[Covert Hawk]

Here's my one post on ron Paul and why I would have reservations voting for him. One thing that I always remember Dr Falwell saying when it came to election time: Vote Christian. Its great that he is pro-life and pro-family. Where is his faith? Im not going to assume he isnt a Christian, but as someone who Im sure knows the importance of Conservative Christians, hasnt from what I can see said anything about his faith...as I mentioned, I was talking to my mom yesterday and she mentioned that he is more of a "humanist" and as a Christian, it doesnt sit well with me to vote for a candidate who doesnt acknowledge responsibility to a "higher power" (God or whoever).

Ron Paul has explicitly stated that he is a christian. Just because he doesn't bombard you with it like other candidates doesn't make him a "humanist." Besides, I'd rather have an atheist president that share's my political philosophy than a president like "christian" Bush. So, he started a war of aggression murdering thousands of people, maiming and displacing millions more, destroying billions of dollars of private property and wealth in the process. But thank Goodness he answered to a higher power!

[BJWilliams]

I wouldnt vote for someone who claims to be one just to get votes either. if youre a Christian, live like it. Does it mean you have to be perfect? Absolutely not, because if that was the case, none of us (much less politicians) would live up to that standard. If anything, do your best to live a life that is above reproach and such that when people try to make claims against your character, it makes them look bad because people can point to your own life. As I said, Im not going to assume that Dr Paul isnt a Christian (that would be just as dangerous an assumption to be frank), but Id like it if he at least had something to say about his faith. At the same time Im not going to vote for someone who puts on their "Christian face" just to get Christians to vote for them. I wasnt saying that I wanted a preacher, I want someone who lives a responsible life, has a faith that is evident without having to "thump people over the head with it" and can still be a strong leader on the important issues.

[BJWilliams]

Actually I think I was either sick or off campus taking care of something that day so I never heard it

[Covert Hawk]

I wouldnt vote for someone who claims to be one just to get votes either. if youre a Christian, live like it. Does it mean you have to be perfect? Absolutely not, because if that was the case, none of us (much less politicians) would live up to that standard. If anything, do your best to live a life that is above reproach and such that when people try to make claims against your character, it makes them look bad because people can point to your own life. As I said, Im not going to assume that Dr Paul isnt a Christian (that would be just as dangerous an assumption to be frank), but Id like it if he at least had something to say about his faith. At the same time Im not going to vote for someone who puts on their "Christian face" just to get Christians to vote for them. I wasnt saying that I wanted a preacher, I want someone who lives a responsible life, has a faith that is evident without having to "thump people over the head with it" and can still be a strong leader on the important issues.

Fair, but Ron Paul's books make numerous references to his christian faith and how they intertwine with his political philosophy.

Check out this speech he gave at the Faith and Freedom conference or check out his speech he gave at Liberty in 2007 and decide for yourself.

And just some food for thought, perhaps you perception of Ron Paul is affected by the fact that he doesn't put on his "christian face" just to get votes. This has prevented major christian leaders from backing him, most likely, sometimes even speaking dishonestly about him on national TV.

Norman Horn recently wrote a great editorial about Ron Paul, Christianity, and Libertarianism. I encourage you to check it out.

[jmdickens]

[youtube]

[/youtube]

Also

[youtube]

[/youtube]

Send this to your mom

[SuperJon]

I want someone who lives a responsible life, has a faith that is evident without having to "thump people over the head with it" and can still be a strong leader on the important issues.

Why is the faith aspect so important? The other two things are much more important than the faith of the candidate. I know it's a factor but you're making it out to be like it's a make or break.

[Purple Haize]

You must be a gay black Jew then! Don't hate me hate his ghost writer. And now that I think of it ghosts are usually white...hmmmmm

1. Im not gay
2. Im not a Jew
3. Youre a jerk for even joking like that
4. What she told me had nothing to do with Martin Luther King or race at all for that matter.

You also have thin skin!

[BJWilliams]

To put it simply, I think it should drive and serve as a foundation for the other two. As I said, I dont want someone who hammers people with their faith and pounds it over their heads but at the same time, having a strong faith that drives their desire to live a life above reproach but at the same time drives them to be a strong leader and shapes their stand on issues that are important to the people (be they Christian or not)

[jbock13]

What I have to say has been basically covered by all, but I disagree with Doc on that unfortunately. Too many socialists pervert the Bible to turn Jesus into a socialist. A socialist will never get my vote, period.

As for Paul, you have certain moron talk show hosts on a station near you from 3-6 and 6-9 keep telling you Ron Paul is for drug legalization. He may be, or maybe not, I'd like the Paul supporters to answer that question because they know better than I. But does Paul ever say that it is good to try drugs? Maybe the answer is that drugs are harmful, but that the government causes more problems by waging prohibitions and locking up non-violent offenders for life.

That's why I'm for at least the legalization of some drugs. Not because I believe it's right to partake, but because we're throwing lives away for things that harm no one's life but the user. It's not the government's job to protect us from ourselves. It's the governments job to punish those who harm others.

I've used this analogy before. I will never drink alcohol, or ever touch it because of the destruction it has wrecked on my family. But just because I don't approve of it, does that give me right to ban it for you even if you are responsible while drinking?

[Purple Haize]

Oh look that, Ron Paul scores the highest among non-whites in a match-up against Obama according to this CNN Poll

Romney is second with 20%. And this poll was conducted before the 'scandal' broke about his racist newsletter. Not saying he wrote it, but he needs to answer for them and isn't doing a very good job of it.
Putting your name on things can come back to bite you in the butt.

[Covert Hawk]

Oh look that, Ron Paul scores the highest among non-whites in a match-up against Obama according to this CNN Poll

Romney is second with 20%. And this poll was conducted before the 'scandal' broke about his racist newsletter. Not saying he wrote it, but he needs to answer for them and isn't doing a very good job of it.
Putting your name on things can come back to bite you in the butt.

The "scandal" broke 22 years ago! Ron Paul didn't write them and he has repudiated them!

[Purple Haize]

Is there a shelf life on stuff like that? 'I mean I Used to hate gay black Jews but now I'm happy to tolerate them'. This is the first I have heard of them, and I'm sure the first most people have.
He may have 'repudiated' them but that doesn't answer a lot of questions. Why did he allow his name to be used and associated with letters like that? If he didn't put his name/auto pen on them who did? Did that person get fited, repremaned or what? Why didn't he send out a letter disavowing those statements immediately upon learning of them? For someone who is generally blunt in his statements he isn't responding to well when the heat is on.
This is not going to go away. Hopefully he spent some time over Christmas refining and finding answers to this. So far he isn't doing very well.

[Covert Hawk]

What I have to say has been basically covered by all, but I disagree with Doc on that unfortunately. Too many socialists pervert the Bible to turn Jesus into a socialist. A socialist will never get my vote, period.

As for Paul, you have certain moron talk show hosts on a station near you from 3-6 and 6-9 keep telling you Ron Paul is for drug legalization. He may be, or maybe not, I'd like the Paul supporters to answer that question because they know better than I. But does Paul ever say that it is good to try drugs? Maybe the answer is that drugs are harmful, but that the government causes more problems by waging prohibitions and locking up non-violent offenders for life.

That's why I'm for at least the legalization of some drugs. Not because I believe it's right to partake, but because we're throwing lives away for things that harm no one's life but the user. It's not the government's job to protect us from ourselves. It's the governments job to punish those who harm others.

I've used this analogy before. I will never drink alcohol, or ever touch it because of the destruction it has wrecked on my family. But just because I don't approve of it, does that give me right to ban it for you even if you are responsible while drinking?

Ron Paul is against the federal war on drugs. A Paul administration would not use the Federal Government to prevent anyone from using drugs. The question of prohibition would be left to the states.

As far a drug legalization is concerned, I support it. However, its not because I support using drugs of course. The line I think that needs to be drawn is whether a proposed criminal action has a victim or not. Drug use, prostitution, and gambling are examples of "victimless crimes" that I believe should not face criminal prosecution. Evangelical author Laurance Vance has a very good article about this subject. Be sure to check it out.

Every Crime Needs a Victim

[Purple Haize]

Drug use and prostitution are not 'victimless crimes'. To say that it is shows a lack of understanding as to what those vices involve. Im sure the 16 yo on the streets are doing it for job fulfillment Its statements like that which give Ron Paul his ceiling. Gambling, I'm not sure is even a crime anymore.

[jbock13]

Haize, alcohol causes children to be victims of abuse. Does this mean we should ban it?

[Covert Hawk]

Is there a shelf life on stuff like that? 'I mean I Used to hate gay black Jews but now I'm happy to tolerate them'. This is the first I have heard of them, and I'm sure the first most people have.
He may have 'repudiated' them but that doesn't answer a lot of questions. Why did he allow his name to be used and associated with letters like that? If he didn't put his name/auto pen on them who did? Did that person get fited, repremaned or what? Why didn't he send out a letter disavowing those statements immediately upon learning of them? For someone who is generally blunt in his statements he isn't responding to well when the heat is on.
This is not going to go away. Hopefully he spent some time over Christmas refining and finding answers to this. So far he isn't doing very well.

Yes, there is. Obviously whoever wrote them doesn't work in any capacity for Paul anymore because we haven't seen any incendiary racist statements since. This is old news! Ron Paul repudiated the articles immediately in his 1996 congressional campaign, 2008 presidential campaign and this current campaign.

As far as the first part of your statement is concerned, Ron Paul DID NOT WRITE THE ARTICLES!. Stop trying to take those extreme views, which btw, never appeared in any of Paul's other numerous speeches and writings and pretend that there his. There not! We have numerous speeches and writings with which to discern what Ron Paul's views are. Even the president of the NAACP has come out and defended Paul.

[Covert Hawk]

Drug use and prostitution are not 'victimless crimes'. To say that it is shows a lack of understanding as to what those vices involve. Im sure the 16 yo on the streets are doing it for job fulfillment Its statements like that which give Ron Paul his ceiling. Gambling, I'm not sure is even a crime anymore.

You can't claim that drug use and prostitution are not victimless crimes without explaining why there aren't. So do you mind telling me how consenting adults making decisions about their own lives affects anyone else?

[Purple Haize]

Haize, alcohol causes children to be victims of abuse. Does this mean we should ban it?

Child abuse is a crime. It can be attributed to a lot of things.
I never said ban anything. What I did say was that it was ignorant to say drug use and prostitution are victimless. We do not live on our own little islands. Are there better ways to handle the drug problem in America? Absolutely. Legalizing it, IMO, isn't one of them.

[Purple Haize]

Drug use and prostitution are not 'victimless crimes'. To say that it is shows a lack of understanding as to what those vices involve. Im sure the 16 yo on the streets are doing it for job fulfillment Its statements like that which give Ron Paul his ceiling. Gambling, I'm not sure is even a crime anymore.

You can't claim that drug use and prostitution are not victimless crimes without explaining why there aren't. So do you mind telling me how consenting adults making decisions about their own lives affects anyone else?

Consenting adults takes all of his money and spends it on hookers. Catches a venereal disease. Passes disease on to spouse/ significant other.
Person needs drug money. Assaults and beats person for the money
Broke and strung out on drugs person is now on welfare, Medicaid etc.
16 yo runs away from home. Ends up in bits and pieces in various garbage bags and dumpsters across the city.
And of course non of these people have any families to grieve for them.

[Covert Hawk]

Drug use and prostitution are not 'victimless crimes'. To say that it is shows a lack of understanding as to what those vices involve. Im sure the 16 yo on the streets are doing it for job fulfillment Its statements like that which give Ron Paul his ceiling. Gambling, I'm not sure is even a crime anymore.

You can't claim that drug use and prostitution are not victimless crimes without explaining why there aren't. So do you mind telling me how consenting adults making decisions about their own lives affects anyone else?

Consenting adults takes all of his money and spends it on hookers. As an adult he has a right to spend his money as he sees fit.
Catches a venereal disease. Ridiculous argument as if only prostitutes carry diseases.
Passes disease on to spouse/ significant other. The spouse/significant would have to have consented to have sexual relations with said individual in order for them to catch their disease

Person needs drug money. Assaults and beats person for the money. When he physically harms someone for money he is a criminal. What about the overwhelming majority of addicts who use money they earned lawfully to purchase drugs?

Your also ignoring the fact that the prohibition of drugs drives the costs of the substance up. The inflated costs of drugs due to prohibition is what is more likely to turn an addict into a criminal more than anything else. Before prohibition, stories of addicts assaulting and beating people didn't exist.

Broke and strung out on drugs person is now on welfare, Medicaid etc. If you don't like welfare programs, them abolish them! Don't make our society a less free one.

16 yo runs away from home. Ends up in bits and pieces in various garbage bags and dumpsters across the city. The black market is what leads to violence in the drug industry not drugs themselves. 16 year old kids weren't getting cut up 100 years ago when there were no prohibitions on drugs

And of course non of these people have any families to grieve for them. You know when I say victim you know I mean a victim of physical pain, right?

[Purple Haize]

Didn't answer a single question. Good attempt to rationalize though.
Of course, I'm not suprised you are trying get away from the issue of the news letters. While many agree that he didn't write them, there is a general consensus who did write them.

[Covert Hawk]

Didn't answer a single question. Good attempt to rationalize though.
Of course, I'm not suprised you are trying get away from the issue of the news letters. While many agree that he didn't write them, there is a general consensus who did write them.

I think your on drugs! I answered everyone on your objections. Your the one who should be running as far as you can away from the news letters since no one believes Ron Paul is a racist except for Neocons bent on destroying his campaign.

[Purple Haize]

Really? Not going to say that most people believe it was a person whose initials are L R and he tends to opt out of things.

[Covert Hawk]

Really? Not going to say that most people believe it was a person whose initials are L R and he tends to opt out of things.

So you finally admit Ron Paul didn't write them! Kind of hurts your case against him, now doesn't it?

[BJWilliams]

smh...