The Truth About Ron Paul - Part 2

Which topic can we pick next

• He’s Against Abortion and Would Like to See Roe vs. Wade Overturned

• He Would Abolish Federal Consumer Protection Groups Like The FDA

• He’s Not For Federally Supported Public Education

• He Doesn’t Believe in the Separation of Church and State

• He Doesn’t Believe The Evidence for Man-Made Global Warming Is Convincing

• Why the Phuck does he Phuck with Alex Jones

londonfog said:

He Doesn’t Believe in the Separation of Church and State

Click to expand...

Where did you get that from?

The more federal funding for education the more stupid the children become. Do we want a future that pans out to be exactly like Idiocracy?

[video=youtube;L0yQunhOaU0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0yQunhOaU0[/video]

Mr Neutron said:

Where did you get that from?

Click to expand...

WORDS OF RON PAUL

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders' political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government's hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people's allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation's Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.[/FONT]

December 30, 2003

Truth is he is going to be a good president.
I also agree with him that we should be an English Speaking Christian Nation.

londonfog said:

I guess you guys would also feel that it should be you right to wear a seat belt or to put your child in a car seat...

Click to expand...

For adults, yes. They should have the right to not wear a seat belt, they will suffer the consequences of their own actions as a result. For minors, no... they are not of the age or ability to make rationally sound decisions on their own, and their parent/guardian cannot/should not waive their children's right to life away by placing them in a dangerous situation.

My opinion on circumcision is fairly close to the same. A parent has no right to permanently mutilate their child, even for religious reasons. I can't believe I'm saying this, but San Francisco was right to want to ban this practice for minors.

NoDrama said:

The more federal funding for education the more stupid the children become. Do we want a future that pans out to be exactly like Idiocracy?

Click to expand...

I like money... brought to you by Carl's Jr.

I LIKE MONEY!! Water???? You mean.... like.... from the toilet???? hahahaha

londonfog said:

Which topic can we pick next

• He’s Against Abortion and Would Like to See Roe vs. Wade Overturned

• He Would Abolish Federal Consumer Protection Groups Like The FDA

• He’s Not For Federally Supported Public Education

• He Doesn’t Believe in the Separation of Church and State

• He Doesn’t Believe The Evidence for Man-Made Global Warming Is Convincing

• Why the Phuck does he Phuck with Alex Jones

Click to expand...

I don't know where he said he would like Roe VS Wade overturned but if he did i don't' agree with it but you can't ask anyone to be perfect, anyone else who has delivered 4000 plus babies into the world would probably lean towards being pro-life as well.

I'm with his idea on abolishing such shammy sections of the federal government such as the FDA and letting the private sector determine what's safe and not safe, that would make everything more efficient and help to eliminate corruption that goes down , such as the current laws which drugs that can kill to be sold over the counter and deeming legitimate alternatives to cancer treatment (gerson's diet) to go unseen because they don't make money unless they are charging dieing people 10's of thousands of dollars for treatment that more than likely won't even work! FDA is flawed fundamentally.


Federally supported public education is a FAILURE! I will tell you first hand that the more the fed gets involved in education the worst it gets, there used to be a time when kids where taught to be free thinkers and expand their views, there used to be a time which someone my age would work all summer and use that money to pay for college tuition,books, living expenses, dorms, and even the cost of owning a car over the school year. Now we are making teachers feed kinds information as fast as they can just to regurgitate it the coming Friday on a test only to have the kids forget what they "learned" within a weeks time. College costs are exponential to what they where in the 70's and early 80's, many students have to work 30 hour weeks year round to afford to be able to live and feed themselves while hardly even touching the tuition costs. That was all brought on once the Federal government tried to get involved in education. My word to them is fuck off! The only way federal government should helps kids is through the Pell grant by helping them afford the books and classes they made nearly unaffordable. And even then we wouldn't need that helps had the government left college and public schools alone.

Ron Paul doesn't believe in the government having full control, and that statement he made is an iffy on but I'm not going to determine anything to I find out more.
but
Global warming is a sham! Now there is no doubt that we as a race are affecting our environment adversely but it's simply an exaggerated red herring to the fact that earth has warm and cool cycles it goes through. If anything we need to focus on ridding our dependance on fossil fuels and harnessing the free energy available to us (wind, water, solar).

No matter what people think of alex jones the fact remains that he has been accurate nearly detail for detail on 98% of what he predicted would happen. The "bilderburg" group is real and is a problem, whether people want to acknowledge that or not is out of my reach but I can say the america is stuck in an military/medical/industrial complex and most of the people who are involved in those annual meetings are influential in one or another segment of the corporations than our country's government is sleeping with.

hazyintentions said:

I don't know where he said he would like Roe VS Wade overturned but if he did i don't' agree with it but you can't ask anyone to be perfect, anyone else who has delivered 4000 plus babies into the world would probably lean towards being pro-life as well.
.

Click to expand...

Why should the federal government defend the 'right' to end life?
Why should tax payers finance abortions?

beardo said:

Why should the federal government defend the 'right' to end life?
Why should tax payers finance abortions?

Click to expand...

You know I wasn't aware taxpayer dollars funded abortions, I was under the influence that women who wanted an abortion paid for it themselves..

But no matter my opinion I am very firm in that the federal government should have 0 say and it should be a states issue.

Ron Paul back in 1984 Defending Freedom

[video=youtube;G87jOx1VJ3o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G87jOx1VJ3o&feature=player_embedded#at=70[/video]

londonfog said:

tell you what you do..first go roll the biggest joint you can....smoke it and remember how you feel...do this for a week...then go shoot up some heroin for a week...when done post and tell us what you think...Now don't post before you do this for I really want to prove a point to you ...good luck

Click to expand...

I have gotten shots of dilaudid day in and day out for longer than that on multiple occasions. The first time, after the week and change of shots, they sent me home with some in pill form. I still had some of them a year later when I had my first major complications after the shots. Dilaudid is every bit as strong as heroin and most junkies like it more if not as much. What do I think? Shots of dilaudid are better than sex.

So, I guess your point was that YOU are afraid of what YOU might do if you tried it. I loved it. I am not afraid to admit it. I also very much enjoy bungie jumping and roller coasters. I even had a shot of adrenaline once(or a pharm version of it anway). It was fucking awesome too. Enjoying something and giving up your life for it are two different things. I enjoy it when my old lady picks my scabs, but I don't cut myself so I get scabs. If heroin and meth were legal would I go bang some? No, probably not.

So the end result is your point really was you think that the things you justify in your life are ok, but the things others justify in their lives isn't.

My point was you shouldn't expect that your morals and ability to deal with things are everyone else's too. It wasn't that I think everyone should go do heroin. It was that you are no different than the people who are policing our lives by making marijuana illegal in the entire country.

londonfog said:

Which topic can we pick next

• He’s Against Abortion and Would Like to See Roe vs. Wade Overturned

• He Would Abolish Federal Consumer Protection Groups Like The FDA

• He’s Not For Federally Supported Public Education

• He Doesn’t Believe in the Separation of Church and State

• He Doesn’t Believe The Evidence for Man-Made Global Warming Is Convincing

• Why the Phuck does he Phuck with Alex Jones

Click to expand...

1) He isn't against Roe Vs Wade because it legalized abortion. He is against it because it really wasn't the federal governments place.
2) FDA has banned raw milk. Doesn't that strike you as a pretty obscene abuse of power for a federal agency? Not to mention pointless and stupid.
3) Federally funded education doesn't seem to be doing a very good job. Maybe he is against it because once again - it isn't the federal governments place.
4) Ya know the whole 'separation of church and state' isn't in the constitution right? That is more of a concept. I am not a Christian. Having a religion forced down my throat is unacceptable. However, a majority of our country is Christian. I don't care if children pray in school, I don't mind them having the word God in the pledge, I understand the concept of God and what it means to the people around me. I have my God too. The entire separation issue was so we wouldn't have a national religion - not so we wouldn't have religion visible in our public live. Do you ever wonder why a group of men, who I am pretty sure were nearly entirely Christian would do this?
5)Anthropogenic global warming is not a proven fact. It is more of theory. We know global warming and cooling happen alternatively. While I agree that man has some influence on the earth, is it enough for a massive drastic change? Maybe or maybe not. We have spikes and drop offs all the time in temperatures since the Earth was born (I bet that was one loose bitch). We might hit an ice age in 50 years, no one knows for sure. Man might not even be the major cause of the .3 degree temperature increase we see. I mean, we did have a bigger drastic drop 400 years ago than we are having as an increase now.



6) Finally, I have no idea, he might as well have a furby talking conspiracy theories as a friend.

txpete77 said:

sync0s... you're dropping the context of his argument, and then using it against him. I think his opinion on this is wrong, but what you just did there was dishonest. I've seen your arguments in here and I didn't expect that from you...

Click to expand...

The post can be justified in any way you guys want. The bottom line, under any pretext what so ever, if you are for making something illegal on the basis of preventing further usage you should not advocate usage for any body else. I was making a valid point with that post, and there was no dishonesty in it at all. I would not try to argue against murder and than tell somebody to go commit murder so that they could understand why I am against it, that's just not me.

hazyintentions said:

You know I wasn't aware taxpayer dollars funded abortions, I was under the influence that women who wanted an abortion paid for it themselves..

But no matter my opinion I am very firm in that the federal government should have 0 say and it should be a states issue.

Click to expand...

The federal government doesn't fund abortion outright (well, most of them, medically necessary, rape incent ect are approved and paid for by federal funds)

I think the conversation is that planned parenthood is giving abortions cheaper because receives federal funding for everything else, and that means that the federal government is supporting PP's abortions indirectly. While I personally feel that if you are willing to abort your baby you will make a shitty parent anyway and cause the child to be another bad person, I believe people should have the ability to get an abortion. I do not want to fund the abortions though. If it is your personal right and decision to have an abortion then it should also be your personal responsibility. Abortion is something the fed government should neither be for or against.

Dr Ron Paul On FreedomWatch Yesterday on the Debt Ceiling...

Here are the doctors orders:

[video=youtube;B3X29g2pSug]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3X29g2pSug[/video]

BIAST FOX NEWS POLLSTER BTW BUT HERE YA GO:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters currently indicate that Obama's top two contenders are Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. The margin of sampling error for the surveys is +/- 3% with a 95% level of confidence. The following surveys were taken between June 24 thru July 17, 2011. Here are the results - note that the candidates are ranked by those who pose the strongest challenge to Obama. Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are currently the top two challengers.

Romney 43% - Obama 42% = 1 point lead for Romney
Obama 41% - Paul 37% = 4 point lead for Obama

Obama 44% - Guliani 39% = 5 point lead for Obama
Obama 44% - Perry 39% = 6 point lead for Obama
Obama 46% - Bachmann 39% = 7 point lead for Obama
Obama 44% - Christie 37% = 7 point lead for Obama
Obama 47% - Palin 38% = 9 point lead for Obama
Obama 44% - Pawlenty 32% = 12 point lead for Obama
Obama 45% - Santorum 31% = 14 point lead for Obama
Obama 44% - Huntsman 28% = 16 point lead for Obama
Obama 48% - Gingrich 30% = 18 point lead for Obama
Obama 49% - Cain 28% = 21 point lead for Obama

The poll, dated July 22, 2011, states "Congressman Ron Paul may be a long shot to win the Republican presidential nomination, but he runs competitively with President Obama right now."

Source: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/obama_41_ron_paul_37

A previous Rasmussen poll, dated April 14, 2010, placed Paul within 1 point of Obama: Barack Obama 42%, Ron Paul 41%

Source: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/election_2012_barack_obama_42_ron_paul_41

The fact that Ron Paul has proven himself as a top contender in two Rasmussen polls over a 15 month period is a clear indication that Paul is a top tier candidate for the GOP nomination in 2012. Please share!

Today Ron Paul Builds Steam in IOWA

[video=youtube;O_zQ1Q6eMcE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_zQ1Q6eMcE[/video]