Posted by Anthony Martin
Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:47:00 GMT
If you are a one-issue voter, and your “one issue” is Abortion, you will not like Ron Paul. Neither hard-core-pro-lifers nor hard-core-pro-choicers like him. Here’s proof:
When comparing this record with others, one can certainly understand why one-issue-voters would be turned off by him. He wants to do away with Roe vs. Wade, as NARLA points out, but what they ignore is that he thinks it’s a state issue.
Even though he thinks it’s a state issue, he’s also behind H. R. 300 which would block any futher judicial activism:
Allows the Supreme Court and the federal courts to determine the constitutionality of federal statutes, administrative rules, or procedures in considering cases arising under the Constitution. Prohibits the Supreme Court and the federal courts from issuing any ruling that appropriates or expends money, imposes taxes, or otherwise interferes with the legislative functions or administrative discretion of the states.
He’s also authored H. R. 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.”
Yet hard-core-pro-choicers will likely focus on the one 0% rating he got from NARLA and ignore the fact that he has never had 100%. Hard-core-pro-lifers will focus on the fact that he’s not always 0% like Representative Tom Tancredo.
It’s easy to understand why Ron Paul is neither 0% or 100%. We’re talking about the voting record of a representative who’s focus is on understanding all problems from the standpoint of what The Constitution is allowed to dictate.
By the way, what is hard-core-pro-choice, anyway? I can imagine someone who is hard-core-pro-life, but someone who is hard-core-pro-choice must actually loath their own birth, yes?
Posted by Anthony Martin
Sun, 23 Sep 2007 23:16:00 GMT
How can we put any single issue above The Constitution? Even if the issue is as huge as the War Waged in Iraq II, how can that overshadow how we approach The Constitution?
We don’t recognize US government officials who swear on a stack Bibles to uphold UN resolutions. Only The Constitution gets that distinction. That’s because it’s the only binding document between US Citizens and the government. The UN has no jurisdiction.
Yet, we have a Congress that has no problem ignoring The Constitution by going to war without a declaration. So what makes us think that same Congress won’t ignore the first and second amendments? If Congress thinks nothing of ignoring one part of The Constitution, why not others? We have words for people who do that to the Bible (they’re called hypocrites).
So we cannot look at this election myopically through one issue like the War Waged in Iraq II. If you disagree with The Constitution, if you think The Constitution is anachronistic to require Congress to declare war, then you should advocate change to The Constitution. First things first. We have a mechanism for that. It’s called an amendment. After the amendment, you can have your fancy no-declare-war. Until then, it’s unconstitutional.
Are we trying to build The American Empire? Is that our goal? Can we be so blind not to see that every war since WWII has been part of The American Empire? If we are trying to build The American Empire, we have some dire problems. The money supply for one. The IRS can only collect about one third of the money we spend. I don’t want The American Empire, ever. It’s unconstitutional.
We depend on this unconstitutional government far too much. It was this unconstitutional government that opened holes in our airline industry that contributed to 9/11. If we had more respect for the 2nd amendment, planes would not have flown into buildings.
By that, I mean if the airlines were able to secure themselves rather than rely upon an unconstitutional federal ban on firearms, the airlines would have had the means to protect their customers. The airlines could still legally require customers to relinquish their firearms before boarding their aircraft. Then, it would be incumbent on the airlines to protect the planes, not the customers, nor the government. That’s constitutional.
For more information, get off your high one-issue horse, set aside an hour, go get a cup of coffee, sit back, relax, and watch:
Download