I Disagree With Ron Paul.

sync0s

sync0s

Well-Known Member
It's kind of sad that RP supporters are viewed as cultists because of our views and that we are required to tell people our negatives for a candidate in order to be taken serious. I've been a libertarian since I was first introduced to the ideas by my sister 10 years ago. We now have a candidate on the big stage who supports our values and because we are so excited about it we are viewed as ignorant. Remember, it's human nature to follow the least resistant path. It's always easier to follow the popular views, than the unpopular ones. Don't think for a second that someone from a libertarian perspective hasn't heard all of the arguments and reflected their logic through and through.
 
beardo

beardo

Well-Known Member
A few people in this thread have said they disagree with him on abortion, So do I
I think he is to reserved on the issue and to willing to let states decide on the issue instead of supporting banning abortion.
I also disapprove of his failure to take a stand agianst allowing gay marraige
 
sync0s

sync0s

Well-Known Member
beardo said:
A few people in this thread have said they disagree with him on abortion, So do I
I think he is to reserved on the issue and to willing to let states decide on the issue instead of supporting banning abortion.
I also disapprove of his failure to take a stand agianst allowing gay marraige
Click to expand...
I said those disagreements, but for the complete opposite view of yours. It's hypocritical to want small government less involved, and then to be for banning gay marriage. I hope you realize this.
 
beardo

beardo

Well-Known Member
sync0s said:
I said those disagreements, but for the complete opposite view of yours. It's hypocritical to want small government less involved, and then to be for banning gay marriage. I hope you realize this. My opinion on gay marriage is it's the governments job to protect human rights, and this means the rights of homosexuals as well.
Click to expand...
The definition of marriage is a reliogious one and it has been historicly defined as a union of a man and woman.
Gay couples should be able to have whatever ceremony they want and enjoy benifits like visitation of partner in medical situations and things like that
why do they insist on changing the definition of marriage?
Abortion is murder and should be covered by those laws.
 
budlover13

budlover13

King Tut
beardo said:
The definition of marriage is a reliogious one and it has been historicly defined as a union of a man and woman.
Gay couples should be able to have whatever ceremony they want and enjoy benifits like visitation of partner in medical situations and things like that
why do they insist on changing the definition of marriage?
Abortion is murder and should be covered by those laws.
Click to expand...
But i agree that RP is the best overall man for the job :)
 
sync0s

sync0s

Well-Known Member
beardo said:
The definition of marriage is a reliogious one and it has been historicly defined as a union of a man and woman.
Gay couples should be able to have whatever ceremony they want and enjoy benifits like visitation of partner in medical situations and things like that
why do they insist on changing the definition of marriage?
Abortion is murder and should be covered by those laws.
Click to expand...
They want the definition changed because under the current definition they can't enjoy those benefits what so ever. If it is a religious thing, then let the freedom of the religious ban the marriages from being recognized by the church, whatever, but our government has no right to oppress the peoples rights on foundations of religious principal.

The only ground at which one can say abortion would be murder is that it is a human cell. However, you could take that definition and say that someone piercing their ears and killing the tissue murder in a sense. I don't believe it can be considered murder until scientists can truly provide evidence as to when conscious life truly becomes existent in the embryo, because up until then you're just killing cells, which humans do everyday. Also, there is one undeniable fact that makes me not support banning of abortion: lowering crime has been directly attributed to legal abortion. Also, when abortion was illegal, there was evidence of accidental suicide due to back alley abortions being performed. We think we are doing a moral duty and protecting the fetus from being aborted by an unready parent, and we don't question their ability to raise the child. We think there is always adoption, however flooded foster homes ends up being the destiny of many. We also don't consider the lives of the mother and how if it is illegal and they attempt to do a back alley abortion and kill themselves.

Keep in mind, our founding fathers don't even recognize unborn fetuses as citizens (and abortion has existed pretty much since the dawning of man):
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
  • Anyone born inside the United States *
  • Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
  • Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
  • Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
  • Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
  • Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
  • Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
  • A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
Click to expand...
By the way, RP supports banning abortion under the same reasoning I have for allowing gay marriage.
 
beardo

beardo

Well-Known Member
sync0s said:
They want the definition changed because under the current definition they can't enjoy those benefits what so ever. If it is a religious thing, then let the freedom of the religious ban the marriages from being recognized by the church, whatever, but our government has no right to oppress the peoples rights on foundations of religious principal.

The only ground at which one can say abortion would be murder is that it is a human cell. However, you could take that definition and say that someone piercing their ears and killing the tissue murder in a sense. I don't believe it can be considered murder until scientists can truly provide evidence as to when conscious life truly becomes existent in the embryo, because up until then you're just killing cells, which humans do everyday. Also, there is one undeniable fact that makes me not support banning of abortion: lowering crime has been directly attributed to legal abortion. Also, when abortion was illegal, there was evidence of accidental suicide due to back alley abortions being performed. We think we are doing a moral duty and protecting the fetus from being aborted by an unready parent, and we don't question their ability to raise the child. We think there is always adoption, however flooded foster homes ends up being the destiny of many. We also don't consider the lives of the mother and how if it is illegal and they attempt to do a back alley abortion and kill themselves.

By the way, RP supports banning abortion under the same reasoning I have for allowing gay marriage.
Click to expand...
Rp does not support banning abortion-He believes it should not be protected by the federal government and states should decide- I hear your stance on abortion, and understand that an embryo can not live on it's own outside of the mother and may only be a few cells, My stance is that without a hostile action those cells would most likely become a person similar to you or I.
 
beardo

beardo

Well-Known Member
budlover13 said:
But i agree that RP is the best overall man for the job :)
Click to expand...
This is why I feel we should all vote for Paul, he is a moderate mediator between our differing opinions and he has a good understanding of the issues and points of contention
 
sync0s

sync0s

Well-Known Member
beardo said:
Rp does not support banning abortion-He believes it should not be protected by the federal government and states should decide- I hear your stance on abortion, and understand that an embryo can not live on it's own outside of the mother and may only be a few cells, My stance is that without a hostile action those cells would most likely become a person similar to you or I.
Click to expand...
touche. Remember, through stem cell research you can alter the RNA of a (skin, heart, whatever) cell and it could eventually create a human or human part as well..

[video=youtube;EL1BOWC3No0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EL1BOWC3No0&feature=related[/video]
 
sync0s

sync0s

Well-Known Member
budlover13 said:
Why can't we just leave natural shit natural? WTF? There's no END to this debate!

Sorry. But.....?
Click to expand...
I don't fully understand your argument??

If you're talking about altering RNA in a cell, we do this because it will help future human health in substantial proportions
 
budlover13

budlover13

King Tut
sync0s said:
I don't fully understand your argument??

If you're talking about altering RNA in a cell, we do this because it will help future human health in substantial proportions
Click to expand...
Not necessarily the RNA thing but with EVERYTHING. We humans have this overwhelming desire to say "Let's concentrate this." or "let's pull out this ingredient." as with aspirin. i just think there's a whole lot to be said for using the source as a whole. Marinol is a good example of that. It has THC but what about all the other cannabinoids that contribute to well-being? Or we have to process it and add shit to it when it comes to foods.

i just simply prefer the natural forms of most things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top