Ron Paul and the states-rights-sidestep

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Too bad you are too lazy to click on the links I went to the trouble to provide for you. Every single one of them is a Ron Paul/Abortion thread...just a few of many. I backed up my claim...you just go waaaa waaaaa waaaaa.....

Des

Originally posted by bl4ke360

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by Skewed
Considering the fact that he delivered babies as his job, I can completely understand his opinion being pro-life. I think you are trying to connect dots where there are no dots to connect. While he maintains his opinion, he is stepping outside his opinion and respecting others, and more so by leaving it to the individual states instead of the federal government to decide what is best for them.

I have to disagree with you. Ron has stated numerous times he is pro-life, but he also states that it is the peoples choice what they do.

He has every right to be pro-life. He doesnt have a right to force that upon me.

Yes he does because it doesn't only affect women, it affects babies as well, which he sees as human beings. From his perspective it would be murder, are you trying to say somebody against murder doesn't have the right to force his beliefs on you? We should all just make our own decisions with no penalties?

Not the point of the thread. The point of the thread, which you seem to be backing up, is that he will outlaw abortion, even though he claims he wont. He has every right to his views. They are no more "right" than mine. But if he is elected, he will have the power to FORCE his upon the people,

reply to post by Destinyone


Ive seen, and been in the those threads, and not one of them makes the point that is being made here.

But please, keep deflecting from the fact that you cannot dispute my claim.

What OP is saying that the abortion law would be similar to the marijuana laws in some states. Its legal in those states but illegal at the federal level. The Fed would be able to override state law.

I think that is what the OP means.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by Destinyone

 

Ive seen, and been in the those threads, and not one of them makes the point that is being made here.

But please, keep deflecting from the fact that you cannot dispute my claim.

You have no valid, nor unique claim to dispute....You didn't even bother to provide links in your OP. Just told us to google the quotes....A very entitled attitude, If I may so so myself.

Des

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by bl4ke360

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by Skewed
Considering the fact that he delivered babies as his job, I can completely understand his opinion being pro-life. I think you are trying to connect dots where there are no dots to connect. While he maintains his opinion, he is stepping outside his opinion and respecting others, and more so by leaving it to the individual states instead of the federal government to decide what is best for them.

I have to disagree with you. Ron has stated numerous times he is pro-life, but he also states that it is the peoples choice what they do.

He has every right to be pro-life. He doesnt have a right to force that upon me.

Yes he does because it doesn't only affect women, it affects babies as well, which he sees as human beings. From his perspective it would be murder, are you trying to say somebody against murder doesn't have the right to force his beliefs on you? We should all just make our own decisions with no penalties?

Not the point of the thread. The point of the thread, which you seem to be backing up, is that he will outlaw abortion, even though he claims he wont. He has every right to his views. They are no more "right" than mine. But if he is elected, he will have the power to FORCE his upon the people,

How is this any different than forcing the death penalty on people or forcing punishment for murder? That's also a view and some people don't think murder is wrong, does that mean they shouldn't have to face the punishment for it?

Originally posted by FreedomXisntXFree
What OP is saying that the abortion law would be similar to the marijuana laws in some states. Its legal in those states but illegal at the federal level. The Fed would be able to override state law.

I think that is what the OP means.

That, and the fact that this is an instance which PERFECTLY illustrates that RP uses the same backdoor politics as the candidates he claims to be so different from.

protects the rights of human persons between conception and birth;

This is just silly.
Even the site you linked says this bill has a 1% chance of being passed.

This bill if it even get passed will be at the steps of the supreme court in a heartbeat.
Don't they from upon limitation of judicial power?

Originally posted by bl4ke360

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by bl4ke360

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by Skewed
Considering the fact that he delivered babies as his job, I can completely understand his opinion being pro-life. I think you are trying to connect dots where there are no dots to connect. While he maintains his opinion, he is stepping outside his opinion and respecting others, and more so by leaving it to the individual states instead of the federal government to decide what is best for them.

I have to disagree with you. Ron has stated numerous times he is pro-life, but he also states that it is the peoples choice what they do.

He has every right to be pro-life. He doesnt have a right to force that upon me.

Yes he does because it doesn't only affect women, it affects babies as well, which he sees as human beings. From his perspective it would be murder, are you trying to say somebody against murder doesn't have the right to force his beliefs on you? We should all just make our own decisions with no penalties?

Not the point of the thread. The point of the thread, which you seem to be backing up, is that he will outlaw abortion, even though he claims he wont. He has every right to his views. They are no more "right" than mine. But if he is elected, he will have the power to FORCE his upon the people,

How is this any different than forcing the death penalty on people or forcing punishment for murder? That's also a view and some people don't think murder is wrong, does that mean they shouldn't have to face the punishment for it?

Again, this thread isnt to debate whether or not abortion is right or wrong. RP's stance is well established. It is to illustrate the fact that he claims that he wants to leave it up to the states, yet is setting it up so that what the states choose is irrelevant.

It seems to me, that you think that this is ok.

Originally posted by grey580

protects the rights of human persons between conception and birth;

This is just silly.
Even the site you linked says this bill has a 1% chance of being passed.

This bill if it even get passed will be at the steps of the supreme court in a heartbeat.
Don't they from upon limitation of judicial power?

Ahh, but if president, there are other avenues to take. He wont get it passed as long as he isnt elected. If he is president, it changes the whole ballgame.

Originally posted by Destinyone

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by Destinyone

 

Ive seen, and been in the those threads, and not one of them makes the point that is being made here.

But please, keep deflecting from the fact that you cannot dispute my claim.

You have no valid, nor unique claim to dispute....You didn't even bother to provide links in your OP. Just told us to google the quotes....

Des

edit on 2-5-2012 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)

Links to what? The two things that he is well known to back, that is, the repeal of Roe v wade and the Sanctity of life act?

Considering that RON PAUL is the one who reintroduced the Sanctity of life act, I figured it wasnt in dispute. And as far as repealing Roe V Wade, how many times does the man have to say himself that he wants it gone before you believe it?

Seeing lots of deflections in this thread. Ive yet to see a valid counterpoint.

reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree


So is that what all that mumbo jumbo in sec. 3 and sec. 4 is about? The fed can override state law?

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by grey580

protects the rights of human persons between conception and birth;

This is just silly.
Even the site you linked says this bill has a 1% chance of being passed.

This bill if it even get passed will be at the steps of the supreme court in a heartbeat.
Don't they from upon limitation of judicial power?

Ahh, but if president, there are other avenues to take. He wont get it passed as long as he isnt elected. If he is president, it changes the whole ballgame.

Why are you so afraid of Dr. Paul being elected. Perhaps you are a Woman fearing loss of rights....

Des

Originally posted by Destinyone

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by grey580

protects the rights of human persons between conception and birth;

This is just silly.
Even the site you linked says this bill has a 1% chance of being passed.

This bill if it even get passed will be at the steps of the supreme court in a heartbeat.
Don't they from upon limitation of judicial power?

Ahh, but if president, there are other avenues to take. He wont get it passed as long as he isnt elected. If he is president, it changes the whole ballgame.

Why are you so afraid of Dr. Paul being elected. Perhaps you are a Woman fearing loss of rights....

Des

Why cant you stay on topic? Why must you deflect and make silly, off-topic comments?

Why cant you dispute the points I have made?

reply to post by grey580


The likelihood of the bill passing isn't what the OP is discussing. What he is saying is that Ron Paul claims to be for state rights, especially on the abortion issue. However, at the same time he is pushing for this bill that would make abortions pretty much illegal.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by emberscott
reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree

 

So is that what all that mumbo jumbo in sec. 3 and sec. 4 is about? The fed can override state law?

They dont have to override the state. The states will be able to make it legal. The doctor will just be open to federal prosecution.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

Seeing lots of deflections in this thread. Ive yet to see a valid counterpoint.

I am also seeing a lot of threads that involve Ron Paul and this subject matter. So what is really the big deal?

Recent threads at that...

Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

All I can say is, you are so narrow minded, if you turned sideways, you'd disappear....

Des

hmmm, another deflection and personal attack. Why wont you discuss the topic?

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Anything is possible I guess.
Pigs could fly too I suppose.
And on the odd chance that was voted into law it would get the crap lawyerd out of it.