• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

It's really weird that Ron Paul is Pro-Life

M

micrometers

Diamond Member
Because being Pro-Life is very much intrusive government.

Paul's libertarianism takes him to places that challenge the drug war and interventionist foreign policy. Good for him.

But given general libertarian opposition to regulations and rules, you would think that pro-choice would be natural for him.

I think it's either

1. really evidence that Paul is equally an old-fashioned traditional conservative

2. the power of the pro-life lobby in the Republican party that being remotely pro-choice is an automatic disqualifier.
 
It's because even libertarians realize that when you abort a baby, you're just plain killing it. Killing a person is killing a person and killing a person is morally wrong.
 
XZeroII said:
It's because even libertarians realize that when you abort a baby, you're just plain killing it. Killing a person is killing a person and killing a person is morally wrong.
Click to expand...

lol. I guess I was a mass murderer for killing my sperm consistently day-after-day when I hit puberty back in the day.
 
karmypolitics said:
Because being Pro-Life is very much intrusive government.

Paul's libertarianism takes him to places that challenge the drug war and interventionist foreign policy. Good for him.

But given general libertarian opposition to regulations and rules, you would think that pro-choice would be natural for him.

I think it's either

1. really evidence that Paul is equally an old-fashioned traditional conservative

2. the power of the pro-life lobby in the Republican party that being remotely pro-choice is an automatic disqualifier.
Click to expand...

Libertarian foundations are the protection of life, liberty, and property. Do you really not see how pro-life fits into that? The debate is more whether an unborn fetus is a life or not.
 
momeNt said:
Libertarian foundations are the protection of life, liberty, and property. Do you really not see how pro-life fits into that? The debate is more whether an unborn fetus is a life or not.
Click to expand...

This.

Libertarians believe you should be able to pretty much do what you want, unless it interferes with another person's life, liberty or property.
 
Actually, Dr. Paul isn't pro-life enough for most Republicans and he's lost some supporters for writing in defense of the morning after pill. However, he is pro-life overall and I do agree with the OP that he is a traditional conservative as much as a libertarian. He's what you call a paleolibertarian, different from a Beltway libertarian like Gary Johnson who is totally socially liberal.
 
momeNt said:
Libertarian foundations are the protection of life, liberty, and property. Do you really not see how pro-life fits into that? The debate is more whether an unborn fetus is a life or not.
Click to expand...

pro life is theocracy garbage.

http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5105

ayn rand was vehemently pro-choice. which is why it's so weird that ron paul is pro life. I think that it was likely his recognition that being pro-choice would instantly torpedo any chance he had at winning. Instantly.
 
XZeroII said:
It's because even libertarians realize that when you abort a baby, you're just plain killing it. Killing a person is killing a person and killing a person is morally wrong.
Click to expand...

A couple of things wrong with this statement. First of all, a fetus is not a "person", and secondly, it's not always morally wrong to kill a person.
 
I think you guys have it wrong. Ron Paul is all for being pro-choice when it comes to them colored fetuses (feti?), but vehemently pro-life for them pure and wholesome white fetuses. At least that is what I think RapidMongoose would tell me. 😛
 
XZeroII said:
It's because even libertarians realize that when you abort a baby, you're just plain killing it. Killing a person is killing a person and killing a person is morally wrong.
Click to expand...

An unborn human is not a person. That moniker is reserved for humans who are post birth.

First said:
lol. I guess I was a mass murderer for killing my sperm consistently day-after-day when I hit puberty back in the day.
Click to expand...

Humans (sans those with genetic abnormalities) have 46 chromosomes. Your sperm only have half that number and are not humans. 🙂
 
It's not weird at all. Pro-choice or pro-life hinges upon one's definition of when the individual rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness begin. At conception, at viability, or at birth?

I'm a libertarian who believes those rights begin at viability. Ron Paul may believe something different.
 
cybrsage said:
An unborn human is not a person. That moniker is reserved for humans who are post birth.
Click to expand...

Anatomically, though, there is virtually no difference between a newly born baby and a late stage fetus. This is why late termination is illegal in most countries, but many libertarians feel that defining how "late" is "too late" is practically impossible because technology is always improving viability. Conception is clear cut, at that point you've done the deed and you've got a full chromosome human forming. Contraception is cheap, I don't think lifers have much sympathy for people who skimp on 25 cent condoms and then have a kid that's going to cost them half their time and income.
 
Last edited:
You need to see it from a prolifers' point of view; it's murder, so saying they support big gov is like saying a person who thinks the government should punish murderers is also into big gov.

Also, a sperm is not a fertilized egg or a fetus.
 
Im sure its a little bit of everything said so far. His religious views creep over to his political views on pro-life. He doesnt want an instant GOP disqualification by saying he is pro-choice.
 
karmypolitics said:
pro life is theocracy garbage.

http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5105

ayn rand was vehemently pro-choice. which is why it's so weird that ron paul is pro life. I think that it was likely his recognition that being pro-choice would instantly torpedo any chance he had at winning. Instantly.
Click to expand...

Ayn Rand was pro-choice because she didn't think a fetus was a life. This is why it's possible for libertarians to fall on either side of the fence on this one.
 
I assume that he has first hand knowledge of abortion practices and realizes how horrific some are. A mixture of that and religion and I don't see how it's hard that he'd be pro choice.

Guys like Romney and Gingrich would probably volunteer to rip off baby appendages or stick scissors into their skulls.
 
karmypolitics said:
Because being Pro-Life is very much intrusive government.
Click to expand...

That's the problem with being a Christian Libertarian. You have end up believing in many crazy religious beliefs that require the government's intrusion into people's private lives but at the same time claim to profess a belief in liberty.
 
karmypolitics said:
pro life is theocracy garbage.
Click to expand...

The irony is that the anti-abortionists who call themselves "pro-life" are in reality very much anti-life since their belief is irrational and if implemented would result in the destruction of or at least severe damage to people's lives and happiness. What could be more anti-life than forcing a woman to die because of a difficult pregnancy or forcing someone to parent a child conceived through rape?
 
Funny how everyone whom is in favor of abortion has themselves been born.

Ask any adopted or person whose parents had considered abortion whether they would rather have been dead. If you can find a single person who says they would rather be dead, then I would consider changing my opinion on abortion.
 
First said:
lol. I guess I was a mass murderer for killing my sperm consistently day-after-day when I hit puberty back in the day.
Click to expand...

Oh, so you are a hermaphrodite? All your sperm are actually self-impregnated eggs with complete DNA from two different people? You sure are some sort of freaky mutant then! :colbert:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top