Ron Paul Ad

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Once again I'll point out his stance on abortion........VERY far right attitude.

Have a good one!:s4:

His stance on abortion is the same as goes now, let the states make the choice. The only difference is that he wants to actually respect state decisions. Having personal beliefs against abortion doesn't make him a monster, and I'm more concerned about policy. For Christs sake I can't believe that so many Americans consider abiding by the constitution to be a small priority/issue. To restore America to the values of the founding fathers, get government out of our lives, have an economic policy that's actually responsible and won't bankrupt the nation; these issues are far more important than Ron's personal issues about abortion.

[Psycho4Bud]

His stance on abortion is the same as goes now, let the states make the choice. The only difference is that he wants to actually respect state decisions. Having personal beliefs against abortion doesn't make him a monster, and I'm more concerned about policy. For Christs sake I can't believe that so many Americans consider abiding by the constitution to be a small priority/issue. To restore America to the values of the founding fathers, get government out of our lives, have an economic policy that's actually responsible and won't bankrupt the nation; these issues are far more important than Ron's personal issues about abortion.

We've been through this before and I even posted a vid with his stance. He'll leave the prosecution to the states but it would be considered MURDER by the fed. If you have something to prove otherwise please post it. Remember to reference the bills that he has proposed to congress.

During the last debate he stated that he wouldn't hold the woman liable but the doctors performing the act was another story. Why the Ron Paul supporters want to white wash this issue is beyond me.....

Have a good one!:s4:

[Markass]

I like him a lot due to the fact that he doesn't believe the federal government needs to be involved in so many things, rather that the states and the people have more power and control over specific things..that's what I fucking learned in government, of how america is supposed to be, separation of powers, freedom from government...but that's how it isn't in today's time...Ron Paul is the one to restore sanity in this nation.

I had one gram of marijuana in a flashlight keychain, the drug dog hit on it today at school after missing it during visits over about three years...I was arrested and jailed with a $3,500 bond for around 1 measly gram of marijuana..sure it was at vo-tech, but was it really necessary to tie me up in the court system over 1 gram of fucking pot?

[phx123]

Who's your favorite Republican?
Ok, you don't have a favorite.
But if you had to pick one, who would it be?

We've been through this before and I even posted a vid with his stance. He'll leave the prosecution to the states but it would be considered MURDER by the fed. If you have something to prove otherwise please post it. Remember to reference the bills that he has proposed to congress.

During the last debate he stated that he wouldn't hold the woman liable but the doctors performing the act was another story. Why the Ron Paul supporters want to white wash this issue is beyond me.....

Have a good one!:s4:

[Psycho4Bud]

Who's your favorite Republican?
Ok, you don't have a favorite.
But if you had to pick one, who would it be?

At this point I'm still very much undecided. There isn't a one of them that I really agree with that much.

Have a good one!:s4:

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

At this point I'm still very much undecided. There isn't a one of them that I really agree with that much.

Have a good one!:s4:

It is hard to decide, isn't it? The selection this election just isn't very impressive. Personally I'd want Obama for the democrats and Paul for the republicans. My Obama vote, though, is only because I think he's the least crippled in a nest full of lame ducks. Whether or not you like Ron Paul, I think he's the only guy who would institute some real change and not just mild tweaks to the status quo (as usual).

[DurbanStone]

Ron Paul is the man for the job. This is your last chance to remake the America that once was!

[Fencewalker]

We've been through this before and I even posted a vid with his stance. He'll leave the prosecution to the states but it would be considered MURDER by the fed. If you have something to prove otherwise please post it. Remember to reference the bills that he has proposed to congress.

During the last debate he stated that he wouldn't hold the woman liable but the doctors performing the act was another story. Why the Ron Paul supporters want to white wash this issue is beyond me.....

Have a good one!:s4:

I'll give it a go.

(a) Finding- The Congress finds that present day scientific evidence indicates a significant likelihood that actual human life exists from conception .

(b) Declaration- Upon the basis of this finding, and in the exercise of the powers of the Congress--

(1) the Congress declares that--

(A) human life shall be deemed to exist from conception , without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency; and

(B) the term `person' shall include all human life as defined in subparagraph (A); and

(2) the Congress recognizes that each State has the authority to protect lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that State.

Ok, basically what this does is nullifies Roe v. Wade, which he has been clear from day one that he wants to do. Now, if you have the mindset that the federal government is the "nanny", this would cause concern, however since Paul has also been clear from day one that the federal government should butt out of the state's decisions, it isn't as scary as some folks seem to take it to mean.
Leaves it up to the states.

a) Finding- The Congress finds that present day scientific evidence indicates a significant likelihood that actual human life exists from conception.

(b) Declaration- Upon the basis of this finding, and in the exercise of the powers of the Congress--

(1) the Congress declares that--

(A) human life shall be deemed to exist from conception, without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency; and

(B) the term `person' shall include all human life as defined in subparagraph (A); and

(2) the Congress recognizes that each State has the authority to protect lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that State.

Each state has the authority to protect lives (pro life) of unborn children, or not (pro choice). The federal government is out of the equation.
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Ron Paul's own words:

Federalizing Social Policy

January 30, 2006

As the Senate prepares to vote on the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito this week, our nation once again finds itself bitterly divided over the issue of abortion. It's a sad spectacle, especially considering that our founders never intended for social policy to be decided at the federal level, and certainly not by federal courts. It's equally sad to consider that huge numbers of Americans believe their freedoms hinge on any one individual, Supreme Court justice or not.

Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided, but not because the Supreme Court presumed to legalize abortion rather than ban it. Roe was wrongly decided because abortion simply is not a constitutional issue. There is not a word in the text of that document, nor in any of its amendments, that conceivably addresses abortion. There is no serious argument based on the text of the Constitution itself that a federal "right to abortion" exists. The federalization of abortion law is based not on constitutional principles, but rather on a social and political construct created out of thin air by the Roe court.

Under the 9th and 10 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.

The notion that an all-powerful, centralized state should provide monolithic solutions to the ethical dilemmas of our times is not only misguided, but also contrary to our Constitution. Remember, federalism was established to allow decentralized, local decision- making by states. Today, however, we seek a federal solution for every perceived societal ill, ignoring constitutional limits on federal power. The result is a federal state that increasingly makes all-or-nothing decisions that alienate large segments of the population.

Why are we so afraid to follow the Constitution and let state legislatures decide social policy? Surely people on both sides of the abortion debate realize that it's far easier to influence government at the state and local level. The federalization of social issues, originally championed by the left but now embraced by conservatives, simply has prevented the 50 states from enacting laws that more closely reflect the views of their citizens. Once we accepted the federalization of abortion law under Roe, we lost the ability to apply local community standards to ethical issues.

Those who seek a pro-life culture must accept that we will never persuade all 300 million Americans to agree with us. A pro-life culture can be built only from the ground up, person by person. For too long we have viewed the battle as purely political, but no political victory can change a degraded society. No Supreme Court ruling by itself can instill greater respect for life. And no Supreme Court justice can save our freedoms if we don't fight for them ourselves.

Ron Paul Library, Federalizing Social Policy

[Psycho4Bud]

Each state has the authority to protect lives (pro life) of unborn children, or not (pro choice). The federal government is out of the equation.

The fed would state that life begins at conception but the states could opt out of prosecution? PLEASE post in what bill, ANYTHING that says "or not" specifically.

We're still white washing the ol' fence here.

Have a good one!:s4:

[Fencewalker]

Well, seems to me that this:

2) the Congress recognizes that each State has the authority to protect lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that State.

Pretty much sums it up. The state has the authority to protect lives of unborn children. If the state chooses to allow abortion, it is within it's rights.
But we could also point to the 'we the people act':

he Supreme Court of the United States and each Federal court--

(1) shall not adjudicate--

(A) any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion;

(B) any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or

(C) any claim based upon equal protection of the laws to the extent such claim is based upon the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation; and

(2) shall not rely on any judicial decision involving any issue referred to in paragraph (1).

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

And to top it off, here are the crimes (and only these crimes) that Ron Paul believes should be federal crimes (backed up by the 10th amendment of The Constitution):

there are only three federal crimes: piracy, treason, and counterfeiting. All other criminal matters are left to the individual states. Any federal legislation dealing with criminal matters not related to these three issues usurps state authority over criminal law and takes a step toward turning the states into mere administrative units of the federal government.

Ron Paul Library, Federalization of crime contrary to Constitution

Have a good one!