Ron Paul for President 2012

OK. I'll state my case to prove your arrogance. I was on vactaion with my family in Hawaii so I couldn't reply to the debate. But if you don't mind and totally disclose this argument I would like to refute your falicies. You admitt that citizens do iresponcibly concieve children. Your argument on the abortion policy was that abortion is necessary to save a mothers life. You then quantify this by saying "Now not only is this unconstitutional as it gives the federal government the power to cross the line between governmental issues and our personal life, it also denies us the ability to make life saving decisions, thus completely destroying our already limited liberty. My argument: If your truly understand freedom and liberty you would understand that less government intervention is the ultimate solution to regaining our freedom. It is morally illegal to take away ones life without their consent. That is essentially murder. People are punished by law if convicted guilty. Abortion violates natural rights as a human being. If nothing else abortion should be left to the state whether abortion is legal/ illegal in their state. As Ron Paul said "Protecting the life of the unborn is protecting liberty. Liberty is the most important thing, because if we have our liberties, we have our freedoms, we can have our lives. But it's academic to talk about civil liberties if you don't talk about the true protection of all life. So if you're going to protect liberty, you have to protect the life of the unborn just as well. I have a bill in Congress which I would certainly promote and push as President. But its been ignored by the right-to-life community. My bill is called the Sanctity of Life bill. What it would do is it would establish the principle that life begins at conception. That's not a political statement, but a scientific statement that I'm making. We're all interested in a better court system, and amending the Constitution to protect life--but sometimes that is dismissing the way we can handle this much quicker. My bill removes the jurisdiction of the federal courts from the issue of abortion. If a state law says no abortion, it doesn't go to the Supreme Court to be ruled out of order."- Speeches to 2008 Conservative Political Action Conference , Feb 7, 2008. Ron Paul has been against abortion since the 60s when he witnessed it. He explains "In the 1960s when abortion was still illegal, I witnessed, as an OB/GYN resident, the abortion of a fetus that weighed approximately 2 pounds. It was placed in a bucket, crying and struggling to breathe, and the medical personnel pretended not to notice. Soon the crying stopped. This harrowing event forced me to think more seriously about this important issue. That same day in the OB suite, an early delivery occurred and the infant boy was only slightly larger than the one that was just aborted. But in this room everybody did everything conceivable to save this child's life. My conclusion that day was that we were overstepping the bounds of morality by picking and choosing who should live and who should die. There was no consistent moral basis to the value of life under these circumstances. Some people believe that being pro-choice is being on the side of freedom. I've never understood how killing a human being, albeit a small one in a special place, is portrayed as a precious right.-Liberty Defined, by Rep. Ron Paul, p. 1 , Apr 19, 2011 The Roe vs Wade is harmful to the constitution "The federal government should not play any role in the abortion issue, according to the Constitution. Apart from waiting forever for Supreme Court justices who rule in accordance with the Constitution, Americans do have some legislative recourse. Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to strip the federal courts of jurisdiction over a broad categories of cases. Source: The Revolution: A Manifesto, by Ron Paul, p. 60 , Apr 1, 2008 I was reading The Revolution by Ron Paul on the flight back to Seattle. I thought it was apropiate to state the federal involvment in abortion is unconstitutional since its a state issue.The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791.[1] The Tenth Amendment states the Constitution's principle of federalism by providing that powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution are reserved, respectively, to the states or the people.Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." When i asked this question:"Who became the judge and who has been granted the authority to take the life away?" is was using a sacratic method. You go on saying that Ron Paul's policy permitts "giving the federal government the power to decide the ultimate answer to this question." But frankly Ron Paul is abiding by the constitution like every president is obligated to do but never actually will fufill this promise. Ron Paul illustrates this by following the Tenth Amendment. If you believe that its ok to take life away without the others consent then you don't deserve freedom yourself. You might want to do a little more research before you use rationale to say Ron Paul's policies are limtless and unconstitutional. Its an insult to his intellegence and mine for that matter! "So tell me whats the difference between killing a baby one minute before birth or killing a baby one minute after birth?" As stated above, this was normal abortion in the 60s. Personal choice is compatible with a free society but what I emphasize is that "They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."- Benjamin Franklin. If you take away someone elses freedoms by not even allowing them to live you buy an abortion so nothing becomes of a pregnancy you don't deserve freedom or liberty. How do you construe this quote? You could even say bills like the Patriot Act or the Senate Bill S. 510 Food Safety Modernization Act Vote Imminent: Outlaws Gardening And Saving Seeds pose a threat to America. My opponent continues by saying "Scenario 1: A fifteen year old girl is raped. She becomes pregnant, and chooses the option of abortion only to find out that abortion has being outlawed by Ron Paul." This argument is falicy since Ron Paul (if elected president) cannot mandate any abortion policy into federal law. Ron Paul simply wants the government to stay out of the abortion topic entirely. "Q: If abortion becomes illegal and a woman obtains an abortion anyway, what should she be charged with? What about the doctor who performs the abortion? A: "The first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don't need a federal abortion police. That's the last thing that we need. There has to be a criminal penalty for the person that's committing that crime. And I think that is the abortionist. As for the punishment, I don't think that should be up to the president to decide." This is Mr. Paul's views, which doesn't automatically make it a law. Your attempts to refute my statement "As for bringing our troops home. This is an excellent solution to resolve hostility because of our meddling affairs in other countries." illustrates your ignorance towards inflation, and exucutive powers to name a few. Going to war in Iraq and Afghanistan violates the constitution; as if it were a blank peice of paper. Iraq was an undeclared war. And to combat terroism requires according to the previous president and members of congress a bill like the patriot act which usurps government power and undermines the first amendment of freedom of speech. other ridiculous bills like the s 510 - Food Safety Bill undermine property rights of an individual and exacerbates a person's well being by limiting the type of food they eat