What do you disagree with Ron Paul in terms of policy and why?
Immigration. Any peaceful person should be able to cross borders freely and openly.
Didn't Paul say he supported creationism being taught in schools at one of the debates? Or at least to "teach the controversy."
He said absolutely nothing of the kind at any time.
Quote from: MrBogosity on August 26, 2009, 06:00:56 PM
He said absolutely nothing of the kind at any time.
[yt]42n42J-gB_Y[/yt]
Okay. So where in that video does he say he supports creationism being taught or at least to "teach the controversy"?
QuoteQ: Academic freedom is threatened when questioning the theory of evolution. An Iowa State astronomer was denied tenure because of his work in intelligent design in May 2007. Censoring alternative theories--dogmatic indoctrination--has replaced scientific inquiry. Will you encourage a more open approach to the presentation of scientific facts that contradict the theory of evolution?
* HUCKABEE: Yes.
* TANCREDO: Yes.
* COX: Yes.
* BROWNBACK: Yes.
* PAUL: Yes.
* HUNTER: Yes.
* KEYES: Yes.
Source: [Xref Hunter] 2007 GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate Sep 17, 2007
"Encourage a more open approach to the presentation of scientific facts..." You DO realize that that's the same sort of manipulative questioning that creationists use to get real scientists to unwittingly sign petitions for them, right?
I mean I would have to answer "yes" to that!!!
You're becoming as bad as the creationists.
His position on abortion. I mean, I can understand why he feels the way he does being an obstetrician and all but as for me, I cannot, in good conscience, tell a rape victim that it is morally wrong for her to not want to carry the baby of her attacker. I just can't. You also get into the issue of pregnancies that carry a serious risk to the mother. I'd hate to see a mother put at risk or even killed because the law got in the way of the abortion she needed.
Though Shane, what didn't you like about his position on immigration? All I've heard him say is to stop rewarding the line jumpers. Stop giving them free welfare, amnesty, social security and so on and it won't be a problem. In his interview with John Stossel, he has said he'd love to see people coming back and forth to the US to work.
Yeah, the abortion issue, too.
The problem is, he says this, but I never hear him talking about removing the ridiculous immigration regulations. People come here illegally because it's easier to swim the Rio Grande than to climb Mount Bureaucracy.
The thing about open door policy on immigration is people worry about the country getting a rep as a haven for people trying to escape the law in their own country. What should be done to alleviate that concern?
Um, nothing. Why should it?
Just the fact that it's one of the biggest arguments against it. Say someone comes to the US from another country and then that country's authorities call up the US and say he's wanted for a crime in his country. Should he be sent back?
Or if someone does come to the US and does nothing but get in trouble with the law from day 1, should he be sent back too?
@Lord T Hawkeye:
Quote from: MrBogosity on August 26, 2009, 06:20:22 AMImmigration. Any peaceful person should be able to cross borders freely and openly.
When did I say I was against extradition and deportation?
Quote from: MrBogosity on August 26, 2009, 06:20:22 AM
Immigration. Any peaceful person should be able to cross borders freely and openly.
What's Dr. Paul's position on immigration?
Also, where do you stand on amnesty?
Amnesty is the wrong solution to the wrong problem. The problem isn't the people coming here legally or illegally, it's the bureaucratic rigmarole they have to go through to do it.
Quote from: MrBogosity on August 29, 2009, 08:22:45 PM
When did I say I was against extradition and deportation?
Never, that came out wrong...
To put it in a better way. Any peaceful person should be able to come. I guess the better question is "How do you tell which is which?"
Shane: A criminal and medical screening should be enough.
I can't remember what video he said this in, however.
I agree: medical and criminal screening. That should be all that's required.
Ick, I hate to play with necromancy but this just keeps coming up and I'm trying to make sense of it.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul197.html
This gets brought up constantly as proof that Ron Paul is in favor of banning gay marriage. I try to say that's guilt by association at best but I'm shot down and the bit about it being constitutional for states to ban gay marriage sounds odd to me.
Can anyone set the record straight on this?
Yes. When John Stossel asked him directly if gays should be allowed to marry, his response was an unequivocal "Sure!"
Ron Paul is talking about Federalism and the separation of powers. Liberals just don't seem to understand that concept.
That's the funny thing. He tells me he's republican but he so often strikes me as liberal much of the time. Calls me a heartless monster because I said sweat shops in third world countries can only do good as long as nobody's forced at gun point to work them. Didn't like it when I said that he's supporting policy that gives them fewer jobs and fewer choices.
Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on September 15, 2009, 11:30:07 AM
That's the funny thing. He tells me he's republican but he so often strikes me as liberal much of the time. Calls me a heartless monster because I said sweat shops in third world countries can only do good as long as nobody's forced at gun point to work them. Didn't like it when I said that he's supporting policy that gives them fewer jobs and fewer choices.
So in other words, he's a woo.
A what now?
QuoteYes. When John Stossel asked him directly if gays should be allowed to marry, his response was an unequivocal "Sure!"
"BUT THAT'S A VIDEO! IT DOESN'T COUNT!!" -_-
Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on September 15, 2009, 02:46:27 PM
A what now?
"BUT THAT'S A VIDEO! IT DOESN'T COUNT!!" -_-
*Facepalms*
Like I said, a woo.
A video of him stating it directly doesn't COUNT? This guy REALLY said that???
No, it was in AIM. But that's his excuse every time I try to show vids as evidence. Won't look at them because they're vids and they don't count for some arbitrary reason.
He REALLY has a double dose of irrational Ron Paul hate. One time, we were doing this exercise where you try to find what do you agree with each candidate on even if you don't support them as a whole. He was able to do most of them but when Ron Paul comes up, just gives a straight no which is a bold faced lie and we both know it.
"Uh...he opposes gun control and so do you"
"Doesn't matter"
Where does this come from? It's insane I tell you.
I think you told us about this guy before in your first post at this forum.
Wow...
Great guy otherwise but enter politics and it's contradiction city.
Seriously, libertarian ideas seem harmless at worst to me but listening to everyone talk, you'd think we were a cult that pours acid on babies. ><
I hear ya' man.
People seem to conflate the passion/forcefulness of some of us, to being dogmatic-ness in all of us...