Paul focusing more on Abortion this time?

[jmdrake]

And does faith answer this question?

Did not the great teacher Jesus explain, there is no salvation in the bible?

He did not say that. He said that the scriptures testify of Him. The Bible doesn't save you, but it does point you to the He who saves you. Also now you are using a red herring as this philosophical point has nothing to do with the discussion.

That said... reread the scripture in previous post about who helped who give birth. I don't think it is an isolated concept in scripture.

Another red herring.

But people who have the law written on their hearts and in their minds do not rely on the bible.

A third red herring.

My heart tells me abortion is wrong. My heart also tells me initiating violence against another person is wrong. My mind tells me I am not wise enough to judge.

Good for you. Ron Paul would agree, he simply thinks that a fetus is also a person.

Distort did I?

You did worse than distort. You are relying on someone else who distorted what Ron Paul said.

Your "quote" was from the LA Times blogger and not Ron Paul. What the blogger said:

Ron Paul, the conservative congressman from Texas known for his small-government beliefs rooted in Libertarianism, told an audience Monday in Iowa that government should dictate what happens in the womb of pregnant women.

and what Ron Paul said:

"Liberty comes from our creator, not from government. Therefore, the purpose, if there is to be a purpose, for government is to protect life and liberty."

A government having a role in protecting life is not the same as the government having the right to "dictate" what happens inside the womb. Does the government have a right to "dictate" what happens in my home? Now. But if I decide to kill my children and cook them for supper I can be held accountable for that.

 

[erowe1]

To what purpose, "shore up conservatives during the primary" if it will cost him the General?

Why do you keep saying this? First of all, he can't even be in the general election unless he first wins the primary. Second of all, voters in the general election lean at least as much to the pro-life side as they do to the pro-choice side.

 

[cheapseats]

Just like Ronald Regan lost the general elect.....oh wait a minute....Regan won on a pro life platform! Really, if Ron won the primary, and lost the general election over abortion, then this country deserves the financial ruin that's coming.

Ronald Reagan was first, I would say foremost, AN ACTOR. Are you suggesting that Ron Paul can WORK A ROOM like Reagan?

If he wins the primary over Abortion, y'all DESERVE to lose the General over the same red herring. And you will.

 

[Krugerrand]

To what purpose, "shore up conservatives during the primary" if it will cost him the General?

To what purpose, pander to those who already AGREE with them? What, if he DOESN'T pander to hypocritical Abortion Hysterics, they'll vote Democrat?

George W won over a good number of pro-life Democrats. I would bet there are more pro-life Democrats that will vote for a pro-life Republican than there are pro-abortion Republicans that will vote for a pro-abortion Democrat.

 

[erowe1]

If he wins the primary over Abortion, y'all DESERVE to lose the General over the same red herring. And you will.

Do you have any basis for this assertion? You just keep repeating it. Did you hear someone on MTV say it or something?

 

[jmdrake]

To what purpose, "shore up conservatives during the primary" if it will cost him the General?

1) If you don't make it past the primary you won't make it to the general.
2) I've already given you examples of people who were pro life in the primary and won the general, so you are being disingenuous.
3) His position on abortion is already public record so it's silly to try to hide that now.

To what purpose, pander to those who already AGREE with them? What, if he DOESN'T pander to hypocritical Abortion Hysterics, they'll vote Democrat?

They could stay home and not vote or vote third party. But again if you don't make it passed the primary you don't get to the general. Really, I will let you have the last word. You are just being obtuse and wasting everyone's time with this ridiculous argument.

 

[jmdrake]

Ronald Reagan was first, I would say foremost, AN ACTOR. Are you suggesting that Ron Paul can WORK A ROOM like Reagan?

If he wins the primary over Abortion, y'all DESERVE to lose the General over the same red herring. And you will.

I see. You care more about your pro abortion position than you do about anything else. Thanks for clearing that up. Gary Johnson may be a better candidate for you.

 

[cheapseats]

George W won over a good number of pro-life Democrats. I would bet there are more pro-life Democrats that will vote for a pro-life Republican than there are pro-abortion Republicans that will vote for a pro-abortion Democrat.

PRO-ABORTION, nice try.

Do you imagine that, if abortion is as laissez faire as FUCKING AROUND, women everywhere will rush right out to have one? Me first!! No, ME first!! That women have been chomping at the bit, just WAITING for it to be legal so they can have as many as possible, like SHOES?

George Bush WON, did he? No hanging chad, Diebold deviousness, or other voting irregularities?

 

[cheapseats]

I see. You care more about your pro abortion position than you do about anything else. Thanks for clearing that up. Gary Johnson may be a better candidate for you.

PRO-ABORTION, fiddle dee dee.

You are a HYSTERIC and, unless you are in the front lines of the anti-war moovement that Ron Paulers ABANDONED as soon as they spied a larger slice of the political pie, you are a HYPOCRITE.

 

[jmdrake]

PRO-ABORTION, fiddle dee dee.

Yep. Oh I know you'd rather call yourself "pro choice" just like someone who supported slavery would might have called himself "pro choice". "I don't want to force all southerners to own slaves. I just want them to have the 'choice'".

You are a HYSTERIC and, unless you are in the front lines of the anti-war moovement that Ron Paulers ABANDONED as soon as they spied a larger slice of the political pie, you are a HYPOCRITE.

I'm sure I've done more to fight against these wars than you have hypocrite.

By the way, are you now admitting that you are not a "Ron Pauler"? If that's the case, then what are you doing here besides trolling?

 

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

He did not say that. He said that the scriptures testify of Him. The Bible doesn't save you, but it does point you to the He who saves you. Also now you are using a red herring as this philosophical point has nothing to do with the discussion.

Another red herring.

A third red herring.

Good for you. Ron Paul would agree, he simply thinks that a fetus is also a person.

Now get real with the crapola. Faith != logic
Don't bring a red herring to a discussion about faith.

You did worse than distort. You are relying on someone else who distorted what Ron Paul said.

Your "quote" was from the LA Times blogger and not Ron Paul. What the blogger said:

so let me get this straight. I did not create this thread pushing this agenda of division. I did not create the thread the other day that mirrored this thread pushing the agenda of division on the same exact points I am making in this one....

yet you are going to pounce on me?

how about you direct that criticism where it belongs...

Ron Paul, the conservative congressman from Texas known for his small-government beliefs rooted in Libertarianism, told an audience Monday in Iowa that government should dictate what happens in the womb of pregnant women.

1. Set the article straight so I don't feel like arguing my position to counter the violent right.

or...

and what Ron Paul said:

"Liberty comes from our creator, not from government. Therefore, the purpose, if there is to be a purpose, for government is to protect life and liberty."

A government having a role in protecting life is not the same as the government having the right to "dictate" what happens inside the womb. Does the government have a right to "dictate" what happens in my home? Now. But if I decide to kill my children and cook them for supper I can be held accountable for that.

2. Explain how "protect life" means a non-believer would be able to have an abortion and not have violence initiated against them from the violent right.

I have read Ron Paul's legislation. I flat out disagree with Ron Paul on this point. And if Ron Paul is going to play the "faith" card you can damn sure bet I am going to talk all day long about the gun in the room. I make no exception for the gun in the room... not even a Ron Paul I admire."

If the role of government is protector vote Saul instead of Paul. At least Saul crushed his enemies before just marching home.

 

[specsaregood]

George Bush WON, did he? No hanging chad, Diebold deviousness, or other voting irregularities?

Actually he did. A number of newspapers in FL recounted the ballots themselves after it was all decided and Bush had more votes in FL. One of the main reasons was that the cuban american community came out for Bush by about 90%. It was pay back because of the whole elian gonzales ordeal that happened under Clinton's watch.

 

[cheapseats]

George W won over a good number of pro-life Democrats. I would bet there are more pro-life Democrats that will vote for a pro-life Republican than there are pro-abortion Republicans that will vote for a pro-abortion Democrat.

Are you seriously prepared to make that bet, that there are more anti-choice Democrats who will vote Republican than there are pro-choice Republicans who will vote Democrat?

Are y'all seriously up for GAMBLING on unseating Obama?

EVERY SINGLE DAY, there are more Beneficiaries. Beneficiaries do not bite the hand that benefits them.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

That was a 'family focus' event. In southern Bible belt states, I would say he likely will; shouldn't he?

Yeah, he was catering his message to his audience, nothing wrong with that. That audience was very interested in the subject, so he addressed it and gave his honest opinion.

In the bigger picture, abortion is nothing but a red herring to distract from issues that effect us all. It couldn't be more obvious than when two nearly identical budget proposals come down to a staged "battle" over abortion...

 

[cheapseats]

Actually he did. A number of newspapers in FL recounted the ballots themselves after it was all decided and Bush had more votes in FL. One of the main reasons was that the cuban american community came out for Bush by about 90%. It was pay back because of the whole elian gonzales ordeal that happened under Clinton's watch.

Do you believe the American voting apparatus - method and hardware - are inviolably tamper-proof?

Are people seriously harkening back to Ronald Reagan AND GEORGE BUSH to assure themselves that ANTI-CHOICE FOR WOMEN is electable at THIS crossroads?

This "election season," Ronald Reagan's name is likelier to be bantered around in connection with SLEEPING AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS than with Sanctity of Life.

 

[Krugerrand]

Are you seriously prepared to make that bet, that there are more anti-choice Democrats who will vote Republican than there are pro-choice Republicans who will vote Democrat?

Are y'all seriously up for GAMBLING on unseating Obama?

EVERY SINGLE DAY, there are more Beneficiaries. Beneficiaries do not bite the hand that benefits them.

Sadly, I'm not sure how it could be proven ... but yes, I'll make the bed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrats_for_Life_of_America
Democrats for Life of America
In 2003, the group was denied permission to put a link on the Democratic National Committee's website. That same year pollster John Zogby found that 43% of Democrats "agreed with the statement that abortion 'destroys a human life and is manslaughter.'"[10]

These were, in many cases, the same voters that liked when Bush said we should be nation building and should not be the world's police. McCain couldn't carry them since his pro-life positions were not as well established and he was so obviously pro-war.

How does the the beneficiary talk fit in?

 

[specsaregood]

Do you believe the American voting apparatus - method and hardware - are inviolably tamper-proof?

No, but they had paper ballots, not electronic. And I do believe that FL has a huge cuban population and they were really pissed at Clinton and Reno and took it out on Gore at the ballot booth.

 

[Krugerrand]

2. Explain how "protect life" means a non-believer would be able to have an abortion and not have violence initiated against them from the violent right.

You're framing that as if the attempt to kill the child is not an act of violence. Defense against an act of violence is not "initiated" violence.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Now get real with the crapola. Faith != logic
Don't bring a red herring to a discussion about faith.



so let me get this straight. I did not create this thread pushing this agenda of division. I did not create the thread the other day that mirrored this thread pushing the agenda of division on the same exact points I am making in this one....

yet you are going to pounce on me?

how about you direct that criticism where it belongs...

1. Set the article straight so I don't feel like arguing my position to counter the violent right.

or...



2. Explain how "protect life" means a non-believer would be able to have an abortion and not have violence initiated against them from the violent right.

I have read Ron Paul's legislation. I flat out disagree with Ron Paul on this point. And if Ron Paul is going to play the "faith" card you can damn sure bet I am going to talk all day long about the gun in the room. I make no exception for the gun in the room... not even a Ron Paul I admire."

If the role of government is protector vote Saul instead of Paul. At least Saul crushed his enemies before just marching home.

You advocate the violent aggression against people who haven't been born yet. That is really the most eggregious and tyrannical you can get...to declare that a certain group of people should not be protected by law.

In practice, of course, your tyranny is thankfully not recognized in our law. Unborn people have inheritance rights, they are protected from doctor neglect and anyone else who does them harm.

Our law is nowhere NEAR the tyranny you want, thank God. We only have a little way to go to make it consistent.

 

[Krugerrand]

No, but they had paper ballots, not electronic. And I do believe that FL has a huge cuban population and they were really pissed at Clinton and Reno and took it out on Gore at the ballot booth.

My apologies for my de-railing thoughts ... but I wonder if Clinton regrets that whole Gonzales thing. It clearly was a Florida game changer.