Bob Vander Plaats does not agree with Ron Paul's moral compass

[RDM]

Texas Rep. Ron Paul's insistence that states should have the final say on social issues such as abortion and gay marriage does not sit well with Bob Vander Plaats, the head of The Family Leader.

Paul was the only GOP candidate at a forum over the weekend hosted by Vander Plaats' group opposed to amending the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as a heterosexual union.

Also appearing at the Thanksgiving Family Forum in Des Moines, Iowa were Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney was invited but did not attend. Also not in attendance was former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, who has not placed an emphasis on Iowa.

Paul, who has previously said he is personally opposed to gay people marrying, said that the role of government is to preserve liberty, not mold people or society: “The law can't reflect the morality of the people. If you do that, you have embarked on something where you sacrifice liberty.”

In analyzing the candidates' performances, Vander Plaats, a vociferous opponent of gay marriage, didn't sound impressed.

“I think he let his libertarian view trump his moral compass,” he told the Des Moines Register.

Paul has also declined to sign the group's 14-point anti-gay marriage pledge.
httx://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=10148&MediaType=1&Category=26

 

[specsaregood]

Well then I hope he's happy when they nationalize gay marriage; because the biggest states with the most votes are blue.

 

[TonySutton]

When you ask people to put their faith in the government, I do not think there is much faith left for God. The religious right needs to stop asking the government to do the work God has charged his people with.

 

[V3n]

Bob Vander Plaats is the same guy who wrote into his 'pledge' that black children were better off under slavery! Why anyone would listen to him or care about his endorsement, I do not know! The more distance from this guy, the better!

Paul was the only GOP candidate at a forum over the weekend hosted by Vander Plaats' group opposed to amending the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as a heterosexual union.

If he had changed his opinion on this subject it would be blatant pandering and probably would have lost my vote. I'm proud of him for sticking up for what he believes and not allowing the pressure of the situation force him to conform to what the other candidates were doing! (of course, that's what makes Ron Paul, Ron Paul!)

 

[pcosmar]

Bob Vander Plaats Moral Compass

 

[Paulatized]

When you ask people to put their faith in the government, I do not think there is much faith left for God. The religious right needs to stop asking the government to do the work God has charged his people with.

Thank You!

 

[trey4sports]

Well, sorry Bobby. I hope you like Gov't defining marriage as man/man and woman/woman.

 

[RDM]

Bob Vander Plaats is the same guy who wrote into his 'pledge' that black children were better off under slavery! Why anyone would listen to him or care about his endorsement, I do not know! The more distance from this guy, the better!



If he had changed his opinion on this subject it would be blatant pandering and probably would have lost my vote. I'm proud of him for sticking up for what he believes and not allowing the pressure of the situation force him to conform to what the other candidates were doing! (of course, that's what makes Ron Paul, Ron Paul!)

By the looks of the Twitter feed I'm reading, it looks like he's soon about to endorse Gingrich. How much influence does this Vander Plaats have in Iowa as far as swaying votes?

 

[V3n]

That's disgusting. Gingrich has less respect for Marriage than any homosexual couple fighting to be with the one (and only one!) that they love.

As far as actual pull in the state, I don't know.. I'm scared these kooks always have more sway than they ought to.


edit: my 2 cents:
Free will is the greatest gift God gave us, shame on those who would legislate morality to prevent us from using it!

 

[Aratus]

newt = status quo

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/is-iowa-conservative-bob-vander-plaats-for-world-government/

November22nd
Is (Iowa Conservative) Bob Vander Plaats for World Government?

The social conservative leader has ruled out Ron Paul for his organization’s endorsement because Paul believes in “states’ rights” across the board — rather an odd view for a Christian group to take. Christians, from Calvinists to Catholics, are supposed to believe in subsidiarity, an ancient principle of Christian social thought, whereby power is to be as dispersed and local as possible. Evidently, Ron Paul is supposed to support a nationalist approach to family issues in defiance of this principle.

Dr. Paul’s actual approach is to strip the federal courts of authority over a host of issues involving family, thereby getting the federal government out of these areas. This is the correct position constitutionally, morally, and strategically.

What could Vander Plaats’ argument against world government be? What if France is not sufficiently family friendly? Why not send in the UN? Anyone who opposes world government must be an immoral idiot who believes in “country rights” instead of the triumph of righteousness.

If Vander Plaats does not support world government, why not? Why not have a powerful world government that can use violence rather than persuasion and example to put right all the world’s wrongs? If states’ rights is the wrong position, so is countries’ rights, so can we expect Bob to follow his logic wherever it takes him, all the way to global government?