I Am Pro Choice

[Lindsey]

Can I choose to marry my same-sex partner?

 

[talkingpointes]

That was painful to watch.

Indeed. Anything past a comment can possibly mess with my heart rate. I'm going to have a cigarette instead.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Can I choose which corrupt 3rd world government will be the recipient of my tax dollars?

And this thread reminds me of the Reason interviews at the DNC on the "choice" to have an abortion versus the "choice" to smoke weed. You can choose what to kill inside your body, but not what you will put in your body.

The person who was asked about right to work just needs to read Walter Block . Libertarian negative rights theory leaves no room for a positive "Right to work." Granted, if the Democrats (Or Republicans for that matter) are going to support involuntary association through anti-discrimination laws based on race, religion, sexual orientation, exc. there's no good reason for them not to include "Union status" as well, but someone who was consistently pro-choice would support the right of a business to agree with a union not to associate with people outside the union.

Everyone else in that video was full of crap and a massive hypocrite. They only support the choice to kill children. They probably aren't even consistent about the whole "Your body" thing, I highly doubt they want to legalize the organ market.

So yeah, that was mostly painful to watch. The right to work part was especially hateful because the interviewer didn't understand "Pro-choice" in that context any better than the person being interviewed.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Can I choose to marry my same-sex partner?

Of course you can. You've had that choice since 2003, anywhere in the United States...

Oh wait, you want everyone else to recognize your choice. Fine, just move to New York, or something...

Seriously though, I think most "Pro-choice" people would probably support government recognition of SSM. I don't, but its not a big issue for me. I also don't support the "Choice" to commit murder in the womb and that is a bigger issue although not as serious as the war issue.

 

[phill4paul]

Can I choose to........

No, rights are not unlimited.

 

[cheapseats]

REALITY CHECK:

The dominant faction of the faction of the Liberty Moovement that is a wannabe-wing of the Republican Party elected last go-round to play to "Social Conservatives" a.k.a. The Hardright. Articles abound about this having contributed mightily to Republican defeat in November.

Minority opinion within the minority that is Ron Paul Forums . . . the Liberty Forest type . . . are again
dismissed/marginalized/insulted for waving the HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF FLAG. Oy vey.

But I would point out this glaring hypocrisy: The majority of the minority expends more intense and more abiding effort to ELIMINATE the Abortion choice than to RESTORE the many,many, many choices that have been snatched.

Reality Check: Ron Paul is pro-life.

REALITY CHECK: Ron Paul lost. By a LOT. Playing to Social Conservatives may have helped Romney clinch the nomination, but it absolutely hurt him in the General.

And had he NOT pandered to the Hardright, who ELSE was gonna get the nod from Republicans Deciders? They were NEVER gonna give it to Ron, agreed?

 

[jmdrake]

Of course you can. You've had that choice since 2003, anywhere in the United States...

Oh wait, you want everyone else to recognize your choice. Fine, just move to New York, or something...

Seriously though, I think most "Pro-choice" people would probably support government recognition of SSM. I don't, but its not a big issue for me. I also don't support the "Choice" to commit murder in the womb and that is a bigger issue although not as serious as the war issue.

^This. Now how about "Can I marry both of my babies' mamas." Because that will get you arrested. (Note I only have one mama for both my babies. Just speaking hypothetically.)

 

[Christian Liberty]

Can I choose to........

No, rights are not unlimited.

Of course they aren't. But they end only where mine begin.

REALITY CHECK: Ron Paul lost. By a LOT. Playing to Social Conservatives may have helped Romney clinch the nomination, but it absolutely hurt him in the General.


And had he NOT pandered to the Hardright, who ELSE were Republicans gonna give the nomination? They were NEVER gonna give it to Ron, agreed?

Ron Paul did a lot better than Gary Johnson, who was the liberal's "libertarian" and was also far less of one than RP...

 

[Christian Liberty]

^This. Now how about "Can I marry both of my babies' mamas." Because that will get you arrested. (Note I only have one mama for both my babies. Just speaking hypothetically.)

If you want to you should be able to but government should do nothing more than recognize any contract you may agreee to.

 

[jmdrake]

REALITY CHECK: Ron Paul lost. By a LOT. Playing to Social Conservatives may have helped Romney clinch the nomination, but it absolutely hurt him in the General.

And had he NOT pandered to the Hardright, who ELSE was gonna get the nod from Republicans Deciders? They were NEVER gonna give it to Ron, agreed?

Reality check. Ron Paul lost because his foreign policy is not popular with republicans. And pro-choice Dennis Kucinich didn't do so hot in his presidential bid either.

Edit: And Romney was not the choice of Social Conservatives nor did he reach out to them. He got hammered in the general because they mostly stayed home.

 

[talkingpointes]

REALITY CHECK: Ron Paul lost. By a LOT. Playing to Social Conservatives may have helped Romney clinch the nomination, but it absolutely hurt him in the General.


And had he NOT pandered to the Hardright, who ELSE was gonna get the nod from Republicans Deciders? They were NEVER gonna give it to Ron, agreed?

Wow. Tell me how many states did Ron win in the primaries in 12'. Just curious how many you think.

If you think he won five or more; what happened at the RNC? You know the whole part we they just pretend like we don't exist. How do you reconcile with such insurmountable proof of them not going to care for the son of Paul.

For those who forgot -- here's our last victory !!!! PRESIDENT RON

 

[jmdrake]

If you want to you should be able to but government should do nothing more than recognize any contract you may agreee to.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to FreedomFanatic again.

 

[talkingpointes]

Cheapseats. What happened to the impassioned cheapseats that was banned at one for such heated discussions? Compromise now, that's what we've won ?

 

[cheapseats]

Wow. Tell me how many states did Ron win in the primaries in 12'. Just curious how many you think.

Zero, unless you include the Virgin Islands. Which I never do in my calculations.

If you think he won five or more; what happened at the RNC?

I SAW what happened.

And what happened because of what happened? Nothing.

Well...not NOTHING. The Usual Suspects held onto the pecking order.

You know the whole part we they just pretend like we don't exist. How do you reconcile with such insurmountable proof of them not going to care for the son of Paul.

I do. I don't.

I be tilting at Board Majority Opinion/Emotion, as per usual.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Knowing what I know now, I'd still support Ron Paul if he supported abortion and gay marriage, albeit more grudgingly. I did ultimately encourage people to vote for Gary Johnson, although he definitely did strike me as blending the whole "Fiscally conservative, socially liberal" tagline with real libertarianism, rather than being a true libertarian. However, when I was a young neocon, I would never have really considered Ron Paul if he had gotten those issues wrong. At the time I was already annoyed enough at his foreign policy because I thought saving the world by military force was humanitarian and good. I don't think I would have ever become "Converted" if Ron were pro-choice.

 

[cheapseats]

Cheapseats. What happened to the impassioned cheapseats that was banned at one for such heated discussions? Compromise now, that's what we've won ?

Yep, Rand killed it in so many ways...

Agreed.

Henceforth, I will be conscientious about staying out of his sub-forum unless I have something nice to say. This should NOT be interpreted at "coming around" but, rather, as tiptoeing around the "ban-hammer".

Unless I am warned otherwise, I assume Rand is still fair game in other sub-forums?

Please DO warn me if I am near the ban-line. I do not want to be banned again, at least not yet. I'm lookin' for someone.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...Fox-News-Sunday-w-Chris-Wallace-3-24-13/page2

 

[phill4paul]

Of course they aren't. But they end only where mine begin.

No. They don't. My rights are my rights always. As are yours. Co-existing.

However, my reference was to Feinstein's statement that the second amendment was not unlimited.

 

[Lindsey]

Can I choose to criticize a member of the Paul family on this board?

 

[cheapseats]

Cheapseats. What happened to the impassioned cheapseats that was banned at one for such heated discussions? Compromise now, that's what we've won ?

Baby Steps bud. You have been here long enough to know that ...

Grown men in "the land of the free and the home of the brave" shouldn't still be settling for BABY STEPS...not in the face of LONG YEARS of abuses of power, with MUCH suffering and death thereby.

Don't make me haul out that quote from Braveheart, about settling for the scraps from Longshank's table.

And its working.

Not with me.

But then, the way y'all played the last election didn't work for me either.

But then, you lost.

I used to get into email battles about Ron with a bank president I work with. But guess what. He loves Rand. Even statements like this. And its all because of how Rand says it.

But you know this. And still insist on posting silly comments like above.

Slutter McGee

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...Fox-News-Sunday-w-Chris-Wallace-3-24-13/page4

ImplausibleEndeavors ‏@MindOfMo
SCREW YOU to big-talkin' guys who flatter themselves as "Liberty Lovers" but who celebrate BABY STEPS & gab like girls about NEXT ELECTION.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?406086-Thoughts-on-Rand-Paul/page3

 

[Christian Liberty]

Can I choose to criticize a member of the Paul family on this board?

As far as I understand, the moderation has allowed this at least in some cases, although it seems like you'll get away with less of it in Ron/Rand's forum respectively. I've stated disagreement with both Ron and Rand, although more often the latter, and not had any problems. Of course, I agree with them like 90% of the time, I suspect a neocon wouldn't have the same courtesy, but they don't belong here anyway.

That said, the forum is private property and so they have the freedom to expel people that they don't want here, anytime they want.