Joseph Farrah at World Net Daily Libels Paul

[mikelovesgod]

Farrah's article is a clear libel on Ron Paul. The article is here:
http://www.wnd.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57837

He states something completely alien in context when he says:
"This might surprise some people. According to Salon, it's Ron Paul. And that makes sense given his view of the institution of marriage. Paul said, at the debate I moderated last week, "Marriage only came about, and getting license only came about, in recent history for health reasons."

Actually, those of us who read and believe the Bible see it a little differently. The first marriage was between Adam and Eve. It was God-ordained. It's an institution created in heaven, not on earth."

Dr. Paul has never said in contradistinction to God's plan, he was talking about it solely as a government institution. This is a complete falsehood by Hannah to insinuate this and thereby guilty by association.

Please email him... everyone: letters@worldnetdaily.com

[Original_Intent]

We responded to this last week and there was a letter to the editor at WND regarding this.

[V4Vendetta]

We responded to this last week and there was a letter to the editor at WND regarding this.

i wrote them an email last week saying how dissappointed i was in world net daily for saying such a thing.

Did anything ever happen?

[steph3n]

Whatever you do, do it in a polite manner, it gets much further.

Use the Ron Paul Library such as here:

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=346


A notable quote:

Marriage is first and foremost a religious matter, not a government matter. Government is not moral and cannot make us moral. Law should reflect moral standards, of course, but morality comes from religion, from philosophy, from societal standards, from families, and from responsible individuals. We make a mistake when we look to government for moral leadership.




Farrah's article is a clear libel on Ron Paul. The article is here:
http://www.wnd.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57837

He states something completely alien in context when he says:
"This might surprise some people. According to Salon, it's Ron Paul. And that makes sense given his view of the institution of marriage. Paul said, at the debate I moderated last week, "Marriage only came about, and getting license only came about, in recent history for health reasons."

Actually, those of us who read and believe the Bible see it a little differently. The first marriage was between Adam and Eve. It was God-ordained. It's an institution created in heaven, not on earth."

Dr. Paul has never said in contradistinction to God's plan, he was talking about it solely as a government institution. This is a complete falsehood by Hannah to insinuate this and thereby guilty by association.

Please email him... everyone: letters@worldnetdaily.com

[Original_Intent]

i wrote them an email last week saying how dissappointed i was in world net daily for saying such a thing.

Did anything ever happen?

No retraction was ever printed, but they did post one of the LTE's that challenged the article.

[mikelovesgod]

Well, here is my response to him that I already sent:

As an adamant opponent of homosexuality I credit you for exposing those members of the GOP who are pro-homosexual. I think it's insane that people consider this abhorrent act in public to be justifiable. Also, I think your article is blatantly dishonest to some degree on the matters of Dr. Ron Paul. He is opposed to homosexuality on a personal level, but also believes it's the states right to make such decisions not found as powers of the federal government. To make it seem as if he is opposed to God's order by the creation of Adam and Eve is farcical and dis-ingenious at best....

You need to have more journalistic integrity than a sound-byte hit-piece. Ron Paul just opposes federal regulations on marriage and sees government interference as a problem, but that does not mean he's anti-marriage or against marriage, he's against marriage as a government institution, not a religious one. Your quote was about his view of government in marriage. His reasoning is Constitutional and therefore the argument you should have is with the tenets of the nation, not the person who swears to uphold it. I would publish a retraction and give a more honest view, a more honest statement is that Paul is federally and governmentally neutral on matters of homosexuality and believes it's a state issue by the declarations of the founders of the country. In case you forgot states outlawed homosexuality, and the laws of Texas were still on the books until recently.

[steph3n]

Interesting I was searching for that LTE and in searching for Ron Paul I see this:

Huckabee says Salon 'simply inaccurate'
Thursday, October 4, 2007 -- Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee A Salon magazine article ...

WOW they are posting FUTURE articles in their search engine, but it seems not LTEs

[Original_Intent]

Here is the LTE WND published the day after Farah's article:

In his Sept. 27 article, Joseph Farah wrote the following concerning presidential candidate Ron Paul's view on gay marriage:

"Who is the third most homosexual-friendly GOP candidate?

"This might surprise some people. According to Salon, it's Ron Paul. And that makes sense given his view of the institution of marriage. Paul said, at the debate I moderated last week, 'Marriage only came about, and getting license only came about, in recent history for health reasons.'

"Actually, those of us who read and believe the Bible see it a little differently. The first marriage was between Adam and Eve. It was God-ordained. It's an institution created in heaven, not on earth."

I watched the debate in question, and Farah is misstating what Paul said. He said that marriage is a religious institution (with appears to be Farah's view as well) and that marriage licenses granted by the state only came about in recent history for health reasons. His view was that the state should not be involved in granting marriage licenses – marriage should again be recognized as a religious institution under God, not a privilege granted by government.

Steve Dasbach

[mikelovesgod]

Steve,

I know and agree with you. How he could misconstrue what he said is libel.