Im sure it is a reflection of his values now, too. However, Ron Paul has one thing you, the rest of the politicians, and most people in general do not have. The ability to realize that even if he doesn't like something, he has no right to interfere in someone else's life because he doesn't want anyone interfering in his. That and the law on his side. The constitution does not provide for federal funding of homosexuality and thus it is illegal for the federal government to fund it. Promoting homosexuality is like promoting devil worshiping or christianity.. Sure, the people who are ok with devil worshiping/christianity see no problem with the government paying to promote their beliefs, but what about the people who are paying for it and believe it is wrong? Why should an atheist have to pay to support a religion and why should I, a straight man, have to pay to support something that I honestly believe is probably the result of mental trauma more often than not. That being said, I don't care if people are gay, they are still people and I even flirt with them, lol. Promoting it is not on my agenda of things to do, though, and I object to being taxed to pay for it. Why can't the homosexuals pay for their own promotion if they want promoted?
The Truth About Ron Paul - Part 2
- Thread starter deprave
- Start date
I think I speak for all Ron Paul supporters when I say: If Ron Paul single handily wrote a bill about marriage it would not be very long. It would take away all privileges for being married and turn it into a private contract that does not involve the federal government in any way.
Or it could be a stick figure drawing of him and a turtle getting married. Its hard to say.
sync0s
Well-Known Member
Indefensible my ass. Let's do this in caps, maybe you might get it: WHY SHOULD THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUND ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROMOTE ANY KIND OF SEXUALITY????? homosexual or heterosexual, this is absolutely no place for the federal government.that would be acceptable for me. plaster that all over the news and wait for the reaction!
that must be why he wrote a bill that dictates that gays do not have an acceptable lifestyle
if it should not lean in either direction, why did he pick a very specific, anti-gay direction in which to lean?
stumbling across hr 7955 was the best thing to happen to me this week. watching you guys try to spin and defend this is awesome. the better move would be to admit it is a stupid thing to put into an otherwise palatable bill, that his views have evolved (witness his recent dadt vote), and that this should be buried in the past. people make mistakes.
but no, you guys choose to defend the indefensible.
h.r. 7955 was in all actuality a very good proposal and if you guys paid attention to the rest of it it would completely debunk half of your arguments. For instance being for corporations, anti-middle and poor class, not giving a shit about the elderly, etc. However, you choose to focus on one line and you take that and spin it like it's a someone against affirmative action that you label a racist. Awesome.
tryingtogrow89
Well-Known Member
It seems that you are reading into something and over analyzing way way way to much.
It is quite simple really, you are referring to the 10th amendment of the constitution, state nullification, but the state nullification must remain constitutional.
Lets not get into sexual harassment, that is not constitutional.
Civil rights?
How about constitutional?
See how this works?
sync0s
Well-Known Member
For someone who claims that he knows Ron Paul and "begged him to run," they sure don't know shit about him. I think proof that duke is an ignorant voter.
tryingtogrow89
Well-Known Member
Come again?
tryingtogrow89
Well-Known Member
According to the Tenth Amendment, the government of the United States has the power to regulate only matters delegated to it by the Constitution. Other powers are reserved to the states, or to the people (and even the states cannot alienate some of these).
The mooore ya knooooow!
The mooore ya knooooow!
dukeanthony
New Member
Yep, its RP's OPINION that the Gay lifestyle is not for him, please show the bill that RP submitted that is trying to make LAWS against gays, please do show it. What? you can't ? Imagine that.
tryingtogrow89
Well-Known Member
A bill is not a law or a rule or a statute. A bill is nothing until it is voted on, passes and signed into law. If Missouri actually makes Child employment a legal enterprise and you all of a sudden see children playing hooky from school to going to work in the salt mines, please let us all know. Stay vigilant! You never know when them Southerners will do something to make the children work long hours for little pay.
tryingtogrow89
Well-Known Member
It is so incredible people need this explained to them.
as soon as the law allows it...
google child labor america...
we don't need child labor. get the unemployed adults working first....
The law already allows it, I work the holy shit out of little kids. Work their fingers til they bleed, 60 hour workweeks are average, and I provide only $5 a week for pay plus room and board. I'm outright mean too, I yell and scream and curse them and perhaps someday I might have to mete out corporal punishment if it is warranted. Totally 100% legal child labor. I start em working digging trenches at age 5, by age 14 they have moved up to driving vehicles, doing accounting and spreadsheets, Ruminant animal care, haying operations, salvage and Mechanical repair. What can most kids do at age 14? Run a smart Phone and watch TV?
I'm sure this must be a huge relief to you.ron paul lets you take it up the ass.
WillyBagseed
Active Member
But you have to pay adults more than children, kids need werk2 !! lolas soon as the law allows it...
google child labor america...
we don't need child labor. get the unemployed adults working first....
Prefontaine
Well-Known Member
Yes you do have the right to do what you want with your own genitalia or orifices and Ron Paul will protect that right.ron paul lets you take it up the ass.