


There can be no doubt that the question of abortion, despite the complex nature of its various issues, is ultimately concerned with equality of rights under the law. While we recognize differing views on this question among Americans in general—and in our own Party—we affirm our support of a constitutional amendment to restore protection of the right to life for unborn children. We also support the Congressional efforts to restrict the use of taxpayers' dollars for abortion.
We protest the Supreme Court's intrusion into the family structure through its denial of the parent's obligation and right to guide their minor children.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showplatforms.php?platindex=R1980

 

Even the 1976 platform of the GOP was pro-life. Under the section about the American family, it said:

a position on abortion that values human life;

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showplatforms.php?platindex=R1976

Now here are the words of Ron Paul a year ago on the issue of abortion:

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]"...Under the 9th and 10th amendments, all authority over matters not specifically addressed in the Constitution remains with state legislatures. Therefore the federal government has no authority whatsoever to involve itself in the abortion issue. So while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid...."[/FONT]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul301.html

So we see that Ron Paul is against the GOP from 1976 through 2004 and against what Ronald Reagan stood for.

 

This issue has been debated many times here on the Baptist Board, youngster, and perhaps you missed the recent brilliant discussion of the issue by Pastor Larry. I consider those against the death penalty in one of two classes: orthodox Christians who have never thought about the issue as The Holy Bible discusses it and, secondly, religious leftists. As for Ron Paul's opposition to the death penalty, I think that we would have to put him in the category of religious leftist since he is taking a public position. In his specific case, if he hasn't considered the Biblical evidence, then perhaps he is unthinking, which would disqualifying him from the Presidency, in my opinion. I have documented where President Reagan called for the death penalty in the GOP platform so Ron Paul is clearly not a Reaganite.