Ron Paul Thread

[CoderGuy]

Well, the way I see it we need someone with core American values, that'll uphold our rights. In the end, it doesn't matter what someone believes regarding evolution. That's just trivia as far as national politics goes. We need someone who isn't going to war with the world, or spending us into oblivion. As long as the basic principles are in place, there's advisors for the rest.

I disagree there. Evolution, gay rights, and abortion are hot button religeous topics, and I don't believe the leader of the free world should allow their personal religious beliefs to dictate policy. Once Bush started trying to change the constitution based on his beliefs on gay marriage, for instance, I lost what little respect I had for him. Right now all of the GOP candidates are very religious, and while I would rather have a Ron Paul than an Obama, I would not vote for him based on making his religious beliefs the focus of the campaigning.

[lxskllr]

His personal beliefs don't always coincide with mine, but for most issues, he defers to the states where the decision really belongs. I find little fault with his views...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic...ns_of_Ron_Paul

[CoderGuy]

His personal beliefs don't always coincide with mine, but for most issues, he defers to the states where the decision really belongs. I find little fault with his views...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic...ns_of_Ron_Paul

I agree with you on that. And if he is able to keep his personal beliefs personal, he is 100% the right man for the job, he is the only one that "gets it" and actually knows what the problems are (and has proven for the past 20 years that he has been right). It's only when they use their beliefs to make legal decisions the way others have that I have a problem.

[truthwolf1]

My guess is if you sat down and questioned him he leans towards a (theistic evolutionist). Meaning he believes in a creator and also in the science. He seemed to be okay with Gay anything as long as it is left up to the states to decide not a Federal order for all. Abortion, you do have a strong point with Paul delivering as many babies as he has, but I am sure he would leave that up to the people to decide on also. Those are many of the issues including legalizing marijuana which he would move take the FED out of.

[sgreger1]

Well, the way I see it we need someone with core American values, that'll uphold our rights. In the end, it doesn't matter what someone believes regarding evolution. That's just trivia as far as national politics goes. We need someone who isn't going to war with the world, or spending us into oblivion. As long as the basic principles are in place, there's advisors for the rest.

Much of science R&D is funded through federal money of one sort or another. Therefore, who runs the federal government runs our scientific progress as a nation. What I am afraid of is that someone who either a) doesn't believe in science or b) doesn't place a high value on science will hinder us significantly as a nation by cutting funding. Example: Bush forbade funding of stem cells, so everything grinded to a halt for 8 years, then Obama comes in and provides funding and within 2years we are already transplanting custom grown organs into humans in clinical trials. That is the difference between a pro-science and an anti-science president.

I agree, we have bigger fish to fry, but as a voter science is high up on the list of things I think are important to the economy, our defense, and our future as a nation. We need to fund space exploration, innovation in the medical field, etc etc etc. This cannot happen when people don't believe in even the most accepted of scientific principles.

[sgreger1]

This man will be appointing supreme court justices, he will be deciding who gets federal funding and for what etc etc. His personal beliefs on these topics are integral to how he makes these choices.

I like Paul and he has my vote, but I only like 51% of him, the other 49% are some pretty whacky christian beliefs that don't ring the "you should trust me with the highest office in the land" bell.

[lxskllr]

He seems to be against federal funding in general. I'm not sure what his stance is on different science issues, but it's generally hands off, leaving things to the free market, and the states. I can appreciate that position even though it may be against my immediate interests.

[sgreger1]

He seems to be against federal funding in general. I'm not sure what his stance is on different science issues, but it's generally hands off, leaving things to the free market, and the states. I can appreciate that position even though it may be against my immediate interests.

And that is why he has my vote. However, on funding science, that is usually tied in with defense or education spending so I am curious how he handles it. He couldn't really differ that decision down to the states any more than he could have the states decide how to fund NASA. It's a federal level expenditure, but hopefully he would do the right thing.

[TheJanitor]

Anyone is electable. It's a question of standing up, and doing the right thing....

Unelectable. As in, no way in hell he gets enough votes. As in, more than half of the people voting disagree with his positions. He's too "small government" for liberals, and too weak on national security for conservatives. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out there's no way in hell he gets elected. He won't even come in second in the primaries.

[lxskllr]

and 10 years ago, Obama was too brown to get elected. Point? Everyone is unelectable until they get elected.

[TheJanitor]

But, Obama is a textbook leftist. He has a base. A huge one. Paul does not. Just a very small, very vocal group of supporters. The numbers don't lie.

[TheJanitor]

Don't get me wrong, I would vote for Paul if he got the nomination, as I will not vote Democrat. But, it just won't happen.

[charmando]

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...evolution.html
it's pretty hard to argue with this type of evidence.

[Bigblue1]

Ron Paul: Perfect constitutional voting record, Sgregor you know better than to fall for the divisive social issues that don't matter one iota. They use social issues to perpetuate the current system, Your smarter than that.......

[chadizzy1]

Ron Paul would shake things up.
That makes people nervous.