Sunday, October 14, 2007
Girl that takes off her clothes on the Internet likes Ron Paul
Not only is Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul popular with dorky men on the Internet. He’s also popular with at least one live girl who likes to take her clothing off while standing in front of her webcam. She says she’s a Paul supporter because his presidency would mean more personal liberty for individuals.
Unless of course she was raped and needed an abortion.
In that case, Ron Paul wouldn’t want her to make that decision. No, he would want that decision to be made for her by someone else. He believes that the issue of abortion should be made not by the woman, but by the state in which a woman lives.
If every state decided that the issue of abortion is strictly a private matter and should be up to the woman, Ron Paul would most likely then say the issue should be decided at the county level.
Even though he pretends that the issue of abortion should be decided at the state level, Ron Paul tried to invoke a federal law that stated human life begins at the moment of conception. He authored H.R. 776, the “Sanctity of Life Act of 2005.”
That means the moment a rapist’s sperm fertilizes his victim’s egg, the result is a human being no different then you, me, or any other real person. I have no doubt that if the impossible happened and Paul somehow became President, he would abuse the power of the Oval Office to promote his own personal beliefs about abortion. Much like he has tried to do with his position as a congressman.
Ron Paul believes this microscopic fertilized-egg citizen deserves all of the rights and privileges afforded to all Americans. Is it any wonder why Ron Paul attracts so many kooks?
Link to Ron Paul underwear girl (SFW)
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
[...] is a response to a post in another blog. While my post should stand alone as worth reading, for optimal effect please read [...]
I wrote a reply to this post in my blog. I was initially only going to reply in comments, but I decided that my reply was substantial enough to merit a post of its own.
Thank you for posting this. It is only through dialogue that the ideals of individualism and liberty can succeed.
Actually, if you look up the original laws concerning abortion for each states prior to Roe V. Wade, you will find that ALL of them had an out for someone that was raped, in cases of incest, extreme malformation of a child or where the child put the mothers life in extreme peril. Can’t have you ignoring the truth can we?
Why you are into fear mongering?
It is also amazing that the first words out of your mouth is RP is endorsed by dorky men. What, no lesbians for Hillary, Rednecks for Thompson, Jesus Freaks for Huckabee.
Goodness, be a bit more original or keep saying it and show your bigotry.
Texas Little El, The type of bill that Ron Paul authored not only robs a woman of the right to chose, it removes the option of ending a pregnancy even in case of rape. H.R. 776 states that all life begins at conception. Even when the conception is the byproduct of a rape.
Ron Paul has also said that a pregnancy never puts the life of the mother at risk.
Ron Paul doesn’t like abortion. I get that. He shouldn’t try to force that belief on everyone else via a federal law. He’s tried to force his view on the rest of us as a congressman and he would do it has a president.
Look, get it together. It doesn’t matter if life starts at conception. There’s a little thing called self-defense. That’s why abortion is allowed in cases of rape. That’s why abortion is allowed when the mother’s life is in danger.
It doesn’t matter when life starts at conception, because the chief philosophical restraints against a total ban FUNCTION REGARDLESS. You -are- allowed to kill someone if they are a threat to your safety. It’s called ‘justified self defense’.
Ron Paul isn’t forcing his belief on everyone else bia a federal law. He’s anti-forcing his belief. Currently, being pro-choice is forced on everyone by federal law!
He’s trying to get abortion laws devolved to the states where individual states can decide. Yes, some of them will have oppressive anti-abortion bans. But yes, some of them will have pro-choice laws that will offend even my moderate sensibilities. I’m willing to accept that California will be more pro-choice than I want it and Alabama will be more pro-life han I want it if you’ll accept the same. Being in the middle puts me, frankly, in a worse position than you. You’re only going to be offended by Alabama’s abortion ban. I’m going to be offended at Alabama’s abortion ban AND California’s abortion subsidies.
Once the issue is devolved to the states, those people who strongly care about abortion will move to states where it is legal or illegal, in accord with their preferences. People like me will fail to care, but may watch interestedly the diverging evolution of society within states that differ on abortion policy.
I again exhort all of you to please throw away your vote next election season- vote for Ron Paul.
Look, get it together. It doesn’t matter if life starts at conception. There’s a little thing called self-defense. That’s why abortion is allowed in cases of rape. That’s why abortion is allowed when the mother’s life is in danger.
Not if Ron Paul had his way. Take a look at H.R. 776, the “Sanctity of Life Act of 2005.” You will notice that there is no provision for cases of rape and/or incest. There is no provision for when the life of the mother is in danger. According to Doctor Paul,a pregnancy never puts the life of the mother at risk so it’s a non-issue.
Ron Paul isn’t forcing his belief on everyone else bia a federal law. He’s anti-forcing his belief. Currently, being pro-choice is forced on everyone by federal law!
And that’s a bad thing? You do realize that pro-choice is the freedom to choice for yourself, right? A woman in the United States of America doesn’t have to get permission to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. It shouldn’t be up to the town, county, or state that woman lives in. It should be up to her and nobody else. It’s a private matter and it isn’t anyone else’s business. Woman that don’t believe in abortion don’t have to get one.
Once the issue is devolved to the states, those people who strongly care about abortion will move to states where it is legal or illegal, in accord with their preferences. People like me will fail to care, but may watch interestedly the diverging evolution of society within states that differ on abortion policy.
You honestly believe that if women have one of their most personal and fundamental rights taken away from them by the state they live in, they should just move? That’s is ridiculous.
My favorite part of Ron Paul’s stance is that he is against abortion but for the death penalty. I know he’s against the FEDERAL death penalty now, but you know in his heart he stills likes to see people swing.
Actually, wouldn’t a vote for Ron Paul be taking away a Republican vote?
VOTE RON PAUL IN ‘08! WOO HOO!!
PS- I don’t trust candidates with 2 first names.
He has a surplus of names- why not share? I need a new one.
I hereby declare my self Ron Schooly.
How about Ron Paul Schooly? That way when his followers invoke his name, you can pretend that they are talking about you.
Now that I think about it, wasn’t Ron Paul Schooly the bass player for Led Zeppelin?
I think just "Ron Schooly" sounds good- less pretentious. And yes, I did play bass for a bit with the Lead Zeppelin, a well known Led Zeppelin cover band.
"It should be up to her and nobody else. It’s a private matter and it isn’t anyone else’s business."
So, no input from the father…assuming he’s not one of the millions of rapists in your worst-case scenario?
You act like a fetus is the moral equivalent of a pimple.
Unless the father has the option of taking the fertilized egg and placing it inside his body for nine months, I don’t see why his or any other man’s input would be relevant. And I never implied that there were millions of rapists impregnating women.
I would argue that a zygote has a lot more in common with a pimple then it does an actual person. Except a pimple is made up of a lot more cells and is humongous when compared to a zygote
"Unless the father has the option of taking the fertilized egg and placing it inside his body for nine months, I don’t see why his or any other man’s input would be relevant."
So why would this change once the baby is on the other side of the uterus? In other words, why would the father have a say on the welfare of the baby once the umbilical chord is cut?
Where’s the magic dividing line between non-life and life? Have you worked that out, Rick? If so, please enlighten us.
"Where’s the magic dividing line between non-life and life? "
When the baby is born.
Duh.