Ron Paul: is pro-choice state by state

warning: Parameter 2 to forward_form_validate() expected to be a reference, value given in /home/artla/public_html/includes/ on line 580.
Thank you for your help in spreading the word about American Right to Life. We appreciate your help.

Ron Paul: is pro-choice state by state

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

Libertarian Party: officially pro-choice

Libertarian Party platform: "I.8 Reproductive Rights ... We oppose government actions that... prohibit abortion..."

Libertarian Party: officially immoral

Libertarian Ron Paul is running for the Republican nomination and remains on "good terms" with the Libertarian Party and spoke at its 2004 national convention and he has never repudiated them even though the Libertarian Party is officially: pro-legalized abortion, pro-legalized homosexuality, pro-legalized pornography, pro-legalized adultery, pro-legalizing crack cocaine, pro-legalized suicide, and pro-legalized euthanasia, pro-legalizing prostitution, and against protecting marriage between a man and a woman.  The Libertarian Party is based on a humanist rather than on a Judeo-Christian worldview and thus has misguided notions of governance and no compass for righteousness in law.

Libertarian Pro-Lifers: guilty of revisionism

Typical Claim: The federal government gave us abortion with the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade. What makes anyone think the federal government will end abortion?
Truth: The states began "legalizing" child killing with 19 states permitting abortion for various reasons in the seven years before Roe (MS, CO, CA, OR, NC, NY, AK, HI, WA, FL, AL, AR, DE, GA, KS, MD, NM, SC, VA) including a number with virtual abortion on demand like New York which allowed abortion through six months.

Paul's ‘Life' Bills: allow abortion in the states

Sanctity of Life Act of 2007: "each State has the authority to protect lives of unborn children... [but] the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review... any case arising out of any statute... on the grounds that such statute... regulates-- the performance of abortions..." Sec. 2(b)(2) & 3(a)(2). Consistent with other Paul bills, his legislation contains words that satisfy inattentive conservatives: notice he says the states would have the authority, that is, the option, but not the responsibility to protect children. Donors who have given Paul millions are mostly unaware of this trick. For Ron Paul then insists upon enormous Planned Parenthood-sized loopholes that would permit every single abortion committed in the fifty states to continue, many millions over his career, by requiring the federal judiciary to officially tolerate child killing in the states, which is where almost all U.S. abortions occur.

Paul's Bills Even Violate Constitution: allow depriving of life and liberty

Paul would require the federal government to violate the U.S. Constitution and tolerate child killing, rejecting the 5th Amendment and the 14th: "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Libertarian Falsehood: claim states' rights include authorizing murder

States prosecute murder. They do not have the right to decriminalize murder. God gives no country, state, or any subdivision of government permission to authorize or even tolerate the intentional killing of the innocent. The federal and state relationship is irrelevant to the 'legalization' of abortion. If a neighboring country legalized the killing of Christians, Jews, children, or any class of person not convicted of a capital crime, it thereby commits an act of war that would justify invasion. God won't and pro-lifers must not give a pass to the federal government to look the other way when American states authorize child slaughter.

Personally Pro-life: means officially pro-choice

American RTL Action opposes candidates who are personally pro-life. The official position of someone who wants to be a governing official matters. If an official is personally against lynching blacks, killing Jews, and aborting kids but will officially tolerate such crimes, we will oppose him.

Constitutional States Rights: side deals aside

Ron Paul promotes a confused view of states' rights that suggests that the federal government can apathetically look the other way if the states authorize the killing of innocent human beings. No side deal that human beings make between themselves can exempt them from obligation to enforce God's enduring command, Do not murder. So even if the U.S. Constitution explicitly stated that for appropriations and representation reasons most blacks would be counted as three-fifths of a person, or if it explicitly stated that the states have the right to decide whether to authorize the killing of Jews or unborn children, such provisions would be unjust and should not be defended under some perverse understanding of governmental principles but should be opposed by all.

And Then You Can Kill the Baby: PBA fiasco

Ron Paul voted for the partial birth abortion ban. Any law that ends with "and then you can kill the baby" is a bad law. Thus the PBA ban is a bad law. The U.S. Supreme Court in April 2007 upheld this wicked child-killing regulation in the most brutally vicious decision ever issued by an American court. In their majority Gonzales v. Carhart ruling the court advocated "an injection that kills the fetus" and "less shocking methods" of killing the same late-term children, and the ban explicitly keeps partial-birth abortion legal declaring that the baby can be delivered up to "the navel" and then dismembered, turning this ruling into a virtual PBA manual.

"States' Rights": violated by advocate Ron Paul

Ron Paul, in violation of what he sees as a states' rights principle, voted for the federal partial birth abortion ban imposed upon the states. Paul rightly chastised the pro-life movement (which had been led by National RTL) for sponsoring the unprincipled PBA ban, but then he voted for this federal legislation violating not only God's enduring law but also his own states' rights principles even though he acknowledged his fear that this "pro-life" law "does more harm than good" by corrupting the principles of life and further undermining the possibility of legally protecting human life from fertilization. Paul gets a lot of funding from misled conservatives who also gave popular support to the evil PBA ban, so rather than risk alienating these voters, on the House floor Paul lambasted the law, and then voted for it.

A Libertarian Pro-life President: kids are being killed, so I'd punt

Ron Paul is running for the nomination for president saying that abortion is not a federal issue. A thousand candidates for mayor have put off pro-lifers with the claim that city government has nothing to do with abortion. Candidates for governor have said abortion is a federal matter. Ron Paul is running for president and he says it's a state matter. God grants no such immunity for the tolerance of shedding innocent blood to any level of government (Deut. 21:1-2, 6-7). These candidates pass the buck, and hope to punt the abortion issue because they see it as hurting their chance to gain power.

American Right To Life knows that God does not want our country run as a theocracy, but He does want America's government to function, not by secular humanist ideas, but based upon His principles of governance and justice. True principles apply to all nations. If Ron Paul lived in Berlin in 1944 and had said, "While killing Jews is invalid, a federal law banning the holocaust across all of Germany's 16 states would be equally invalid," his wicked claim would be immediately obvious to most people, but abortion has so dehumanized babies that even pro-lifers are vulnerable to lies that promote tolerance of the slaughter. Please join American RTL in calling for all governments to require enforcement of God's enduring command, Do not murder.