Skip to comments.Breaking: Pro-Life Rand Paul Wins by Landslide in Republican Primary in Kentucky
Posted on 05/18/2010 5:57:46 PM PDT by tcg
The Major news sources have all called the Republican Primary in Kentucky and Rand Paul, the son of Ron Paul, has soundly defeated Trey Grayson for the Republic Party nomination for a seat in the US Senate.
By the time the votes are all counted it could be a near landslide for the first time Senatorial candidate. Dr. Paul is a family man who has been married to his wife Kelley for 19 years. They have three sons. He is a doctor, and not a politician. That is part of the appeal he had for the voters of Kentucky.
There will be pundits parsing the meaning of this election all evening. They will discuss the meaning of this strong showing. Rand Paul certainly was not the preferred candidate of the Republican Party establishment. He had the backing of the broad coalition being called the "Tea Party" movement.
He has never run for public office. He all but eschewed the traditional fundraising model, opting instead to utilize the internet in the manner that his father used the internet in his outsider bid for the Presidency.
While the pundit class pontificates, those who recognize that the foundation of all human rights is the fundamental Right to life should take heart from Rand Paul's position in defense of the dignity of every human life from conception to natural death.
Here are his own words:
"I am 100% pro life. I believe abortion is taking the life of an innocent human being. I believe life begins at conception and it is the duty of our government to protect this life. I will always vote for any and all legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.org ...
A human fetus is alive. The Constitution needs to be Amended to protect a fetus as a Person.
That's how these things work.
Your repeated absurdities already lost you the debate. This is just a free-for-all at this point.
Absurdity case in point...
If I were an OB-GYM, I might be able to. I'm a Sys/Net Admin. I could probably puzzle it out if I saw the patient files, but I don't have access to any of that.
So your answer is "no," the same as the Roe Court.
What, like the words of the Fourteenth Amendment, the words that you and your idols the Pauls pretend aren't in the Constitution?
Nope, but I am not who is making the claim that he is 100% pro-life, am I?
Face it. You aren't really a Conservative are you. You don't give a piss about the Constitution.
That's kinda screwed up logic there...
And yet, you continue to pretend that the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments do not exist. You must be working from the Ron Paul Constitution. It seems to have those, among other important portions, excised out.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
"No person shall be ...deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Our founding documents speak for themselves.
And they make my case, not yours.
No, the screwed up logic is thinking I’d fall for that lame rhetoric.
Less than 1% of all abortions have anything to do with mothers health, rape, incest or such.
It’s lame to bill him as “100% pro-life” when he says there are exceptions.
I’ll bet you never even knew he supported exceptions, did you?
Paulies don’t get it. Once an amendment is passed and ratified, it IS part of the constitution, whether we agree with it or not.
No, they don’t. Mainly because they don’t want to.
Because of their loyalty to a man, and their commitment to a particular ideology, they can’t see what is as plain as the nose on their face...or, as the Founders put it: “self-evident.”
Push ‘em hard enough and many of them will in the last pass claim that the Fourteenth Amendment was not properly ratified, by the way. It’s something to see.
As if that would matter to anyone who believes in natural rights, in the core principles of America. The Right to Life of all persons was always God-given and therefore unalienable, with or without the Fourteenth Amendment. But they just don’t care about that.
I'm doing no such thing. That is just your fevered imagination.
You'd have them both die.
Then how can you miss the plain sense of the words?
I’m not. You are.
How? The Fourteenth Amendment clearly enjoins the protection of innocent human life and the equal protection of the laws on all the States. Even Judge Blackmun admitted such. How could he not? It’s so obvious even a child could understand it.