- Joined
- Oct 17, 2006
- Messages
- 59,336
- Reaction score
- 27,002
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I don't get what you're talking about. If it's abortion, then I agree with him. It's not necessarily a "religious" argument either. I'm atheist, I don't make religious arguments. But I do agree that right to life should be recognized. In general, even if he or I for that matter run our mouths about it, there's nothing we can do. The SCOTUS ruled on it, and that's the end of that.
Please read about the Sanctity of life Act? It's a religious based piece fallacy of legislation and in Paul's stance the chances that his support of it is based on faith rather than not is highly likely.
When Paul mentioned the legislation in a personal "Statement of Faith",[9] CBN News White House correspondent David Brody noted that Paul was an exception to the pattern of the 2008 Republican candidates for president not engaging in "God talk".[10] The California Catholic Daily also cited Paul as "abortion's 'unshakeable foe'" with the Act as evidence.[11]
On January 22, 2008, the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Norma McCorvey ("Jane Roe"), now a pro-life activist, endorsed Paul for president based on his authorship of the Sanctity of Life Act and the We the People Act.[12]
Ron Paul said:I have never been one who is comfortable talking about my faith in the political arena. In fact, the pandering that typically occurs in the election season I find to be distasteful. But for those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do. I know, as you do, that our freedoms come not from man, but from God. My record of public service reflects my reverence for the Natural Rights with which we have been endowed by a loving Creator.
....
In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, H.R. 1094. I am also the prime sponsor of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. I have also authored H.R. 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.” Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken and will continue to advocate direct action to restore protection for the unborn.
Seriously. That is not the end of that.