Abortion isn't the only thing Paul has said this on. Paul has made statements in the Heller case that the Feds have no authority to protect your 2nd Amendment rights from State regulation and he said it in the Kelo decision where he believes State governments can confiscate your property without due process of law.
In Paul's world, you might as well throw out the Constitution.
Agreed, but for example, many so-called conservative groups - including nominally "right to life" groups - weasel out of supporting strong pro-life measures at state level via a line of total bull that goes "oh, we are for a national [only] strategy" and nothing gets done.
I'm for a tiered approach:
Turn things like abortion back to the states and go for things like a national pro-life amendment.
So basically, have it at state level while working to get it at Constitutional level.
I'm fine in principle - with massive distrust of Congress - with a few negative laws on social issues like "no state can recognize or compel anyone to recognize same sex unions of any kind".
With all due respect, I have to ask you the same question I asked Diggity. I understand your argument that life is constitutionally protected, but how do you, too, intend to change what exists? Overturning Roe v. Wade would not ban abortion in every state. I seriously doubt you’d get the Supreme Court to ever rule that life begins at conception and must be protected as such throughout the nation. I also doubt you’d ever get enough states to sign onto a constitutional amendment to ban abortion nationwide. Saying you want something isn’t the same thing as making it happen. Personally? I’d consider the overturning of Roe v. Wade, returning abortion decisions to the states, to be a wonderful victory.