My two disagreements with Ron Paul

[Melchior]

If you'll humor me, maybe we can make a friendly debate out of this. :)

I'm supporting and voting for Ron Paul, no doubt. I can only imagine the positive effects from abolishing the IRS, the Federal Reserve, returning to a gold standard and undoing the damage from stretching our military for interventionism. Not too long about I was watching a documentary about Ludwig von Mises, and he was in it. :D

There are two positions of his however that I find a little odd for someone of his principles. His positions on immigration and marriage. Neither of which are detrimental, but can someone explain them to me?

How does he belong to the Austrian school of economics, being in favor if global free trade and understanding human action (praxeology?) and at the same time believe in strict border control? I know he advocates eliminating welfare and other programs that attract immigrants, and I agree with him, but why deny potential employers and potential employees separated by the border? It reminds me of a certain Scott Bieser cartoon (http://www.scottbieser.com/fortress-America.html). Maybe I'm misunderstanding his position, would he be in favor of open borders in the ideal long-term, after the entitlements and social programs are out of the equation?

Also, how does a libertarian/individualist make an exception to the unlimited right to contract and contract clause? By the way, I am aware he voted down the federal marriage amendment, he probably thinks gay marriage is a states rights issue, but to take that position is to believe marriage is not a right. Would he abolish the marriage license and provide "civil unions" at least?

[coplinger]

You know, I have noticed those same contradictions. I assume that both of those positions are taken more for strategic reasons than ideological ones, being that he is running as a Republican from Texas.

Maybe someone could offer an argument that would reconcile these positions with an ideology of liberty?

[kylejack]

We're facing a terrorist threat right now, and non-interventionism is not going to have an immediate payoff. There's still going to be some people who want to kill us because our bombs killed their family, or we burned down their crops, or whatever other reason. We have to know who is entering our country.

I think Ron Paul would support making it easier to enter legally, however. Right now, unless you have family here or are in a highly skilled profession, it is IMPOSSIBLE to enter the United States legally from Mexico. Mexico does not qualify for the Visa lottery program.

Regarding marriage, Ron Paul doesn't think the federal government should be involved in the religious practice of marriage, and if not for IRS tax exemptions, it wouldn't need to be involved.

[coplinger]

A fence at the border is only as good as it's most corrupt border guard, though & Homeland Security has proven to be an extremely corrupt organization.

[kylejack]

A fence at the border is only as good as it's most corrupt border guard, though & Homeland Security has proven to be an extremely corrupt organization.

Hey, nobody's saying that nobody will slip in, but we can do our best. If we weren't spending billions in Iraq, we could afford a pretty nice fence.

[ronpaulitician]

Would he abolish the marriage license and provide "civil unions" at least?
I wonder the same thing.

[Melchior]

If you watch Penn & Teller: Bullshit!, they had an episode about immigration. They did a test where they actually had immigrants build a wall similar to the design of the real one that our government is planning to build on the border. It took all day to finish the wall, then they told the subjects to try and get past it. In three teams, they dug under, climbed over, and punched through the wall in less than a few minutes.

[cujothekitten]

Here's an article about gay marriage he wrote:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul160.html

[mdh]

Strict border control doesn't necessarily mandate keeping *LEGAL* immigration as difficult as it is today. I don't know about Ron Paul, but personally, I see creating streamlined and efficient legal immigration processes AND strict control of our borders to be equally key elements in maintaining vibrant communities of workers seeking better lives here in the US.

[Melchior]

Here's an article about gay marriage he wrote:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul160.html

Sounds good, but I still prefer Badnarik's position on enforcing contract rights. Ron Paul isn't clear about that.


Today, government decides if a couple is permitted to marry through a licensing process. In other times and places, marriage licenses were denied to interracial or other politically incorrect couples, just as it can be denied to gay couples today.

Like every partnership, marriage should fit the individuals it unites, rather than be a "one-size-fits all" proposition defined by those outside the relationship. Each marriage should be what the partners want it to be-no more, no less.

Just as anyone can engage in a business relationship, any individuals should be able to enter into a marriage. Government's role in a business partnership is to simply enforce, not dictate, its terms. Government's role in marriage should be the same. Both those who support and those who condemn gay marriage will be free to practice their beliefs and persuade others to their way of thinking. Each individual will be free to choose. Isn't that what America's all about?

[mdh]

With regards to marriage licenses, those are handled by states or counties. There are a few areas where marriage is distinctly a federal issue, and where it is indeed even under the purview, constitutionally, of the executive office of the president to set policy. This includes survivor benefits for federal employees among other things. Furthermore, as the Commander in Chief, the president can set policies which effect non-heterosexual individuals serving in the armed forces.

I've got a more in depth thread on this going on the 'Issues for America' forum here:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=333

[Gee]

Dr. Paul does, ideally, believe in open borders. However, he acknowledges that with our current welfare and economic systems, we just can't afford it. Millions of immigrants getting on welfare and social security would be a serious problem, and drive us over the edge more quickly. Also, with the threat of terrorism, open boarders are a serious security risk. So he advocates bringing our troops home, and using some of those resources to secure the borders.

Marriage is simple. Dr. Paul says the constitution gives the federal government no power of mariage whatsoever. As a libertarian he probably would not want even state governments deciding who can and cannot marry, but under our constitution they have the power to.

[garywatson]

Just to answer the original question, yes Ron Paul has written that the basic problem with illegal immigration is the drain on our social services (schools, emergency rooms, police, jails, etc). Since we haven't gotten rid of these services and by law we dictate that emergency rooms have to see everybody regardless of if they will never pay the bill, our only option right now is to stem the flow. He's made it clear that the preferred solution is a system of protected property rights (i.e. you can kick a vagrant beggar off your property without fear of litigation), and a dismantling of the entire welfare state.

So RP's views on immigration appear to be consistent with libertarian thought, though he's suggesting we be pragmatic and fight government handouts and government taxes where ever we can even if this means in the short term there is un-even liberty. Just as these programs were not all enacted at one time, we should feel free to chip away at them one at a time if necessary until they are all gone.

[literatim]

There are many shades of libertarians.

[Tom152]

"There are two positions of his however that I find a little odd for someone of his principles. His positions on immigration...can someone explain (it) to me?"

What I have always found really odd and irrational is for someone to support illegal aliens crossing our borders willy nilly. The "open borders" position is support for lawlessness and corruption on a grand scale. We are a nation of laws...you should be more principled about this emotional issue and learn to live with it.

I found this web site because of the confrontation with Giuliani...and thanks to your post I just discovered that Ron Paul supports lawful, sensible, and managed immigration. I left the libertarian party years ago because of their support for open borders, but now I am a new full supporter of Ron Paul. Where do I send my check?

[literatim]

"There are two positions of his however that I find a little odd for someone of his principles. His positions on immigration...can someone explain (it) to me?"

What I have always found really odd and irrational is for someone to support illegal aliens crossing our borders willy nilly. The "open borders" position is support for lawlessness and corruption on a grand scale. We are a nation of laws...you should be more principled about this emotional issue and learn to live with it.

I found this web site because of the confrontation with Giuliani...and thanks to your post I just discovered that Ron Paul supports lawful, sensible, and managed immigration. I left the libertarian party years ago because of their support for open borders, but now I am a new full supporter of Ron Paul. Where do I send my check?

Donate to his campaign here (https://www.ronpaul2008.com/forms/contribute.cfm).

[Craig_R]

If you'll humor me, maybe we can make a friendly debate out of this. :)


How does he belong to the Austrian school of economics, being in favor if global free trade and understanding human action (praxeology?) and at the same time believe in strict border control?

I've been over at the LP arguing about this with folks recently, I'm a Libertarian, and I'm for border control.

Heres how I get there:

Property rights. The United States of America in its entirety is the Private Property of its collective CITIZENS. As such the majority of its citizens wish to deny entry of our property to those who would enter illegally.

This is the same as Locking your doors at night before you go to bed.

I would also advocate a drastic reduction in legal immigration as well, and this is why:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4094926727128068265&q=by+the+numbers

[jon_perez]

Here's an article about gay marriage he wrote:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul160.htmlI notice that if you let Ron speak for himself, you invariably get a thoughtful, intelligent, non-evasive answer.

I hope he can serve as a model for his supporters.

It's not that Ron Paul is an extremist as some mainstream media tries to paint him as, it's just that the pendulum has swung so far away from reason (for some issues) that someone who does speak reason ends up being seen as extremist/left-wing/radical/etc... (and don't tell me that people like Coulter and Malkin aren't nuts themselves...)

I don't think the ranting on Youtube about propaganda or conspiracies is going to help Paul's cause though... Paul's supporters must be seen as intelligent, rational thinking people and not conspiracy nuts. The makeup of his supporters is a balancing act that Paul has to juggle very, very carefully at this point in time because he has not gathered enough mainstream support yet.

[Anne]

Dr. Paul does, ideally, believe in open borders. However, he acknowledges that with our current welfare and economic systems, we just can't afford it.

He does? Can you provide a text that he has written to that effect? Everything I have read by him suggests he is for strong borders, going so far as building a wall.

[Jimmy]

Call your congress critter today about the immrigration bill.



Call the Capital switchboard toll-free:

1-800-839-5276

and ask to be connected to your member of Congress.

RON PAUL 2008

[Hawaii Libertarian]

He does? Can you provide a text that he has written to that effect? Everything I have read by him suggests he is for strong borders, going so far as building a wall.

See the official campaign web site's "Issues" page on Border Security and Immigration Reform for the definitive answer.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/html/issue-Border_fx.html