2007-09-21 08:26:12 · 18 answers · asked by Beauty&Brains 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Hey ROn Paul is a pro-life in his personal view. But does not believe it should be outlawed or life should be defined at the federal level.
He believes that it should be at the state level.
Even at the state level , it would never be outlawed because people now days are much too liberal in that regard (in a good way I suppose)
One great example of this is North Dakota they tried to have the people vote on legislation to outlaw abortion, typically you would think they would be very conservative, but they actually voted to keep it legal. So he is only not for federal government funding and making a "one size fits all" rule for this issue.
2007-09-21 08:50:35 · update #1
I'm a democrat but might change party affiliation to vote in the primaries for Ron Paul. The only thing that's holding me back is that he is a pro-lifer. Not that I'm for killing babies or anything, I just don't think a man should be able to have any say in this law at all. Not until they can get pregnant and bear a child. If men could get pregnant, you know there would be an abortion clinic on every corner.
2007-09-21 08:37:33 · answer #1 · answered by Ralphie 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
If anything I've become more committed to Ron Paul than ever. I just wish he'd not spend so much time talking about his religious beliefs and his position on abortion. Using these issues as a selling point runs very contrary to Libertarian ideas and really aren't relevant to his campaign message. He's really running the risk of alienating Democrats who might be thinking about jumping ship. But, still, it's a minor objection.
Outside of that, I still believe very strongly that Ron Paul is the best choice if we are ever to get serious about repairing the damage that's been done to this country.
2007-09-21 09:03:38 · answer #2 · answered by skullklipz 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
in all probability not. for me it will be the two obama or mccain. so some distance, mccain being born in south united states of america of america or his involvement with lobbyists or maybe being between the keating 5 hasn't fairly replaced what i think of roughly him. likewise obama's minister's stupid comments do not area me plenty the two, purely like lots of the crazies that help him do not do plenty to alter my opinion. i pay attention to each talk and make my very own opinion, with out the earnings of any paid pundits who've an aganda - declared or not. the two have good factors and the two may well be superb to clinton.
2016-10-19 08:06:14 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorry, a few months ago I supported no one and today I still haven't found anyone that I can support. I sure hope someone emerges soon or I may be forced to vote for the lesser of two evils.
2007-09-21 09:30:23 · answer #4 · answered by The Voice of Reason 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
NO! I still support Ron Paul 100% because I have been following his political career for over 20 years and believe "VERY" strongly that his ideals are best for the majority of Americans....
...His ideals are basically the same as Thomas Jefferson's, & the rest of the founders, who revolutionized the political thinking of the world when they wrote legislation {The Constitution} that essentially "LIMITED" the power of a centralized government and gave that "Power" to the American people.
Thank you.
*****************************************************
2007-09-21 09:33:43 · answer #5 · answered by beesting 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have changed my mind about Rudy Guliani, my first thought was "he doesn't have a chance", now I hope he is the GOP candidate because he is a sure loser. He can never overcome the firefighters of the US who are campaigning against him, for good reason.
His three marriages will preclude him from running on the old GOP "family values" platform, so what is left?
2007-09-21 08:38:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The questions I would like to ask all candidate of both parties what makes them qualified to be our next President. A detailed list of qualifications.
2007-09-21 11:11:38 · answer #7 · answered by rug 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
First of all I cant believe we're having presidential debates this far ahead of the elections. I wanted Dennis Kocinich in the beginning and I'd still like to see him make it. I'll have to wait for the convention next year and see who they nominate.
I'm registered Independent, so I'm not tied to a party. I will say I'm more involved in this election than I have been in many others.
2007-09-21 08:37:05 · answer #8 · answered by phlada64 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, I used to favor Bill Richardson for the Democratic nomination until I read his views in more detail and he's gone too far to the left for me, like most of the Democrats.
2007-09-21 08:49:44 · answer #9 · answered by Sean 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I've found Ron Paul more favorable. Aside from his stance on the war, I agree with everything else. Even though the war is important to me, the fact that I agree 100% with everything else he says impresses me, and I might vote for him.
Of course, he's not going to win, but I really don't want to commit to anyone else.
2007-09-21 08:30:18 · answer #10 · answered by Pfo 7 · 8⤊ 2⤋