Ron Paul Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps. Again, he may be my President (and Scott’s) before he is yours (and Ishi’s)
:confused:
I think he would be inaugurated on the same day for all of us if he won. But you’d certainly be celebrating earlier than me. I might look forward to Ron Paul’s supreme court nominees though and his spending cuts.

Ishii
 
How does legalizing drugs make it easier to break free from drug addiction?

Marijuana is a dangerous drug where various derivatives are much safer. When somebody says that legalizing drugs will reduce drug abuse, I have to ask what their attitude towards various substances is. Most drugs, if treated improperly, can cause harm. Alcohol and tobacco/nicotine cigarettes are “safe” drugs that are good examples. The former is known to cause cancer, the latter can cause alcoholism.

It is time for the young to grow up and forget Ron Paul. Legalizing drugs, especially addictive drugs that can have mind altering and other damaging effects, is totally irresponsible. Rick Santorum is Catholic, consider him.

Where in Catholic teaching concerning the body does it say, “It is okay to abuse mind altering drugs that confuse your moral compass?” Is there notthing wrong with abusing
the body? It’s my body, right? I can do whatever I want to it, right? Wrong. Our bodies
through baptism belong to God and are part of His body. Abuse God’s body, God has to either heal or replace that part.

Legalizing drugs isn’t responsible. Regulating the pharmaceutical industry by breaking up monopolies might be effective though.
Sometimes in trying to suppress a vice through poor means it can cause greater evils than simply permitting the vice while seeking other ways of treating it. Drugs are a perfect example as prohibition provides a very profitable black market for dangerous thugs to exploit. Since drugs are criminalized it also becomes harder for people to seek treatment, as they may face prison time if their drug use is discovered.

Legalizing drugs is not about promoting their use, it’s about recognizing that prohibition is a failed policy that doesn’t diminish the use of drugs, but does put billions of dollars into the hands of dangerous criminals. The prohibition against alcohol was a failure for similar reasons, and the “war on drugs” should be abandoned just as the Prohibition was.

Peace and God bless!
 
I think he would be inaugurated on the same day for all of us if he won.
Not sure how that’s possible. Are you starting a separate country up in Montana? :p.
Okay, I was baiting. So here is my scenario. Perry gets so soundly defeated, that his ego is bruised and he is desperate for affirmation. In a bid for attention, he latches onto the secessionist movement and whips it into a frenzy. In the meantime, the re-elected Obama looks at this as a way to get rid of Texas once and for all. In a concillitory measure to Texas Democrats, he negotiates secession, whereby, Austin remains a part of the United States, ala West Berlin, except in this case the wall is built to keep Democrats in. Not that it matters. Texas opens up a generous immigration policy, even with the United States, so that people like Scott flock to the new land of opportunity. Finally, in the new spirit of independence and personal freedom, Ron Paul is the natural shoe-in for President.

PS - Austin becomes a county of California so that the West Coast can tap into Texas University’s vast attorney reservoir. The new state capitol is moved to College Station.
 
Okay, I was baiting. So here is my scenario. Perry gets so soundly defeated, that his ego is bruised and he is desperate for affirmation. In a bid for attention, he latches onto the secessionist movement and whips it into a frenzy. In the meantime, the re-elected Obama looks at this as a way to get rid of Texas once and for all. In a concillitory measure to Texas Democrats, he negotiates secession, whereby, Austin remains a part of the United States, ala West Berlin, except in this case the wall is built to keep Democrats in. Not that it matters. Texas opens up a generous immigration policy, even with the United States, so that people like Scott flock to the new land of opportunity. Finally, in the new spirit of independence and personal freedom, Ron Paul is the natural shoe-in for President.

PS - Austin becomes a county of California so that the West Coast can tap into Texas University’s vast attorney reservoir. The new state capitol is moved to College Station.
Sounds plausible to me. After all of this goes down and Ron Paul becomes the president of this nascent nation, where is he going to govern from, the assisted living facility?

Ishii
 
Fellow Ron Paul supporter here.

Ron Paul president of Texas? now that’s a favorable alternate.

Better than moving to Switzerland. 😛

But in all seriousness, if he loses, I’m staying here and keeping his ideas alive.
 
Okay, I was baiting. So here is my scenario. Perry gets so soundly defeated, that his ego is bruised and he is desperate for affirmation. In a bid for attention, he latches onto the secessionist movement and whips it into a frenzy. In the meantime, the re-elected Obama looks at this as a way to get rid of Texas once and for all. In a concillitory measure to Texas Democrats, he negotiates secession, whereby, Austin remains a part of the United States, ala West Berlin, except in this case the wall is built to keep Democrats in. Not that it matters. Texas opens up a generous immigration policy, even with the United States, so that people like Scott flock to the new land of opportunity. Finally, in the new spirit of independence and personal freedom, Ron Paul is the natural shoe-in for President.

PS - Austin becomes a county of California so that the West Coast can tap into Texas University’s vast attorney reservoir. The new state capitol is moved to College Station.
PPS - FedMex takes off and becomes the biggest employer in the country of Tejas.
 
Any brand you like, as long as its not an import.

Ishii
No imports and no “fake” American mass produced domestics (Anheuser Busch, Miller, Coors).

Sierra Nevada, Sam Adams, and I am particularly fond of Yeungling Lager. All 100% American OWNED and produced, lest anyone think I am an “America-hater”.
 
Okay, I was baiting. So here is my scenario. Perry gets so soundly defeated, that his ego is bruised and he is desperate for affirmation. In a bid for attention, he latches onto the secessionist movement and whips it into a frenzy. In the meantime, the re-elected Obama looks at this as a way to get rid of Texas once and for all. In a concillitory measure to Texas Democrats, he negotiates secession, whereby, Austin remains a part of the United States, ala West Berlin, except in this case the wall is built to keep Democrats in. Not that it matters. Texas opens up a generous immigration policy, even with the United States, so that people like Scott flock to the new land of opportunity. Finally, in the new spirit of independence and personal freedom, Ron Paul is the natural shoe-in for President.

PS - Austin becomes a county of California so that the West Coast can tap into Texas University’s vast attorney reservoir. The new state capitol is moved to College Station.
I already own land in Texas in anticipation of this possibility.
 
How does legalizing drugs make it easier to break free from drug addiction?
How does incarceration? Is incarceration the best treatment for drug addiction? And not all users of illegal drugs are addicts. Marijuana is not addictive beyond that of any habit. And many, probably most, marijuana users use it and then at some point quit without any treatment including jail time.

Also the criminalization of drugs results in more dangerous drugs. People come up with more powerful drugs because of the need to conceal the product. The meth scourge would probably not exist if drugs were legal. It is just like how during prohibition there was lots of deadly booze for sale. How does this help people? For that matter in order to combat alcohol the government does crazy things like put poison in rubbing alcohol so that anyone who drinks it will get sick and maybe die. The policy is to actually create deadly poisons. Does that sound sane or humane?
Where in Catholic teaching concerning the body does it say, “It is okay to abuse mind altering drugs that confuse your moral compass?” Is there notthing wrong with abusing
the body? It’s my body, right? I can do whatever I want to it, right? Wrong. Our bodies
through baptism belong to God and are part of His body. Abuse God’s body, God has to either heal or replace that part.
Of course Catholic teaching does not say that. But Catholic teaching does say that it might be best to tolerate some vices. None other than St. Thomas said that.
Accordingly in human government also, those who are in authority, rightly tolerate certain evils, lest certain goods be lost, or certain greater evils be incurred: thus Augustine says (De Ordine ii, 4): “If you do away with harlots, the world will be convulsed with lust.”
Source

The drug war it seems to me is one of these cases. Spending vasts amounts of resources to police and jail people for using drugs has resulted in a loss of freedom for everyone. And despite almost half a century the war has made no progress. It is not that drug abuse is good but that policing it is bad.
 
I’m not really sure why I am not allowed to vote in this poll, but I am Catholic, and I support Ron Paul. He is 100% pro-life, and he is trying to bring back the Constitution of the United States (Where did it go? It’s being ignored by Obama.). I am afraid of another godless politician.
 
I’m not really sure why I am not allowed to vote in this poll, but I am Catholic, and I support Ron Paul. He is 100% pro-life, and he is trying to bring back the Constitution of the United States (Where did it go? It’s being ignored by Obama.). I am afraid of another godless politician.
I believe you can begin voting in polls when you have amassed 50 posts. The moderator staff here wants to ensure that people who come in are not spammers or internet trolls, joining just to create problems. Get involved in the discussions and voice your opinion. You will find me an ardent supporter of the things that Ron Paul stands for; namely, free markets, sound monetary policy, non-interventional foreign policy, adherence to the Constitution, and solid respect for life and liberty.
 
Polling shows a Ron Paul third-party candidacy would more-or-less guarantee Obama re-election

“The Pew Research Center finds 44% of registered voters would support Obama, 32% would back Mitt Romney and 18% would get behind Paul in a three-way race.” - USA Today
 
Polling shows a Ron Paul third-party candidacy would more-or-less guarantee Obama re-election

“The Pew Research Center finds 44% of registered voters would support Obama, 32% would back Mitt Romney and 18% would get behind Paul in a three-way race.” - USA Today
Paul has repeatedly stated that he will not run third party.
 
His unconventional states-rights approach to pro-life activism is questioned at the pro-life forum in Greenville, SC (1-18-12).

youtube.com/watch?v=fByI0vYp_DQ
“Unconventional”? Actually, he would seem to be quite correct. Roe vs Wade simply stated that States could not ban abortion. If Roe vs Wade were nullified, it would be up to the individual states to set the laws. I assume Democratic states would allow abortion and Republican states would not.🤷
 
“Unconventional”? Actually, he would seem to be quite correct. Roe vs Wade simply stated that States could not ban abortion. If Roe vs Wade were nullified, it would be up to the individual states to set the laws. I assume Democratic states would allow abortion and Republican states would not.🤷
If you listen to the video, he makes a pretty good case for what you are saying. I got kind of mad listening to it, because he also makes a case for how millions of lives could have been saved if we had followed the constitution. I’m mad because the GOP controlled the executive and legislative branch for a few years while Bush was president and could have done their duty to keep judicial power in check, overturn Roe V. Wade…and save millions.
 
Polling shows a Ron Paul third-party candidacy would more-or-less guarantee Obama re-election

“The Pew Research Center finds 44% of registered voters would support Obama, 32% would back Mitt Romney and 18% would get behind Paul in a three-way race.” - USA Today
True. So you might as well just support Ron for the GOP nomination.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top