Skip to comments.AMERICAN RIGHT TO LIFE REJECTS RON PAUL'S PLEDGE
Posted on 12/29/2011 8:10:29 PM PST by mnehring
American Right To Life calls it politics as usual when Ron Paul tried to mislead pro-life voters by signing a pledge that he actually rejects. Just in time for the 2012 Iowa caucuses Paul pledged that he will "endorse legislation to make clear that the 14th Amendment protections apply to unborn children." But then he contradicted his pledge by stating, "I can't agree that the Fourteenth Amendment has a role to play here."
"Shockingly, Ron Paul agrees with the central finding of Roe v. Wade itself," says Darrell Birkey, director of research for American Right To Life, "that the constitutional protection of human rights does not apply to unborn children." And Birkey adds, "Ron Paul as president would defend a fictitious right of states to legalize the murder of children, but any country that permits kids to be intentionally killed is not even civilized."
"Ron Paul is not who he claims to be," says Lolita Hanks, president of American RTL. "Paul is pro-choice, state-by-state. He believes states should be allowed to keep abortion, which is like allowing states to keep slavery." Thus as president, Paul would refuse to enforce the 14th amendment, which declares, "No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." (See more at AmericanRTL.org/constitution.)
"Today's pro-life movement is strong and growing, not weak and willing to accept whatever we can get," says Hanks. "We're not going to swoon because Ron Paul or any other candidate merely claims to be pro-life. Either Ron Paul will use governmental authority to stop the slaughter of children, or he is just another worthless politician." SOURCE American Right To Life
I’m sickoflibs too, but it seems that you’re straining at a gnat. At 32:30 into American Right To Life’s documentary, Focus on the Strategy 2, you can hear Notre Dame law professor Dr. Charles Rice, constitutional expert, make the same point, that the non-personhood of the child is the central finding of Roe v. Wade, that the baby is a “non-person.” The Roe decision itself admits that its own finding about “privacy” would be falsified if the “personhood” of the fetus were established. Thus Ron Paul agrees with the fundamental finding of Roe, that constitutional protection of the rights of persons do not apply to unborn children. It’s tragic.
The right to life is a fundamental federal issue. Not an area where Ron Paul, or anyone running for public office, should shrink from exercising authority. There is a rub, however, when it comes to practically exercising that authority, namely building enough prisons for all the baby killers and their proponents.
Would Ron Paul be in favor of federally funded abortions? No. Would he be in accord with legislation preventing people from exposing abortion for what it is? No. What is the track record - either by intent or effect - of other Republican Presidents when it comes to arresting baby killers?
Ron Paul’s core cult following hates the lip-service he plays to defending the unborn anyway. Never does it occur to these idiots that the little man is every bit as duplicitous and slimy as Mitt Romney.
Any serious pro-lifer who is even considering this lunatic needs to have their head examined.
They're taking advantage of all the guest hosts. Totally organized effort. Paul's really putting all that Putin moneybomb cash to effective use.
Already zotted. The Paulestinian Purge I’ve been anticipating for four years appears to be on. About time.
I don’t know about now, but I recall that Paul’s pro life voting record was not very good because he felt that states should set their own limits on abortion such as abortion funding, parental consent, taking underage girls across state lines for abortions, etc.
Rick is staunchly pro life and led the fight to ban partial birth abortion. However, he needs to return to Pennsylvania, run for office there and win. He should run against Casey Jr. again. Casey is a disgrace to his father’s name. He has no right to call himself pro life.
I’m acquainted with one Paultard. He’s 38 years old, has never voted in his life, smokes dope morning, noon and night and believes ‘the Joooos control everything”.
As to how these clowns think that Paul can win, I believe you give them undeserved credit. I think most of them lack the requisite equipment to think.
Per Dr. (states rights trump the right to life) Paul:
I don't see the value in setting up a federal police force on this issue any more than I do on other issues. The Fourteenth Amendment was never intended to cancel out the Tenth Amendment. This means that I cant agree that the Fourteenth Amendment has a role to play here, or otherwise we would end up with a "Federal Department of Abortion."
Talk about a confused position. (A personhood amendment would mean that abortions would be handled by existing homicide laws, not separate abortion laws...you big dummy...and the Fed's constitutional role would be to make sure that the states enforce their existing homicide laws...you big dummy)
Talk about a confused man. I swear, I don't even think he makes a good libertarian.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
Basically RPaul is totally nuts, contradicts himself all the time, makes no sense, and IMHO is duplicitous and a scam artist. And his cult followers aka Ronulans cannot think in a straight line for 10 feet.
[singing] littlesorrel, it’s been a zot-filled lonely winter...
This would be reason 986-A why I’d rather gouge out my own eyes than vote for whack job Ron Paul.....
That is blatantly false. He never said that, and he is pro-life.
Some pro-life conservatives support Paul because they are stupid. This is the same stupidity that infects pro-abortion catholics. There is not much that can be done when the stupid do not recognize their stupidity. All we can do is pray for them.
What a disgusting post. Anti-Paul shills have been swarming and spamming every thread even remotely connected to Paul, baying like hounds at the moon, 20, 30, 40 posts of absolute DU-level defamation before anyone can get a coherent word in edgewise.
The rabid hate porn against Paul on this site is an insult to everything Free Republic has stood for for all these years. FR was where people came to get clear discussion of issues - reasons WHY people were wrong, dissections of arguments to show flaws in logic, the power of rational thought over mob screaming.
But now it's all thrown in the toilet over Paul. And why? Because he wants to limit our military activities overseas. But not without a plan - in fact, even the shreiking shills stay far away from his discussion of economics, because he nails every single way the Leftist bastards have been tearing down the country.
The only thing he does is then suggest that if these internal economic factors were fixed, the country would become so economically strong that military efforts would largely become unnecessary because of the vast economic power we would then wield in the world.
People disagree with that presumption? Fine. THEN DISCUSS IT.
Even ROMNEY isn't slandered like Paul - instead, he's NAILED ON THE FACTS (flip-flopping, Romneycare, RINOville).
But this endless mobbing slander makes Free Republic look like DU, and it's sickening. AND IT WEAKENS CONSERVATIVES, because it makes it seem that there IS no way to defeat Paul on the facts. Any of you genius manipulators think of that? You're going way, way too far, and you look inept.
And then to claim the pack slanderers are victims? LOL, what utter hypocrisy! Where'd you get THAT tactic - Hillary?
Grow the hell up and start discussing things like adults.
Thank you for proving my point.
I gave up trying to have rational discussions with Paultards back in ‘07 when they were swarming and spamming this and other boards, and yapping insults like a bunch of deranged chihuahuas whenever anyone disagreed with them.
Now I just laugh at ‘em.