Ron Paul's consistent anti-war position has made him popular, but how many people also understand his rejection of secularism and church/state separation? How many realize that his "states' rights" rhetoric is a mask concealing a desire to use the government to promote "traditional marriage" and criminalize abortion? Ron Paul is only a "libertarian" where and when it's convenient. Much of the rest of the time, he's not merely a social conservative but a religious conservative promoting an agenda very close to that of Christian Nationalists.Let's see how long it takes for the Libertarian Truth Squad to arrive & post something about our lack of understanding of "freedom," etc.
Tip of the Just Another Blog™ chapeau to Apostropher (The Crux of the Biscuit is the Apostrophe).
1 comment:
Umm the first amendment says
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. "
What part of "NO law" do you not understand. How is a law that prevents prayer in school ( voluntary prayer by the way ) not "prohibiting the free exersize thereof [of religion]". Ron Paul also believe that schools shouldnt be able to force students to pray in school and has introduced laws stating this. This seems consistent with the first admendment.
and the tenth says
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people."
I just looked everywhere in the constitution for anything about marriage or abortion. I couldnt seem to find anything. You must be taking the position that the constitution is a "living document" that to change laws we dont need to actually write new laws but just properly interpret the ones we have allready.
I am an atheist by the way and I support Ron Paul. This is because I believe in the rule of law and original interpretation.
Post a Comment