posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 07:40 AM
Originally posted by Raelsatu
Leaving it up the states, how is that anti-liberty?
Leaving it up to the states isn't the anti-liberty part. Passing his Sanctity of Life
, which states that life begins at conception and takes away federal protection from women wanting an abortion, then giving the states the
right to protect life by making abortion illegal IS anti-liberty. Ron Paul considers the rights of a fetus from conception, but never once considers
the rights of the woman, whose body this fetus is totally dependent on.
This is the issue that LOST my Ron Paul vote.
He specifically says that it's up to the morals of the people, i.e he won't take away their liberty to choose the morning after pill,
Making a federal law that life begins at conception and then giving states the right to protect that life... that's taking away liberties. He's just
being sneaky about it.
I agree with Lawrence. People who don't want to hear it aren't going to hear it. But Ron Paul has tried to pass the Sanctity of Life Act every
session. He's not giving up. And the way the country is acting these days, with all the fretting over a woman's choice, I'm not willing to put this
man in office.
Rick Santorum is a homophobic, ultra-religious nut job who wants to put women in the kitchen, pregnant and barefoot. That's REAL. Santorum is REAL. We
know what we're getting with him. Ron's a little smarter and he has people fooled into thinking that he's a Libertarian. He may look like one when
compared to the GOP field we have to choose from, but as far as a REAL Libertarian? No. He's not. Else he would be protecting women's rights. I
wouldn't say he's a fake, because he's running on the GOP ticket. He fits right in. If he was running as a Libertarian, then I'd say he's fake. But
he's a Republican, complete with the disrespect of women and minorities they all have.
edit on 2/24/2012 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no