Ron Paul may profess his belief in indiviual rights with one very big exception....a woman's right to chose whether or not she becomes a mother.  I'm happy for him that he has delivered "over 4000 babies" and I sincerely hope that all of them were wanted, and not the results of violence.... but to trap young girls and women who are victims of sexual assault, is tragic.  In my nursing career, I took care of too many 13 and 14 yr olds who were pregnant victims of mommy's boyfriend! 

by Nana P. (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 40 comments [8 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2007 at 7:51:09 AM

  (0+)

To the first poster:

First, Ron Paul does not believe that the federal government should ban abortion. He believes the decision should be left to local and state governments. It is not the right of the state to decide such matters.

Second, the issue of abortion is not black and white. There are people who believe, on one extreme, that a fetus is an appendage that is part of a woman's body, and that a woman should have the right to do with her body as she chooses. There are people, on the other extreme, who feel that life begins at conception, and the intentional killing of that life is murder.

Assuming, as you do in your post, that one of these views is pro-liberty and the other is not is irrational. Both sides can argue that they are pro-liberty. However, the only federal position on this issue that is truly pro-liberty is one that does not advocate either, but leaves the decision to the state and local government.

Third, We live in a society. I understand that people have strong regarding particular issues. However, while you may not agree with your neighbor, if you cannot, at the very least, understand your neighbors opinions, than you are part of what is wrong with our country and where it is headed.

by craig d (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2007 at 8:40:01 AM

  (0+)

To the first poster:

First, Ron Paul does not believe that the federal government should ban abortion. He believes the decision should be left to local and state governments. It is not the right of the federal government* to decide such matters.

Second, the issue of abortion is not black and white. There are people who believe, on one extreme, that a fetus is an appendage that is part of a woman's body, and that a woman should have the right to do with her body as she chooses. There are people, on the other extreme, who feel that life begins at conception, and the intentional killing of that life is murder.

Assuming, as you do in your post, that one of these views is pro-liberty and the other is not is irrational. Both sides can argue that they are pro-liberty. However, the only federal position on this issue that is truly pro-liberty is one that does not advocate either, but leaves the decision to the state and local government.

Third, We live in a society. I understand that people have strong regarding particular issues. However, while you may not agree with your neighbor, if you cannot, at the very least, understand your neighbors opinions, than you are part of what is wrong with our country and where it is headed.

by craig d (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2007 at 8:40:28 AM

  (0+)

.

by craig d (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2007 at 8:42:42 AM

  (0+)

The sexual assault card is so damn tired. Sexual assault is an awful crime that wreaks havoc to its victims, and should be punished severely under any just society. But, if a person believes that abortion is murder then, clearly, it is still not OK to kill a fetus for the crimes of the father. I am not advocating a particular stance on the issue, but jeez, there are logical arguments on both sides. Once you understand the other side, you begin to realize that there is no right or wrong answer.

by craig d (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2007 at 8:56:18 AM

  (0+)

While it's true that Ron Paul is strongly anti-abortion, it's also true that he doesn't advocate passing federal laws based on feelings or opinions. The Constitution does not allow the Federal Government to consider such things as abortion. After all, even if you consider abortion murder, isn't murder a local crime as opposed to a federal one?

by p henson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2007 at 12:03:44 PM

  (0+)

Abortion is a women's rights issue and is a 9th amendment right. No government whether it be federal, state, or local has any business taking away people's rights. All three levels of government are required to uphold the US Constitution. Ron Paul supports legislation that would redefine life as beginning at conception which would make abortion an act of murder. So stop with this nonsense that Ron Paul doesn't want to ban abortion at the federal level.

The government is corrupt because it is run for the benefit of and controlled by a small elite group of people. It is also corrupt because our constitutional form of government makes the government unaccountable to the people so the government can do pretty much anything it wants to do. What we need is government of, by, and for the people (Direct Democracy).

I don't like Ron Paul for several reasons. Ron Paul opposes separation of church and state. Ron Paul claims to be a constitutionalist but opposes 9th amendment rights and also has failed to support Kucinich bill to impeach Dick Cheney. Ron Paul doesn't publicly support a new investigation of 911. Ron Paul wants to build a fence on the Mexican border and supports deporting anyone who is an undocumented immigrant. Ron Paul supports eliminating taxes on wealthy people and corporations. Ron Paul wants to eliminate social programs. Ron Paul supports subsidies for oil companies. Ron Paul supports oil drilling. Ron Paul supports wasting billions on a Missile Defense System. Ron Paul wants to eliminate the minimum wage and opposes workers rights. Ron Paul supports deregulation of business and privatization of public assets. Ron Paul voted for the bankruptcy bill that benefits creditors and makes it more difficult for people to declare bankruptcy.

I support Dennis Kucinich for president. Dennis Kucinich is the only honest candidate and the only candidate with integrity. Dennis Kucinich supports the rights of ALL people and cares about everyone's well being. Dennis is the only candidate that opposes corporatism and that poses a threat to the ruling class. Dennis is the only candidate that wants to end poverty.

http://www.dennis4president.com

http://www2.kucinich.us/issues

by Ty (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 888 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2007 at 5:43:43 PM

  (0+)

Murder is not a local crime. A local crime is something that is only illegal in the local area like in a particular town, city, or county. Last time I checked murder is a crime everywhere in the country and probably everywhere in the world.

by Ty (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 888 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2007 at 5:53:50 PM

  (0+)

Under the Constitution, the jurisdiction or powers of the federal government are granted to it, all others being reserved to the people or the states. The power to prosecute for murder is not granted the federal government, and hence, it is a local matter to be prosecuted by the states. While the powers granted to the federal government are very limited in the Constitution, over time the power to regulate commerce between the states and the fourteenth amendment granting citizens of every state the same rights as the citizens of the United States have been used to radically expand the police powers of the federal government. This is how we now find ourselves with a giant, bloated federal government that regulates every aspect of our daily lives, when the founders' original intent was that the federal government would have very little impact on the average citizen, and the states would be like little experiments where the best methods of governing would be developed and copied.

As to direct democracy being the best form of government, nothing could be further from the truth. Direct democracy is rule by the mob with no consideration for the rights of individuals and minorities. A Constitutional Republic, on the other hand, like we are suppose to have, but have lost, is a system where democracy prevails only to the point it does not infringe upon the guaranteed rights of individuals or minorities as defined in the Constitution. No pure democracy has ever existed for more than a passing moment because of the inherent instability of majorities, and the radical injustices imposed upon large minorities. After all, 51% can vote to enslave the other 49%. There must be a Constitutional framework guaranteeing fundamental fairness and fundamental rights to individuals and minorities. Thus, a Constitutional Republic fits the mold.

by W.M.L. (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 537 comments [52 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2007 at 6:28:30 PM

  (0+)

First and foremost. . . abortion is a question of life, before any other question. Thus, I  believe a federal question.

When does life begin? It is NOT a question of "right to choose" if the damn thing is alive. Then it IS murder.

Personally, I'm in favor of limited abortion. I don't think a cell or group of cells has any rights just because it is alive, afterall the cell is alive (logically it couldn't be dead).

However, what separates us humans from all other forms of life is our REASONING capacity. A few cells cannot reason. As soon as it is determined the fetus has a well/enough developed brain to allow for the *capacity* to reason, it should come into FULL PROTECTION of the law. I am no expert, so I don't know WHEN that happens, but I guess it should be around half way through the pregnancy.

That's why it is ok to unplug people who are brain dead or in a "vegetative" state.

by Thomas Vietor (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments) on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2007 at 10:00:43 AM

  (0+)