<p>I thought libertarians would be for abortion and stem cell research.. go figure, this is Ron Paul!</p>
<p>I think Ron Paul is amazing and has great ideas, but he is too extreme to ever be elected.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I thought libertarians would be for abortion and stem cell research
[/quote]
So did I, which was why that kind of surprised me.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Voting to ban embryonic stem cell research, abortion, human cloning, and gay adoption.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You might want to go back and look at his positions on these things because you are wrong about every single one of them.</p>
<p>He states that these issues should be up to the state and that the fed govt shouldn't be involved in them....sounds pretty good to me. In Ron Pauls mind, and Libertarians in general, the fed govt shouldn't do things that aren't actually powers of the fed govt. Nowhere is the fed govt required to do stem cell research, therefore, why should the funds/time of the fed govt go towards it.</p>
<p>Uhh... It sounds like I know your candidates positions better than you do.</p>
<p>In Jan 2007 he voted NO on expanding research on embryonic stem cell research.
In May 2005 he voted NO on allowing embryonic stem cell research.
In Oct 2003 he voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion in cases that would save the mother's life.
I misread about cloning... He voted NO on forbidding it, I misread it as voting NO on it.</p>
<p>In July 1999 he voted YES on banning gay adoptions.</p>
<p>So the only one I was wrong about was human cloning... and he didn't vote againt ALL abortion, only some abortion.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In Jan 2007 he voted NO on expanding research on embryonic stem cell research.
In May 2005 he voted NO on allowing embryonic stem cell research.
In Oct 2003 he voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion in cases that would save the mother's life.
I misread about cloning... He voted NO on forbidding it, I misread it as voting NO on it.</p>
<p>In July 1999 he voted YES on banning gay adoptions.</p>
<p>So the only one I was wrong about was human cloning... and he didn't vote againt ALL abortion, only some abortion.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>He voted this because he believes it shouldn't be a federal issue but rather a state issue (read his press statements)....not to ban them across the nation. Maybe you should look at the whole picture instead of isolated parts of it.</p>
<p>How is voting NO against ALLOWING it making it a state issue? If the federal government says that it's not allowed then no matter what the states say it's not allowed.</p>
<p>How is voting on banning gay adoption putting it in the hands of the states? There, again, no matter what the states say it's still banned.</p>
<p>
[quote]
How is voting NO against ALLOWING it making it a state issue? If the federal government says that it's not allowed then no matter what the states say it's not allowed.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's the whole point of ron pauls campaign!!!! He doesn't WANT the federal govt to be able to say the states can/can't do things and he was sticking to his beliefs on those votes...hence why he is different from any other candidate and a true libertarian.</p>
<p>Doesn't Ron Paul want to legalize weed? If so, cool.</p>
<p>Anyway last night when I was with my buds one of my friends wouldn't shut up about Ron Paul and he was telling all of us to vote for him.</p>
<p>
[quote]
That's the whole point of ron pauls campaign!!!! He doesn't WANT the federal govt to be able to say the states can/can't do things and he was sticking to his beliefs on those votes
[/quote]
I'm not sure how much (little?) you know about government, but if the federal government bans something then, no matter what the states want, it is banned.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm not sure how much (little?) you know about government, but if the federal government bans something then, no matter what the states want, it is banned.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What don't you get? I realize this...but ron paul doesn't want it that way and that's not only what he campaigns on but how he votes.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In Oct 2003 he voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion in cases that would save the mother's life.
In July 1999 he voted YES on banning gay adoptions.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sounds like he decided for the states....</p>
<p>He seems semi honest. He would make an interesting president.</p>
<p>Um.. "Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life."
and "Voted YES on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)"</p>
<p>And about the environment.. It is all about private property rights. A corporation has no right too pollute your backyard, because it is your property. The air is a trickier issue, because it is common property... The tragedy of the commons occurs on public property. Noone owns it, so everyone takes advantage of it. Ontheissues.org paints a rather stark picture of Ron Paul. A lot of times Paul strikes down a bill because it has a lot of other riders attached to it.</p>
<p>The more you read about Ron Paul, the more he makes sense. Ontheissues.org does not give the whole picture of Ron Paul. Some sites I suggest reading are: <a href="http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/%5B/url%5D">http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/</a> <a href="http://www.ronpaulforums.com/%5B/url%5D">http://www.ronpaulforums.com/</a> and the official website <a href="http://www.ronpaul2008.com%5B/url%5D">http://www.ronpaul2008.com</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCM_wQy4YVg%5B/url%5D">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCM_wQy4YVg</a>
Explains Environment and Gay rights.
Environment. "Respect property rights"
Gay Marriage. " People should do what they want"</p>
<p>Social liberals believe the solution to problems is more government. Libertarians believe that the solution to problems is less government. Unvariably, all the problems you thought you saw in a free market was due to government intervention, favors, and subsidies. We are eating high fructose corn syrup because of corn subsidies. If the free market had it's way, we would be enjoying cane sugar more often. </p>
<p>The good healthcare system gives incentives for all aspects of medical care to keep costs low. Doctors, patients, pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, etc... As long as someone is paying the bill, the costs will remain high. The solution is a free market solution. Get rid of the FDA stranglehold on medicine, the AMA monopoly on the quantity of doctors.... etc The AMA is like a medieval guild.</p>
<p>One does not need government for regulations. Underwriters Laboratories is a great example of this. It is a private non-for-profit that tests electronics for a fee from the company that makes it. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is funded by auto insurers. Where do you look for information when you buy a laptop or any electronic? The Federal Electronics Administration? NO! You look at reviews and other various online forums. The free market does wonders. </p>
<p>There are so many lobbyists because government regulates so many things. If there wasn't such a big government, there wouldn't be so much to lobby... The free market isn't always friendly to big business. If it was, why would businesses come crying to government to help them. The free market is great for the common people. Monopolies never happen in a free market. Standard Oil had 60% market share when the anti trust case was filed, and dropping steadily. Natural market forces had already taken its toll on Standard Oil, and along the way, Standard Oil had brought upon great innovations in the field of petroleum. The reason you see monopolies, like AT&T is because of government created regulations that hamper entry into the industry. The natural tendency is a free market. The unatural tendency is socialism. </p>
<p>People are selfish, and build a philosophy from that. The resulting philosophy is libertarianism and free markets.. For the greater good of society is a total myth.... Society is made up of individuals. All individuals want to make themselves better. So society will, in fact, progress... Think of people as individuals, not in collectivist groups. Socialism is the ultimate form of collectivism.</p>
<p>The United States was progressing quite nicely in the late 1800's early 1900's. But the progressives were impatient and told government to reign in the "abuses" of the free market... Government took a power grab during FDR and Johnson... now we have this big government with massive cradle to grave entitlements..</p>
<p>This my statement for the moment. Thanks for reading.</p>
<p>bah, a simple name, yet an intricate mind.</p>
<p>Aren't those quotes?</p>
<p>Some of them are.. I guess I actually memorized parts of it without realizing. I'll attribute the healthcare one to Ron Paul.</p>
<p>Remember, your opinions matter. ;)</p>