[CRASH]

Originally Posted by Granite

I guess some people are incapable of thinking he might be actually pro-life, state by state.

I guess some people are incapable of thinking he might be actually pro-life, county by county.
I guess some people are incapable of thinking he might be actually pro-life, city by city.
I guess some people are incapable of thinking he might be actually pro-life, woman by woman.

The reason people are incapable of thinking that Paul might actually be pro-life, is that being pro-life has a meaning.
The meaning is that you will not tolerate any child killing for any excuse including "its a womans right to choose"....I mean..... "it's a states right to choose." Same thing anyway isn't it?

God never gives governments the "right to choose" when it comes to murder.

[CRASH]

Originally Posted by Bob Enyart

Ron Paul: "while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid." 1-31-06

Paul's Christian supporters are in denial. First, they deny that Paul is against a federal ban on abortion, even though he attempts to codify that position in his misnamed "Sanctity of Life" bills. And once they concede his godless position of allowing the states to systematically murder the innocent, then they fall prey to Paul's invalid and contradictory states' rights rhetoric against the unborn. Paul rejects the inalienable, God-given right to life of the unborn. He rejects the personhood of the tiniest humans. He betrays his supposed commitment to the Constitution by refusing to uphold its commitment to our posterity, and its demand that no innocent person shall be deprived of life without due process. (And supposedly, Paul believes the unborn are people who have the right to life.)

Ask a mayoral or gubernatorial candidate about abortion, and they say, "that's a federal issue." Ask most Republican candidates about abortion, and they say, "that's a state issue." Both sides are punting; like cowards, punting the most critical and controversial issue that stands today before government. No other right can be exercised if the right to life is denied.

Paul sins against God in his apathetic position of allowing the states to murder children. And to the extent that Paul knows in his heart that abortion is wrong, to that extent he is also a traitor to his nation, and even its Constitution, lusting after power instead of standing for the right to life of the vulnerable. Ron Paul is not qualified to teach Sunday School, let alone lead a nation.

The inalienable right to life trumps states' rights, and no state has the right to legitimize the owning of blacks, killing of Jews, or aborting children. If you support Ron Paul, you support tolerance of the massacre of innocence, and I call on you to repent.

-Bob Enyart
KGOV.com

POTD

[Granite]

Originally Posted by CRASH

I guess some people are incapable of thinking he might be actually pro-life, county by county.
I guess some people are incapable of thinking he might be actually pro-life, city by city.
I guess some people are incapable of thinking he might be actually pro-life, woman by woman.

The reason people are incapable of thinking that Paul might actually be pro-life, is that being pro-life has a meaning.
The meaning is that you will not tolerate any child killing for any excuse including "its a womans right to choose"....I mean..... "it's a states right to choose." Same thing anyway isn't it?

God never gives governments the "right to choose" when it comes to murder.

Paul's never said that it's a woman's right to choose.

I really wish you people would get informed before criticizing the man.

[Jefferson]

Originally Posted by Granite

Paul's never said that it's a woman's right to choose.

I really wish you people would get informed before criticizing the man.

He said it's a state's right to choose. Same wicked principle.

[Granite]

Originally Posted by Jefferson

He said it's a state's right to choose. Same wicked principle.

I guess what interests me is the blatant and defeatist cynicism displayed by you guys. The idea of a state choosing to outlaw abortion appears to be absolutely unfathomable to you.

With this kind of attitude it's small wonder the pro-life movement has made zero inroads for at least a decade.

[Jefferson]

Originally Posted by Granite

The idea of a state choosing to outlaw abortion appears to be absolutely unfathomable to you.

We are the one's who are spearheading the personhood amendment for the state of Colorado.

[Granite]

Originally Posted by Jefferson

We are the one's who are spearheading the personhood amendment for the state of Colorado.

So why the cynicism?

[Rusha]

Originally Posted by Jefferson

We are the one's who are spearheading the personhood amendment for the state of Colorado.

Well, LEGALLY defining what constitues personhood is a step in the right direction.

[CRASH]

Originally Posted by Granite

Paul's never said that it's a woman's right to choose.
.

I never said he did.
I am attacking the principle by which he has declared that states may be pro-choice by showing his position is the same as letting each woman choose.

I really wish you would get informed before criticizing my argument.

[CRASH]

Originally Posted by Granite

So why the cynicism?

We just do not believe any entity has the right to legalize murder; whether a nation, a state or a woman.

[PKevman]

Originally Posted by CRASH

We just do not believe any entity has the right to legalize murder; whether a nation, a state or a woman.

Crash, I don't know about you, but I've found that Ron Paul supporters refuse to grasp and understand this point. They buy his rhetoric but often fail to see through the lines. Paul claims to be pro-life and says a lot of things that sound good, so they jump on his bandwagon. Unfortunately many good people did this (myself included) with GW Bush. I just hope Paul doesn't get elected for their sake so they don't feel that betrayal when he does in fact allow the states to choose to kill children.

[PKevman]

There should be ONE standard and ONE law for every state, province, county, city, and piece of land that wants to call itself part of the United States of America: Murder of the innocent will not be tolerated in any way, shape, or form. No exceptions.

That is the battle we face, and until we have the entire professing pro-life community behind that mission we're running uphill!

[Granite]

Originally Posted by CRASH

We just do not believe any entity has the right to legalize murder; whether a nation, a state or a woman.

That doesn't address the cynicism inherent in your opinion or in Jefferson's. You all appear totally incapable of imagining a state that illegalizes abortion. Truly sad commentary on your part.

[CRASH]

Originally Posted by Granite

That doesn't address the cynicism inherent in your opinion or in Jefferson's. You all appear totally incapable of imagining a state that illegalizes abortion. Truly sad commentary on your part.

A complete side issue is sad?

We can all imagine a state banning abortion. I can even imagine all states but one banning abortion. But if even one state is still killing kids at the end of the day, then we have lost the battle.

No nation, state or person has the right to legalize murder.

I notice you completely dropped my argument that the pro choice by state is based on the same evil pro choice premise as pro-choice by woman. Does that mean you concede the point?

[S†ephen]

Originally Posted by PastorKevin

There should be ONE standard and ONE law for every state, province, county, city, and piece of land that wants to call itself part of the United States of America: Murder of the innocent will not be tolerated in any way, shape, or form. No exceptions.

including the murder of homosexuals. have you given thought to the fact that if it is not murder for the state to kill a homosexual then (consistently) it is not murder for them to kill an unborn child either.