Ron Paul on Abortion
Because people love it when I talk about Ron Paul...
My pastor, Phillip Kayser, sent the following in an E-mail. He is defending Ron Paul's pro-life stance. I hope this can be helpful for some:
Hi all
I have received questions from several people on whether Ron Paul is pro-life (he strongly is) and whether he is libertarian. His constitutionalism is sometimes misinterpreted as libertarianism, but there is a difference. Though I don’t want to use this list to promote one candidate, (there are two I like very much, and another one that I am content with), I thought I needed to clarify. Here’s a copy of a letter that I sent to one of the inquiries. I hope its OK to send to all, as this will save me time. Blessings.
Hi
Yes, Dr. Ron Paul is very pro-life. Though he has libertarian leanings, he is not your typical libertarian. Paul’s stance on abortion is unequivocal – it is murder. He has said this publicly many times. He has been given a 0% rating by NARAL. On one video he said, “You have to protect the life of all people. ... [the fetus] is human, has legal rights... you can be taken to court for murder. It’s not strictly a privacy issue.... You have legalized infanticide. What’s the difference between the value of life one minute before birth and one minute after birth?†If you look at his official literature he has made the life of the unborn have every legal right that a citizen has. He said, “As an OB/GYN, I have assisted women in delivering over 4,000 babies. That experience has made me an unshakable foe of abortion. Much can be understood about the civility of a society by observing its regard for the dignity of human life. In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. In Congress, I have authored H.R. 1094. This legislation seeks to define life as beginning at conception. I am also the prime sponsor of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v. Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending the federal court tyranny that threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. I have also authored H.R. 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called population control.†He obviously voted for the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. He spoke strongly against partial birth abortion at that vote. But he considers it an empty victory because it hasn’t stopped abortions. But he described the practice is “barbaric.†He also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and would cause the court's precedents in these areas to no longer be binding. He once said, ‘The best solution, of course, is not now available to us. That would be a Supreme Court that recognizes that for all criminal laws, the several states retain jurisdiction.’†In the last statement Ron Paul clearly calls both abortion and homosexuality criminal. I watched Ron Paul go toe-to-toe with a rabid abortion-promoting-feminist, and he did not relinquish one square inch to her. She told him that aborting eight pound babies doesn’t happen. He said, “What do you think partial birth abortion is?†She kept insisting that it didn’t happen, and he said that the principle is the same no matter how small the baby is and that infanticide is never acceptable. Rep. Barbara Hagan (former Chair of the New Hampshire Right to Life Committee) gave this endorsement: “Pro-Lifers from all political persuasions can and should support Congressman Ron Paul for President. His voting record is impeccable and he understands our Constitutional Republic and the Inalienable Right to Life for all.†The National Pro-Life Alliance, said, “Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) [has a] solid pro-life voting record in the United States Congress.†(in Annandale, VA, summer 2007). Ashley Tyndall, president of Caroline Students for Life said, “A vote for Ron Paul is a vote to end abortion – now.†There are many things that Ron Paul has sought to do his his ten terms of office to stop abortion.
What has been mistaken for libertarianism is his unwillingness to go beyond the Constitution (which as a congressman, he has sworn to uphold and defend from all enemies, foreign and domestic). Many politicians today are perjuring themselves when they vote for agencies, programs and expenditures which are not authorized in the Constitution. The Constitution gives the Federal government very limited government. (You could almost say it is libertarian on the Federal level.) These powers are said to be “vested†in the three branches of government, which means they cannot be delegated, taken away or usurped by other branches. Old books on civics spoke of these powers as “limited powers,†“enumerated powers,†“delegated powers†and “specified powers.†If these people don’t like the Constitution, there is a mechanism to amend it. But they have instead chosen the easier course of ignoring it. One economic analyst estimated that 62% of the 2006 Federal Budget is grossly unconstitutional. We are living in a time of great crisis when all our liberties, and every vestige of Christianity is being removed from the public square. It is imperative that we have more than simply a pro-life president. We need a president who will reign in our tyrannical Federal government on every level before it is too late. Ron Paul’s limited government stance is exactly what is needed. Getting back to the Constitution would eliminate most of the horrible problems that have been emanating from Washington, DC. That is Ron Paul’s goal – get back to the Constitution. That should not be confused with libertarianism.
I like Huckabee on a personal level, and I love his pro-life stances. But there are aspects to his agenda that are anything but pro-family. He is certainly for expanding the Federal government on many levels (Department of Education, Medical Care and Preventive Care, Welfare, etc.). The two constitutionalists (as I see it) are Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul. Duncan Hunter may be there, but I haven’t analyzed him enough. Hope this helps.
Blessings.
Phillip G. Kayser
Comments
Add a Comment