An Honest Look at Ron Paul (http://www.thenewamerican.com) - [A+ article]

[PauliticsPolitics]

http://www.thenewamerican.com/opinion/jack-kerwick/10024-an-honest-look-at-ron-paul

(http://www.thenewamerican.com/opinion/jack-kerwick/10024-an-honest-look-at-ron-paul)Great piece.

snippet


Conclusion:
If Republicans, Tea Partiers, and self-avowed conservatives are truly serious about wanting a presidential candidate who is thoroughly committed to restoring and preserving liberty, then Ron Paul is their candidate — their only candidate.

[Travlyr]

Thank you for writing a most excellent article!

WRITTEN BY JACK KERWICK, PH.D.
FRIDAY, 02 DECEMBER 2011 12:03


As this final edition of the series establishes, it is in the person of Ron Paul alone that the Republican Party’s rhetoric of liberty becomes incarnate.

The GOP establishment should be delighted to have such an honest, principled, conservative in the race. I wish they were.

[Number19]

I think this write-up is incorrect when the author writes: "If elected President, Paul would seek to pass a Sanctity of Life Act that would identify conception as the beginning of human life...".

The Constitution does not grant Congress/government the power to legislate on a social/religious issue regulating the private lives of its citizens. RP would never compromise on this principle he has held for 30 years. He may, however, advocate for a Constitutional amendment.

[Jeremy]

It's an A+ article because The New American is biased in favor of Paul.

[Napolitanic Wars]

I think this write-up is incorrect when the author writes: "If elected President, Paul would seek to pass a Sanctity of Life Act that would identify conception as the beginning of human life...".

The Constitution does not grant Congress/government the power to legislate on a social/religious issue regulating the private lives of its citizens. RP would never compromise on this principle he has held for 30 years. He may, however, advocate for a Constitutional amendment.

Um, isn't the Sanctity of Life Act Ron Paul's own bill? He has mentioned his support for it in the debates.

[Travlyr]

It's an A+ article because The New American is biased in favor of Paul.
And Ron Paul is biased in favor of honesty, truth, and peace.

[qwerty]

please post about the moneybomb there if you can!

[tfurrh]

I think this write-up is incorrect when the author writes: "If elected President, Paul would seek to pass a Sanctity of Life Act that would identify conception as the beginning of human life...".

The Constitution does not grant Congress/government the power to legislate on a social/religious issue regulating the private lives of its citizens. RP would never compromise on this principle he has held for 30 years. He may, however, advocate for a Constitutional amendment.

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/abortion/

* Defining life as beginning at conception by passing a “Sanctity of Life Act.”

[Napolitanic Wars]

It was reintroduced with similar text by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) in 2005

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctity_of_Life_Act

[KEEF]

Great read.

As for the abortion issue brought up in earlier posts, I have no issue with Dr. Paul's Sanctity of Life Act. From a trained biologist's perspective, I was always taught that all living things are highly organized (atoms to molecules to proteins and lypids to cells, etc.), are organized into units called cells, have an ability to acquire and use materials and energy from their environment, able to grow and develop, able to respond to their environment (stimuli), have an ability to reproduce (either sexually and/or asexually), and finally, they contain their own genetic information.

Last I check a developing life, upon the moment of conception, is organized at the atomic, molecular, and macromolecular level. It is made up of a single cell that becomes multicellular. It does acquire materials and energy from their environment starting from the yolk sac which eventually loses its nutritive function entirely as the placenta develops, at which the eventual fetus forms a parasitic relationship with the mother. With these resources, it is able to grow and at the time only reproduce asexually. Finally, once sperm and egg join forming a zygote, the eventual fetus does have its own DNA (different from mom and dad).

So imo, Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness applies to them as well.

But on a lighter note, pardon the biology lesson, lets get Dr. Paul elected.