Where does Baldwin stand on freedom of religion?

[MMolloy]

In his own words:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkZB8SlPnTE

 

[robert4rp08]

nevermind

 

[familydog]

In his own words:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkZB8SlPnTE

Is that Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin talking? They both sound the same...

 

[Kade]

Someone simplify this all for me...

 

[Kade]

Where does Chuck Baldwin stand on these issues:

Right to privacy.
Drugs.
Gambling.
Pornography.
Abortion.
Death Penalty.
Federal Technology Funding.


Others if answered.

 

[zeke105]

Where does Chuck Baldwin stand on these issues:

Right to privacy.
Drugs.
Gambling.
Pornography.
Abortion.
Death Penalty.
Federal Technology Funding.


Others if answered.

I would love to know this stuff as well. His website is very lacking. Although, it does cover the abortion issue somewhat. I would like to know more specifically where he stands on abortion. I hope he says it's a state issue like Paul.

"Pro-life is not a campaign slogan for me. As President, I will immediately work with Congress to pass the Sanctity of Life Act which would strip the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in all cases involving the life of an unborn child. When that happens the unborn child would once again be declared a person under the law and cannot be harmed without due process of law. Appointing Pro-life Supreme Court Justices will no longer give the Republicans a phony rallying cry and the evil deeds of the U.S. Supreme Court on January 22, 1973 will be set aside."

 

[Freedom 4 all]

Where does Chuck Baldwin stand on these issues:

Right to privacy.
Drugs.
Gambling.
Pornography.
Abortion.
Death Penalty.
Federal Technology Funding.


Others if answered.

I have no idea, but judging by his stance as a hardcore fundamentalist, I'm guessing:

Right to privacy. NO
Drugs. NO
Gambling. NO
Pornography. NO
Abortion. NO
Death Penalty. YES, PROBABLY EVEN FOR DRUGS, GAMBLING, PORNOGRAPHY AND ABORTION
Federal Technology Funding. NO

It frankly beats the hell out of me why he's even considered a pro-liberty candidate

 

[LibertyEagle]

I'll bet you that you are absolutely WRONG about right to privacy. That's like a conservative tenet. Federal funding of Technology? Probably not. Perhaps you could show me in the Constitution, where the federal government is given the authority to use our tax dollars to fund technology. Thanks.

The rest of them? Don't know. As long as his stance is to return the decisions to the states, that sounds to me to be very aligned with Ron Paul's stance.

 

[H Roark]

I have no idea, but judging by his stance as a hardcore fundamentalist, I'm guessing:

Right to privacy. NO
Drugs. NO
Gambling. NO
Pornography. NO
Abortion. NO
Death Penalty. YES, PROBABLY EVEN FOR DRUGS, GAMBLING, PORNOGRAPHY AND ABORTION
Federal Technology Funding.

It frankly beats the hell out of me why he's even considered a pro-liberty candidate

FAIL

You will see that throughout the CP platform the 10th amendment is frequently referenced (even in dealing with drugs and gambling)

The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Right to privacy. YES
Drugs. YES
Gambling. YES
Pornography. NO
Abortion. NO
Death Penalty. ???
Federal Technology Funding. <--- Why is this even here? Most likely, NO

 

[Kade]

Federal funding of Technology? Probably not. Perhaps you could show me in the Constitution, where the federal government is given the authority to use our tax dollars to fund technology. Thanks.

This is all about our fun little game of interpretation. Show me where it says the Federal Government should not promote technology or progress...

 

[Hiki]

FAIL

You will see that throughout the CP platform the 10th amendment is frequently referenced (even in dealing with drugs and gambling)



Right to privacy. YES
Drugs. YES
Gambling. YES
Pornography. NO
Abortion. NO
Death Penalty. ???
Federal Technology Funding. <--- Why is this even here? Most likely, NO

Why the hell is that?

 

[familydog]

Where does Chuck Baldwin stand on these issues:

Right to privacy.
Drugs.
Gambling.
Pornography.
Abortion.
Death Penalty.
Federal Technology Funding.


Others if answered.

He is against any federal involvement in drugs, gambling, porn, abortion, death penalty, and funding technology. He has stated this numerous times. Since he is running for president and not governor, what he feels at the state level is irrelevent.

"Right to privacy" is incredibly vague. You'd have to be more specific in what you want to hear.

 

[brandon]

This is all about our fun little game of interpretation. Show me where it says the Federal Government should not promote technology or progress...

enumerated powers, etc

 

[Kade]

enumerated powers, etc

The Constitution gives authority to promote progress in science and the arts specifically, it species patents, but nevertheless the intent is obvious.

 

[brandon]

The Constitution gives authority to promote progress in science and the arts specifically, it species patents, but nevertheless the intent is obvious.

Wow, nice bait and switch Kade.

You originally were talking about Federal Funding of technology. Then you referred to Federal Funding as "promoting." Now you are trying to imply that all you meant by "promoting" was issuing patents. Sorry, try again.

 

[familydog]

//

 

[MMolloy]

I try and provide information and everyone is so ready to attack or pick sides.

Although I like Chuck I'm not blindly supporting anyone. I was at a meeting in PA where he was speaking and answering questions and the question of Iraq was brought up... he sounded almost identical to Ron except he was praising our troops more and saying one of Bush's problems was that he didn't have an exit strategy.

So after getting into his exit strategy for a while, I asked the following question:
Can you guarantee that we will be out of Iraq by the end of your 1st term? and he replied that he couldn't put an exact date on the withdraw at this time.

While I can understand being a little vague, given you don't have all the intellegence you might like at the current time... I still don't like not committing to withdraw before the 1st term is over, it doesn't sit well with me.

Pass over this attempt at dialogue and let the attacks recommence!

 

[LibertyEagle]

This is all about our fun little game of interpretation. Show me where it says the Federal Government should not promote technology or progress...

The Constitution does not list all the things the government cannot do. Rather, the Founders listed the things that the federal government COULD be involved in (enumerated powers). I don't see anything in there about funding technology with our tax dollars.