Catholics for Ron Paul Coalition

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChristopherV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

ChristopherV

Guest
Ron Paul Campaign Announces ‘Catholics for Ron Paul’ Coalition
“To a devout Catholic, or any person of faith, the fact that Ron Paul’s political positions are unwavering is appealing and admirable,” said Matt DeVries, who serves on the “Catholics for Ron Paul” national advisory board.
“Dr. Paul’s record on the sanctity of life cannot be questioned. I appreciate that he offers pro-life advocates new ways of thinking on this important issue, such as through affirming states’ rights,”
As a first basic step, those wanting to join the “Catholics for Ron Paul” coalition should visit www.RonPaul2012.com/Catholics
 
Vote for Ron Paul, take away votes from the Republican nominee, help Obama win re-election, then Obama can give us two more pro-abortion supreme court justices guarenteeing abortion on demand for another 40 years. Good job guys!

Ishii
How can voting in the primary take away from the Republican nominee?
 
Isn’t Ron Paul strongly pro gay marriage?
I don’t think so, but would appreciate any links/resources stating such. It seems if he prefers the states to make most decisions concerning themselves, gay marriage would be included.

Found something:

Ron Paul on Civil Rights : Oct 21, 2007
Protect all voluntary associations; don’t define marriage
Q: On gay marriage. You’ve been quoted as saying, “Any association that’s voluntary should be permissible in a free society.” And you’ve expressed your opposition to a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

A: If you believe in federalism, it’s better that we allow these things to be left to the state. My personal belief is that marriage is a religious ceremony. And it should be dealt with religiously. The [government] really shouldn’t be involved. The government got involved mostly for health reasons 100 years or so ago. But this should be a religious matter. All voluntary associations, whether they’re economic or social, should be protected by the law. But to amend the Constitution is totally unnecessary to define something that’s already in the dictionary. We do know what marriage is about. We don’t need a new definition or argue over a definition and have an Amendment. To me, it just seems so unnecessary to do that. There’s no need for the federal government to be involved in this.
 
This might increase his vote percentage from 0.2% to 0.3%!
The primary is our best chance to find a true pro-life candidate. It seems Ron gets overlooked because of ‘other’ issues. Then we have a nominee that many Catholics cannot agree with.
 
How can voting in the primary take away from the Republican nominee?
If he got the nomination, I believe it would guarentee Obama re-election. If he runs as a 3rd party candidate (because he has no chance of getting the nomination), it would take away votes from the GOP candidate.

Ishii
 
The primary is our best chance to find a true pro-life candidate. It seems Ron gets overlooked because of ‘other’ issues. Then we have a nominee that many Catholics cannot agree with.
Other issues, such as his unelectability. But voting for him in the primaries is fine, as long as Catholics vote for the most electable pro-life candidate in the general (which will be the GOP nominee).

Ishii
 
Other issues, such as his unelectability. But voting for him in the primaries is fine, as long as Catholics vote for the most electable pro-life candidate in the general (which will be the GOP nominee).

Ishii
I don’t agree that being unelectable is an issue. If it were, we’d only have one nominee running in both primaries. :rolleyes:
 
If he got the nomination, I believe it would guarentee Obama re-election. If he runs as a 3rd party candidate (because he has no chance of getting the nomination), it would take away votes from the GOP candidate.

Ishii
You and I have about the same chance of getting the nomination as Paul does
 
I believe we are going To end up with a Romney / Bachman ticket if perry gets in theocracy it could be Perty / Bachmab
Right now, I couldn’t see myself voting for either.

Hasn’t Perry gone back and forth on the pro-life issue?
 
Rick Perry will be the GOP nominee. As far as GOP VP nominee, I can’t say just yet. I doubt it will be Bachman.
 
Right now, I couldn’t see myself voting for either.

Hasn’t Perry gone back and forth on the pro-life issue?
Yeah, tough choice. Perry just got a 100% rating from Texas RTL and has had the same for both of his runs for govenor. But as govenor, he doesn’t really vote on anything so it’s harder to assess than a sitting Senator or Congressman. He has control of the state legislature docket and has push several strong pro-life measures.

As for Ron Paul, I live in his district. I would hate to lose him as my representative but there is very little in his positions that I disagree with.
 
Rick Perry will be the GOP nominee. As far as GOP VP nominee, I can’t say just yet. I doubt it will be Bachman.
I thought I read something about Perry going back and forth on the pro-life issue. Do you know if there’s anything to that?
 
Prodigal Son1,
You are right, I recall an article from the 90’s about that…

Rick Perry started out as a Democrat commie, Rick Perry supported Al Gore… it’s a fact look it up! that says a lot!

There really is nothing to be found on his so-called “Pro LIfe” stance while as a Democratic state senator that hasn’t been scrubbed. I’ll let you know when I find it.

Either way Perry is a total warmonger, just another head of the Bush/Obama war machine hydra…
People who are so quick to spread death hardly could be considered Pro-Life.

Real Catholics should also consider the fact that Rick Perry attends the sermons of posuer-preacher “Catholics are whores” Hagee’s line of hate screech. After considering this, anyone on this board who considers Rick Perry “electable” is not a Catholic, more likely some war monger puppet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top