Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Abortion

  1. #1

    Default Abortion

    So, I've seen some debate, among Ron Paul supporters, over the Sanctity of Life Act, and over what exactly was intended by that law. I've heard some say he was intending to ban abortion nationwide, while others have said he was intending to allow each state to decide.

    I've always assumed the latter, but I've also seen some votes inconsistent with this, such as the PBA ban vote.

    Where does Ron actually stand?
    This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    I saw the title and was like "Oh no! Another 76-page thread of arguments."

    He's continually said Roe V. Wade should be overturned and abortion should be left to the states. I've never heard or read anything about him wanting to ban it on a federal level. Even though his vote on the PBA ban violates the 10th amendment, I can understand it, as it crosses the line to the point where it's no different than murdering a newborn, child, or adult because the fetus is no longer dependent on the mother.

    From a moral standpoint, I think he wants a nationwide ban or tight restrictions even though he agrees that prohibition isn't going to get to the bottom of this issue.

  4. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by I<3Liberty View Post
    I saw the title and was like "Oh no! Another 76-page thread of arguments."
    I just wanted to know what Ron's position was, not really to argue over the issue.
    He's continually said Roe V. Wade should be overturned and abortion should be left to the states. I've never heard or read anything about him wanting to ban it on a federal level. Even though his vote on the PBA ban violates the 10th amendment, I can understand it, as it crosses the line to the point where it's no different than murdering a newborn, child, or adult because the fetus is no longer dependent on the mother.
    Well, the thing is that legitimate personhood advocates (Which Ron Paul is, as far as I know, and I certainly am) see no real difference between murder at ANY point in the womb or after birth. There's nothing special about partial birth abortion that makes it any worse than any other abortion, IMO.

    From a moral standpoint, I think he wants a nationwide ban or tight restrictions even though he agrees that prohibition isn't going to get to the bottom of this issue.
    I agree with him, hence why I support a constitutional amendment. Kick any states that won't protect the unborn out, and treat them like any other foreign country.
    This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post

    Well, the thing is that legitimate personhood advocates (Which Ron Paul is, as far as I know, and I certainly am) see no real difference between murder at ANY point in the womb or after birth. There's nothing special about partial birth abortion that makes it any worse than any other abortion, IMO.


    I agree with him, hence why I support a constitutional amendment. Kick any states that won't protect the unborn out, and treat them like any other foreign country.
    I wasn't referring to the morality of PBA versus abortion in the earlier stages of fetal development or any of the personhood debate. I was referring to the fact that technology (namely, the artificial pulmonary surfactant that prevents respiratory distress syndrome in premature infants) makes abortion post quickening, unnecessary. The infant could be moved to the NICU as early as 24-ish weeks. In other words, you get the best of both worlds -- the woman can end the pregnancy without killing the infant. Abortion would be totally obsolete with the advent of ectogenesis, but that probably won't be around for awhile.

    Secondly, I don't think kicking states out that don't comply is an effective solution or a libertarian one. Not sure why you'd think it to be? I don't want to make this into an argument, I'd just like to point out that the black market and medical tourism can create an illegal market for any prohibited services/goods, so this is why many are so nonchalant about bans and the alike. Sure, it would help reduce the problem to some degree, but it won't get to the heart of the problem. Wait until Vasalgel makes it to market in 2015 (and similar 100% effective contraceptives in the works) and then I bet we'll see a stark drop in abortion rates.






Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 100
    Last Post: 01-21-2015, 03:50 AM
  2. Replies: 47
    Last Post: 04-02-2013, 02:30 PM
  3. Abortion who knows someone that.....
    By Schifference in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 03-21-2013, 10:01 PM
  4. Abortion
    By brandon in forum Marketing Strategy, Influence & Persuasion
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 11-09-2007, 08:28 AM
  5. Abortion
    By scubasteve01 in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-10-2007, 12:21 AM

Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •