TV Schedule

Ron Paul is the Religious Right



  3. Colonial_Zombie
  4. related topics
"The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life. The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance." - Ron Paul

The Constitution does not once mention God and the Declaration only refers to an ambiguous "Creator". Has Ron Paul even read the Constitution?

Let the Voters' regret begin. Did you know that Ron Paul is a member of the Religious Right? He's hardly a Libertarian and certainly not a Constitutionalist. Don't believe me? See for yourself.

Let's start off with his denial of Darwin's Theory of Evolution - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw&feature=...

And his denial of the existence of Global Warming - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUm1aVwRnC0&feature=...

And his belief that the Ten Commandments are equitable to the Constitution - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unVqSwL-_Xk&feature=...

Wow. Scary. It's a real shame that all of his RonTard supporters didn't do their homework...

He's also said, "Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few. The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity....Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation’s Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war."

Ron Paul is a dangerous enemy of the Constitution. He has it wrong on the Separation of Church and State, and a woman's right to choose. He would reverse Roe v. Wade if allowed. He also supports school-vouchers, which allows private religious schools to enjoy the support of the government and takes money away from public schools. Sounds like a church-state to me. I don't want my taxes being used to pay from someone else's religious education. If church schools wish to exist, that is fine with me, but let them support themselves and stop living off of unconstitutional government hand outs.

If he claims to want to get government out of our personal lives and off of our backs, and claims to support the Constitution, then why does he not support a woman's right to choose? It is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Ron Paul simply wishes to take our rights away and increase government control over some of the most personal parts of our lives.

He also opposes gay rights and would allow states to discriminate against homosexuals. Either we should all have rights or none of us should have rights at all.

It is a shame so many people have had the wool pulled over their eyes...Wasted votes.
Colonial_Zombie

7 responses // Ron Paul is the Religious Right

  • Here here! Eat it Ron-tards!
    mizer
  • Man I just bought his book!
    My personal veiw is that religion is something that served a purpose in the past but we are slowly out growing it now and evolving psycologically.

    I dont agree with your impression about ron paul.

    I mean he seems up tight about abortion, but thats just cause he's biased since he was delivering so many babies.
    but the point is be it abortion or gay rights or education... he wants us to decide on our policies on a local level
    so he doesnt have to belevie in evolution or global warming its
    unfortunate if he doesnt but he leaves it up to us to choose
    DivinePerspective
  • ron paul Voted AGAINST the 2006 Marriage Protection Act (H.J. Res. 88), which proposed an amendment to the Constitution that would ban gay marriage
    see he sticks up for human rights.

    But thanks for pointing out those problems out to me so Im not sofa king rontarted
    DivinePerspective
  • See what you’re saying, but it just seems clear that Ron is a religious dude with some fundamental religious views, and from watching the links he doesn’t seem completely hard line on any of them. To say global warming is “overblown” is his opinion, he didn’t say it was a lie like bush did until not to long ago.

    If everything above is true I still think out of all the candidates Ron is the one with the people’s interest most at heart. You can't blame him for his religious views...

    kiko
    kiko_deep
  • http://www.queerty.com/ron-paul-on-gay-marriage-2007121...
    Colonial_Zombie, this "Ron Tard" has certainly done more than his fair share of homework. And I accept Dr. Paul regardless of his religious beliefs as much as I accept your right to disagree with him. The other three candidates also claim to be religious but that is hardly a reason to assume that they are incapable of performing the required duties of the presidency. Dr. Paul is very much a libertarian. A conservative leaning libertarian, but a libertarian nonetheless. Like you, I disagree with Paul's interpretation of separation of church and state and his views on pro-life as defending liberty. But taken as a whole he has an unerring stance on foreign policy, economics and civil liberties. In fact, he has probably written more on economics than the other candidates have read.

    Your interpretation of Dr. Paul's proposed educational voucher program is off the mark. It is essentially a tax credit of $5000 per student for parents to choose how to educate their own children and includes a tax credit for our underpaid teachers. Competition amongst schools is a good thing, fostering incentives for better academic programs at lower costs. The consequence that some schools might be parochial simply solves the unending battle of parents who disagree about school prayers, etc.

    I'm not quite sure how you have come to the conclusion that Paul does not support gay rights. That is simply false. To be fair, he did vote against federal legislation to uphold gay couple adoption. He is all for same-sex marriage though. In fact, he thinks that government has no place in any kind of marriage whatsoever. I know that I don't need a government stamped piece of paper to validate my loving relationship. :-)

    Thinking that Ron Paul wishes to "take our rights away from us and increase government control" is simply absurd. Don't despair fellow Pauliticians. A vote cast on principles is never wasted. Let's see how many people we can muster for the Revolution March on July 12th to show Washington a real Patriot Act! http://current.com/items/88936981_revolution_march_on_w...

    Ron Paul on the issues:
    http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/
    Hawkmang
  • http://current.com/items/88939309_ron_paul_s_the_revolu...
    Anyone seeking a more thorough understanding of Dr. Ron Paul's positions might be interested in his new book, "The Revolution: A Manifesto" which will appear at #1 on the May 18th New York Times Best Seller List.
    Hawkmang
  • I am a Christian and I am not attacking his religious views. What I concerned about is his complete ignorance when it comes to basic scientific principles. If he doesn't believe in global warming, he is likely to take NO action whatsoever to stop its harmful effects on our children's future. If he ever had a chance at becoming president, he would be in a powerful place to affect environmental policies of the government, but knowing his extreme fiscal views, he would allow companies to essentially do whatever they wanted, including emit limitless amounts of CO2.

    His denial of Evolution is dangerous because as president he is likely to let a far-right, Paul-appointed Supreme Court allow schools to teach religious beliefs in the science class. As he has said in his own words. He does not believe in the Separation of Church and State...which IS in the Constitution. By allowing schools to have too much local control, they can get away with teaching whatever they want, including their religious beliefs.

    While he may have voted against the absurd marriage amendment, he would allow states to decide whether or not homosexual marriage should be legal. This would mean that there are some United States Citizens who would enjoy rights that others would not because they are considered to be second class citizens. Is this the intention of our Founding Fathers? I don't think so. Paul is OK with states denying marriages because he lives in Texas (where I live) and he knows that Rick Perry, the ultra-conservative governor would not allow homosexuals to marry. What a cowardly policy. If Ron Paul was truly worthy of protecting the Constitution, he would stand up for the rights of all Americans.

    Ron Paul can believe whatever he wants in terms of religion, but it becomes our business when he begins to mention it in his political stump speeches - and we should be concerned. As president, he would seek to remove a woman's Constitutional right to an abortion, guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, through political Court appointments.

    If you don't think these are big deals....then you might as well have voted for Huckabee.

    Ron Paul supports his version of the Constitution, which is vastly different than the one written by our Founding Fathers.
    Colonial_Zombie

Add your response

Login/Registration is required to add a response.