Rand Paul speaks at Duke University - 11/9/18

[jct74]

[MEDIA=youtube]PpG2gHQ60yE[/MEDIA]


What should we expect from Congress between January and the presidential election in 2020, now that Democrats have won back the House?

Not much, according to one U.S. senator.

“I think very little will happen,” said U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky who spoke Friday at the Sanford School. “I think Democrats will bring forth initiatives in the House and they will die in the Senate.”

Paul, who earned his medical degree from Duke in 1988 and has a son who’s a sophomore here, also talked about how his fellow Republicans can work more productively with Democrats.

For one, Paul, a Libertarian-leaning Republican, said he favors a form of compromise that’s not defined based on your party.

Paul said he agrees with liberals on a number of issues, including: war (“I’m as anti-war as you can get”); relaxed criminalization for drug offenses (“There is a racial disparity in drug policy and we should do something about it”); less government eavesdropping on Americans in the name of fighting terrorism; and not allowing a U.S. citizen to be held indefinitely as an enemy combatant without a trial.

“As a Libertarian I can talk with the far left about war, drug policy … not about guns and taxes,” he said to laughter.

Most of the compromising in Washington involves too much shared back-scratching: the left gets its welfare spending so the right can get its military spending, he said.

He believes the main role of government is to protect liberty, not provide broadband in rural areas, for instance. “Private enterprise will take care of that,” Paul said. “I think we should really self-examine what government is.”

...[/QUOTE]

read more:
[url]https://today.duke.edu/2018/11/rand-paul-how-libertarian-philosophy-can-connect-divided-partisans[/url]

 

[ProBlue33]

His answer on abortion was interesting his point on libertarians being divided on the issue, is spot on.

I side with both Ron and Rand perspective on this.

Anybody on this forum think that a woman 6 months pregnant that just broke up with the father of her baby, and now wants to terminate because well she just doesn't want his baby anymore, should have the liberty to do that ?

 

[Swordsmyth]

His answer on abortion was interesting his point on libertarians being divided on the issue, is spot on.

I side with both Ron and Rand perspective on this.

Anybody on this forum think that a woman 6 months pregnant that just broke up with the father of her baby, and now wants to terminate because well she just doesn't want his baby anymore, should have the liberty to do that ?

Nobody should have the "liberty" to take a human life.

It is however a state matter as is any murder.

 

[ProBlue33]

Nobody should have the "liberty" to take a human life.

It is however a state matter as is any murder.

True, so you have the Democratic State of California rule that it is not taking a life in this particular scenario and that it is still the women's full choice to do that.
Do Libertarians in California say to bad so sad, nothing we can do. Or as Rand related are there are some theologies were you can't have a compromise, as he mentioned on slavery.
Look how long it took for the early Americans to get there.....about a century, and it was suppose to be a beacon of freedom for all.

My honest opinion is that in maybe 100 years into the future, abortion will be viewed then, as slavery is viewed today. And it will be women who decide that protecting the unborn is more important than their generalized right to choose, but it's going to take time, just like it took a century to reverse slavery and even then the negative culture continued much longer.

It is the last phase of human rights, protecting the unwanted unborn, again women will have to champion that cause even as those in the 60's & 70's championed the right to abort the unwanted unborn.

 

[Swordsmyth]

True, so you have the Democratic State of California rule that it is not taking a life in this particular scenario and that it is still the women's full choice to do that.
Do Libertarians in California say to bad so sad, nothing we can do. Or as Rand related are there are some theologies were you can't have a compromise, as he mentioned on slavery.
Look how long it took for the early Americans to get there.....about a century, and it was suppose to be a beacon of freedom for all.

My honest opinion is that in maybe 100 years into the future, abortion will be viewed then, as slavery is viewed today. And it will be women who decide that protecting the unborn is more important than their generalized right to choose, but it's going to take time, just like it took a century to reverse slavery and even then the negative culture continued much longer.

It is the last phase of human rights, protecting the unwanted unborn, again women will have to champion that cause even as those in the 60's & 70's championed the right to abort the unwanted unborn.

There are issues that are so abhorrent that they mustn't be tolerated, the Constitution should have included a hard date for the end of slavery in addition to granting the federal government power to ban the importation of slaves after 1808, that would have either encouraged the south to prepare for an end to it or caused them to remain separate in the first place, if they chose to stay separate then if the native abolitionists failed to achieve a political end to slavery they would have had to either keep trying, revolt or emigrate, personally I believe that slavery would have ended one way or another but bad as it was a foreign country would have had no more business starting a war with the south over it than we had toppling Sadam.

The question of abortion would require either a Constitutional amendment or the expulsion of California from the union, if the latter happened then the resident libertarians would have the same options I laid out for abolitionists in an independent south.