Ron Paul on gay marriage

[ladyinred]

http://www.towleroad.com/2007/12/2020-ron-paul-o.html

[dsdrane]

I caught this, too, Lady.

As Paul hails from the more libertarian side of the Republican Party (most of whom have been underground since the ascendency of the wingnut wing of the Republican Party...paging Mr. Huckabee!), I wasn't especially shocked by what he had to say on the matter...mostly I was shocked by the reminder that there are Republicans out there like him.

Beside my parents.

Shame he doesn't have a snowball's chance...but, for all that's holy, where are others of his ilk!?!?

[BrianB]

There are a group of people, including myself, in Dayton supporting Ron Paul. The ideas of less government and people having more liberty appeals to me.

[Daniel]

Always good to hear a conservative come down on the side of real justice. That said, historically speaking, Mr. Paul has things turned around. Yes- there was a time when the 'Church' set the agenda in terms of marriage. But there was also a time before that (the dawn of marriage as we understand it) when state- not the church- was in on the matter. Religion, as it were, honed in for it's own reasons, none the least of which was health reasons.

What people understand to be 'true' is not always true!

That said: David is right. We are the Goldwater Rupublicans?

[ladyinred]

I was actually surprised because I had read elsewhere where he wasn't too keen on gay marriage, but then again you can't always believe what you read.

[Progo35]

I'm hoping that the more people can't tired of all this division, the more we will see people from both parties with more tolerant, moderate aims. I like Ron Paul, too, although I doubt that he'll get the nomination.

[pnggrad79]

RP makes a lot of sense. This country legislates out of fear more than it does the letter of the law. The law says that a citizen of the United States has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Now while that is broad I don't think it leaves much room for people to question what it says-it is pretty blunt and straightforward.

About prostitution and drug use. Didn't we learn this lesson with Prohibition? I think we didn't. While I personally don't think drinking and drug use and prostitution are healthy choices and good for me, I think Paul is right when he says, it needs to be an individual choice. If people want to ruin their lives, it should be their choice. He is right when he says when government starts legislating morality, it causes more harm than good, and virtually impossible to do. Decriminalizing prostitution and drug use I think would reduce it based on a very simplistic principle-tell me not to do something and I am going to want to do it. Say its ok, and suddenly it isn't all that attractive to me.

Fear rules too much of this society. And much of it comes from church. Why is that? God does not send a spirit of fear. He is grace, mercy, love and forgiveness. Love casts out fear. Why hasn't the church grabbed that vital Christian principle?

[Progo35]

Yes, but then again, prostitution has never been legal in the US, whereas Prohibition was an experiment after everyone had been legally drinking for years. Drugs were outlawed because of people overdosing on opiates and stimulants, and drug related deaths have drastically decreased. I didn't know that RP supports legalizing those things.

[astarte_literati]

Originally Posted by Progo35

Yes, but then again, prostitution has never been legal in the US, whereas Prohibition was an experiment after everyone had been legally drinking for years. Drugs were outlawed because of people overdosing on opiates and stimulants, and drug related deaths have drastically decreased. I didn't know that RP supports legalizing those things.

Please. Drugs were legalized because of racism: that is a simple fact. The first drug laws DID NOT APPLY TO WHITE PEOPLE. Even today, drug laws are inherantly racist and classist; the huge disparities between sentences for cocaine and crack posession speak to that. Do some research on the subject; it's a fascinating study in bigotry and misplaced governmental paternalism.

Oh, and drug related deaths decreasing? You obviously aren't examining the collateral damage of the so-called "war on drugs"--the lower stratas of society have been DEVASTATED by the illegal trade in narcotics. Look at the statistics: for every one Black man in college there are four in prison, usually on drug-related charges. Meth labs explode; gangs shoot big holes in innocent bystanders; the government devastates the South American agricultural economy by blanket-bombing fields with herbicide to kill what may be pot or caocao but may also be subsistance crops. The damage done by the failed "war on drugs" claims more and more lives every year, not as a result of the drugs themselves, BUT AS A RESULT OF THEM BEING ILLEGAL. The "war on drugs" kills more people than drugs do.

[keltic63]

Prostitution is legal in Nevada. Due to a technicality, it is also legal in Rhode Island: solicitation can not take place on the street, but there are no laws prohibiting solicitation behind closed doors, in places such as spas, massage parlors, even bars.

[inca nitta]

You know,

I really like this guy. Quite frankly, this is the first time I ever heard that a Republican presidential candidate would support gay marriage.

[ladyinred]

Inca Nitta, he seems to know more about the constitution than many politicians. One of my primary concerns is as Americans we are losing more and more of our freedoms and govt is becoming more and more abusive (Tyrannical) and intrusive into our personal lives and affairs. I'm personally not against religion but I still believe in the separation of church and state, meaning I do not want a state sponsered religion or a theocracy.

People in society are diverse on religious matters as well, there is no one size fits all as we see in the different denominations and even the churches that are nondenominational and of course all other religions and people of no faith.. You will not have a public consensus on a "one size fits all" religion. It won't work and can't work and will never become a reality(You can't impose on others what they should believe without generating resentment anyway). As far as a theocracy , we need look at countries like Saudi Arabi or Iran right now for that matter to see what would evolve fom that. A Iranian woman who is here in the states , said she was thrown in jail in Iran just for asking,"Why do we have to wear the chador?" That's scary stuff.

And do we really want the illusion of so-called security at the price of our liberties and constitutional rights? How much fear do people living in such countries that have none have? One wrong move and one word out of their mouth that offends their govt , off to prisons they go either to be tortured or killed. I personally feel much more secure in a country where our liberties and constitutional rights are safe-guarded and upheld. Perhaps as American people we need to set better boundaries and "limits" with our own government.

Here is another shocker , I read where the average American gives close to half of their income to the government, People pay not only income tax, but many times state, also sales, and property taxes and other taxes,(someone here who is good a math could probably give us a round about figure) so we have to add those together to get the combined taxes we pay. In Countries like Sweden, they pay taxes, but they also reap benefits like mothers who are pregnant up to two years paid leave, and their child care when returning to work is paid for.

Don't Americans have the right to say how their tax dollars are spent?

Also what would our founding fathers think of Americans who give up their liberties for security, they would be rolling over in their graves:"Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
More quotes by founding fathers:
“The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing.”
John Adams
“When a long train of abuses and usurpations …evinces a design to reduce the people under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”
Thomas Jefferson
The words quoted by Thomas Jefferson above are also written in the declaration of independence:...IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

Now I'm not advocating or promoting the idea of violence or a bloody revolution as a means to deal with the government,(And I hope and pray we never have to come to that,hopefully nonviolent resistence will make an impact and is ideally better for all concerned, and I personally don't like the idea of more violence to solve problems) but American people need to be adament that they will not tolerate abuses of their constitutional rights and speak up and protest these abuses, the more people stand up and speak out , the more the government will be forced to listen to our concerns.They have a duty and obligation by oath to uphold and defend the constitution and we need to call them on it and make them accountable and to stand up for the American people.

Dissent and disagreement and debate are not crimes or treason according to our founding fathers or the constitution especially when our rights are being violated and government has become what many consider despotic and tyrannical. We already see what censorship of free speech does. As I'd written earlier even those in position of government like our intelligence have been censored from telling the American people the truth about their findings on Iraq and weapons of mass destruction.Their findings were suppressed. They were basically told to " lie" to support the war.(Were they less patriotic for wanting to tell the truth then?) If they weren't allowed to tell the truth, what can we expect from this current adminstration then? More of the same? Are they really truly representing us?

As I write this I personally do not see myself as a radical, but some things are based on common sense and reasoning .Tyranny is blind to it. Common sense says we have legitmate concerns when government arbitrarily tries to rule over our lives and then tries to censor what we honestly think and believe and then tries to tell us we are wrong for expressing these concerns. And we all are concerned with the security of our nation , but when is it security to take away the fundamental rights of Americans who are law abiding citizens and making them pay for the crime and tragedy of 9/11?
And who is the government to define patriotism for us , our founding fathers did not see blind obedience (submission)to government as patriotism:http://www.daveblackonline.com/true_patriotism.htm What do we need ,the thought police?

Treason defined by the constitution is aiding and abetting the enemy or helping them levy a war against the U.S.(For example supporting and helping Al Qaieda to commit terrorist acts against our nation,or supporting or encouraging another nation to go to war with ours,of course anyone could twist and distort the meaning of words to suit their agenda I guess.)
Very few Americans would fit this profile or even do these things. I certainly wouldn't do these things as I am sure the good people on this forum would never do them either.