Ron Paul - Closet Theocrat?

	Duration: 01:29 minutes Upload Time: 2007-08-25 18:49:40 User: oscillator :::: Favorites :::: Top Videos of Day
Description: Sources: http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2003/tst122903.htm http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul244.html http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_Paul_Education.htm http://www.l4l.org/library/bepro-rp.html http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul100.html http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb1osemR4ys http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html
Comments
cubencis ::: Favorites the constitution doesnt say what states can do- they say what states CANNOT do. and that is an important difference, and states do have rights btw. further more about licenses, if u've ever moved states you'd realize you have to give in u'r old d.l. when/if u want to register a car in the new state. 07-10-09 13:02:21 __________________________________________________
ubuchuckp4 ::: Favorites What is wrong with standing for morality? You could leave everything to the states.Roe V Wade I guess you really would not be too concerned unless it was YOU being scraped from your mothers womb.Think about that a while. That should be the safest place in the world. Ron Paul was an OB/GYN, delivered over 4000 babies. I will take his side about life beginning at conception. And that life has Constitutional rights! 07-10-06 00:06:35 __________________________________________________
wpld88 ::: Favorites Now, on to your claim about "protecting" states' right not to recognize gay marriages. According to the constitution, states have no such right. Instead, the Full Faith and Credit clause states that all licenses and contracts (i.e. drivers' licenses and marriages) that were issued by one state must be honored by every other state. 07-09-30 04:04:21 __________________________________________________
wpld88 ::: Favorites Is it moral? That is a different question, but the constitution does not explicitly address abortion. Thus, abortion cannot be unconstitutional. 07-09-30 04:03:31 __________________________________________________
wpld88 ::: Favorites Roe v. Wade is the brain-child of a previous Supreme Court ruling, Griswold v. Connecticut. The Griswold case involved an interpretation of the fourth amendment (search and seizure) to mean that all Americans have a right to privacy. In Roe v. Wade, the majority ruling was that that right to privacy would be infringed upon if the government were to force all pregnant women to stay pregnant against their will. 07-09-30 04:02:21 __________________________________________________
wpld88 ::: Favorites Benkrawks, I believe Ron Paul supports the constitution, but I also believe that Ron Paul is a wee bit mistaken when he says that both Roe v. Wade and the "forcing" of states to recognize marriage are unconstitutional. 07-09-30 04:01:01 __________________________________________________
oscillator ::: Favorites RP's positions are in line with those of the Christian dominionists, whether he claims they are motivated by 'state's rights' or not. 07-09-04 07:39:49 __________________________________________________
slimjim006 ::: Favorites And your alternative would be????? 07-09-03 23:37:33 __________________________________________________
RamzGT ::: Favorites Interesting, since I am an atheist relativist and I support Ron Paul. I don't care about our differences in religion, b/c when the dust settles, his views on liberty will enable me to believe what I want to in the end. 07-09-03 18:25:35 __________________________________________________
MyNameIsShelby ::: Favorites Thank you for posting this. 07-09-02 15:36:03 __________________________________________________