Comments | liveonearth: Ron Paul Sides with Xstian Social Conservatives

liveonearth

Ron Paul Sides with Xstian Social Conservatives

Apr 12, 2011 09:53

He recently said that an anti-abortion position is a libertarian position based on faith. Faith in what? The bogusness of global warming? HIS god? I am offended. Faith has no legitimacy as a basis for social law, because we don't all have faith in the same things. I had thought that Ron Paul was for the true and full separation of church and ( Read more... )

faith, government, america, politics, morality, abortion, libertarians, ron paul, religion, climate change

Comments 7

geordie April 12 2011, 19:28:25 UTC

I hate that the right wing somehow hijacked the term Christian. Christian does not mean being an asshole to your fellow man. That's capitalist or fascist behavior.

liveonearth April 12 2011, 20:01:45 UTC

I think that Christ would not approve of the thing that bears his name today. And it is a shame that we cannot come to agreement within our society about exactly what life is, if we actually mean to protect it. But these are the thorny issues of our times...so we sit with them and hope that acceptance comes.

ford_prefect42 April 13 2011, 01:33:38 UTC

I think, from what I have generally seen, that christ would be okay with most christians. Therea re a few loons, but the vast majority of the christians I have encountered are good sorts.

It is a shame that we can't come to an agreement, but then, it isn't like there is any actual room for compromise, both sides are quite intransigently entrenched.

Honestly, I would support "giving it to the states". I understand that some states would outlaw it, I'm okay with that. That is one of the primary founding concepts of the US, that the several states may do things differently and that's okay. If you want to have abortions, North Dakota is probably not the state you want to live in. Uncomplicated, reasonable, and allows everyone to have a community of similar-thinking individuals without binding anyone to their own way of thinking. But that doesn't seem to fly with much of anyone.

liveonearth April 13 2011, 04:18:08 UTC

I don't know. States rights, and letting states be various in their legal interpretation of federal mandates makes sense to me too. Then people could simply go where the enforced values suit them, and there would be less bitterness at all of us having to put up with some supposed federal consensus. The smaller a group, the easier it is to find a consensus....

ford_prefect42 April 13 2011, 01:28:13 UTC

Well, the thing is, abortion is a totally religious issue *from both sides*. I am pro choice. Radically so. I have come to realize though that ones beliefs regarding abortion have no bearing on anything other than their beliefs on abortion. Yes, the debate comes back to when life begins, if you take that life begins at birth, then abortion is the mere excision of a mass of tissue. If you take that life begins at birth, then abortion is murder most foul. There are *no* logical points that have any significant merit to back up *either* claim ( ... )

liveonearth April 13 2011, 04:25:45 UTC

My take is that life is continuous. Life is contained in sperm and eggs, and is perpetuated if conditions are met for fertilization, implantation, cell division, nourishment and growth. If we are to value everything with a speck of life in it, we have major problems. If we under-value lives that are already in full expression and over-value potential lives, we are doing life a disservice. But this shades of gray thinking is no basis for political positions, it is more grounds for compromise. Nobody knows when life actually begins, chicken or egg, there is no answer. So let us compromise on a law and have it done.

What is RTL? I still like Ron Paul, I just take issue with him choice to let his faith intrude on his legislative responsibility.

ford_prefect42 April 13 2011, 04:47:28 UTC

RTL=Right To Life. Anti-abortion ( ... )