Ron Paul defends Park 51

The libertarian stance on abortion is that the baby is occupying the woman's body and could be considered to be violating her property rights. I'm a libertarian and "pro-choice", but I still support Ron Paul.

Anyone who rules out supporting Ron Paul over one issue is screwing us all over. Ron Paul is still the ONLY member of Congress who favors ending the war on drugs and ending the US occupation overseas

blazin256 said:

its not a loaded question at all. in fact, its real fuckin simple. you either support child killing or not. dont get it twisted, abortion is child killing.

Click to expand...

it is still a loaded question no matter how vehemently asked. sorry you thought i was attacking your intelligence, i honestly thought you would know what a loaded question is. it is a pretty simple concept, it is even self explanatory.

again, you are entitled to your opinion about when life begins, just don't try to legislate your morality on my wife's fetus: that is all i ask. if she does not want to carry to term the parasite inside her, that is her choice and no one else's.

Bonesplitter said:

The libertarian stance on abortion is that the baby is occupying the woman's body and could be considered to be violating her property rights. I'm a libertarian and "pro-choice", but I still support Ron Paul.

Anyone who rules out supporting Ron Paul over one issue is screwing us all over. Ron Paul is still the ONLY member of Congress who favors ending the war on drugs and ending the US occupation overseas

Click to expand...

you forgot kucinich!

i almost agree with you, except for the fact that this one issue is very important to many people, especially women who are personally effected. but in my defense, i disagree with ron paul over many other issues as well....so for me it is not just one issue

UncleBuck said:

you forgot kucinich!

i almost agree with you, except for the fact that this one issue is very important to many people, especially women who are personally effected. but in my defense, i disagree with ron paul over many other issues as well....so for me it is not just one issue

Click to expand...

From what I've read about Dennis Kucinich so far, he seems like a great guy.

While I do think that individuals have varying issues they believe are important, I don't think that someone like Ron Paul should be dismissed simply because of his stance on abortion, which would just be to leave the federal government out of the debate.

Bonesplitter said:

From what I've read about Dennis Kucinich so far, he seems like a great guy.

While I do think that individuals have varying issues they believe are important, I don't think that someone like Ron Paul should be dismissed simply because of his stance on abortion, which would just be to leave the federal government out of the debate.

Click to expand...

and allow the states to decide.

UncleBuck said:

again, you are entitled to your opinion about when life begins, just don't try to legislate your morality on my wife's fetus: that is all i ask. if she does not want to carry to term the parasite inside her, that is her choice and no one else's.

Click to expand...

But try to understand from their perspective. For the other side, abortion is taking a life of a babie. From that perspective, wouldn't be the action of trying to save this life, the only reasonable thing to do? I think it's a pretty normal reaction.
If they acknowledge that it's a life, and didn't try to save it, wouldn't be more ignominious from their part to simply ignore it?

man i love ron paul! Either way on the abortion issue he says that its not up to the government its up to the states to decide whether they want to kill baby's. B/c right now in America the government runs planned parenthood just as the Nazi's ran government Planned Parenthood (baby killing facilitys for the jews), placed ever so convienetly in the jewish ghetto's just as they are in America for black and hispanics.... This was all started by Margret Sanger who advicated abortion clinics for all colored/minoritys people.

And if you look at there goal, think of how many children they are killing off advertising abortion clinics makeing it the normal trendy thing to do.

UncleBuck said:

he is not a hypocrite for holding this belief. he is a hypocrite for espousing libertarian views yet advocating for the government to get into my wife's uterus. ayn rand says a fetus has no rights until it is born. murray rothbard correctly equates a fetus to a parasite.

the official libertarian position is summarized here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_perspectives_on_abortion#Pro-choice_positions

like i said: hypocrite.

just like any other politician, he takes the anti-choice stand to give himself a scant chance at the party nomination, political gain, call it what you will. your appeals to emotion don't sway me in the least. stop trying to legislate your morality on my wife's uterus

Click to expand...

Your inability to understand a simple explanation of Ron Pauls stance on abortion and the reasons does not make him a hypocrite. It just means you are unable to comprehend a simple statement without twisting the words meaning. He is not defined by Libertarianism, that is your mistake also. But coming from a close minded racist like yourself, it doesn't surprise me.

i am all for child killing if that's what we are gonna call it now. Fuck em

so how many kids have you pro lifers adopted lately?

what is it, 1932 again?

there is NO abortion debate. we fixed all that years ago. some people just can't move on.

the gays are still fighting to get married in cali. they could use some help.

fdd2blk said:

what is it, 1932 again?

there is NO abortion debate. we fixed all that years ago. some people just can't move on.

the gays are still fighting to get married in cali. they could use some help.

Click to expand...

way to waltz right in and change the subject of the thread lol

Will the gay couples be anti abortion? They have no use for abortions...maybe the church groups will ease up on them if they join forces with the church to oppose abortion

Wordz said:

so how many kids have you pro lifers adopted lately?

Click to expand...

None. I can love the right to life, especially mine, and hate kids at the same time. lol

hoss12781 said:

We have far larger issues at stake than political baiting about what is and should be protected as a freedom of religion issue. Both the Paul's are wankers. If Rand wins in KY I'm moving to Tenn.

Click to expand...

You just gave the state of Kentucky another reason to celebrate when Rand Paul wins. A tool like you will leave the state. Kentucky's gain is Tennessee's loss.

UncleBuck said:

he is not a hypocrite for holding this belief. he is a hypocrite for espousing libertarian views yet advocating for the government to get into my wife's uterus. ayn rand says a fetus has no rights until it is born. murray rothbard correctly equates a fetus to a parasite.

the official libertarian position is summarized here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_perspectives_on_abortion#Pro-choice_positions


like i said: hypocrite.

just like any other politician, he takes the anti-choice stand to give himself a scant chance at the party nomination, political gain, call it what you will. your appeals to emotion don't sway me in the least. stop trying to legislate your morality on my wife's uterus

Click to expand...

You're inability to fully comprehend what Ron Paul stands for is your failing not his. He has always said he believes in the sanctity of life which is why he is also against the death penalty. The right to life trumps all other rights. Without the right to life the others are meaningless.

I was on MY boat the other day and a kid swims over and grabs my boat because his has sunk. The kid is exhausted, but since I believe in property rights I pushed the kid back into the river.

Parker said:

You're inability to fully comprehend what Ron Paul stands for is your failing not his. He has always said he believes in the sanctity of life which is why he is also against the death penalty. The right to life trumps all other rights. Without the right to life the others are meaningless.

I was on MY boat the other day and a kid swims over and grabs my boat because his has sunk. The kid is exhausted, but since I believe in property rights I pushed the kid back into the river.

Click to expand...

did you at least throw him a "flotation device"?

Parker said:

You're inability to fully comprehend what Ron Paul stands for is your failing not his. He has always said he believes in the sanctity of life which is why he is also against the death penalty. The right to life trumps all other rights. Without the right to life the others are meaningless.

I was on MY boat the other day and a kid swims over and grabs my boat because his has sunk. The kid is exhausted, but since I believe in property rights I pushed the kid back into the river.

Click to expand...

he can believe in his 'sanctity of life', but he can not do that while still calling himself a libertarian. it is an obvious pander for the repub ticket as he would not be even remotely electable otherwise. not that he is all that electable as is...but that speaks more to the sorry state of our politics more than anything else.

fdd2blk said:

did you at least throw him a "flotation device"?

Click to expand...

yea but I charged him for it.

UncleBuck said:

he can believe in his 'sanctity of life', but he can not do that while still calling himself a libertarian. it is an obvious pander for the repub ticket as he would not be even remotely electable otherwise. not that he is all that electable as is...but that speaks more to the sorry state of our politics more than anything else.

Click to expand...

Like I said earlier, that is your flawed analysis. YOU are the one calling him libertarian. Ron Paul has said he is a Republican and he, as well as others, agree with some libertarian policies. To say he is a libertarian is a weak attempt to marginalize him. You know little about Ron Paul if you use the term pander and his name in the same sentence.