Requesting help answering a Santorum supporter

Thanks to ALL!

keeps trying to explain a real issue with the "abortion philosophy" in that: Under the law, if Dr. P, as an obstetrics doctor, accidentally kills a baby, he is legally liable because "the baby" has "inheritance rights".

Then how is it that in the case of abortion, "the baby" has no inheritance rights?

This is a huge glaring hole in just about everyone's pro-abortion argument that Dr. Paul points out. Most people have never considered this and it's a real mind bender.

Skip to 1:35 ... http://youtu.be/8-fU-knxT0U

Of course you could always come back with the question, "if pro life is so important why would you back a candidate that's voted to fund planned parenthood at least 5 times and not the candidate who hasn't funded it for his entire 12 terms in congress? You may not think it's a state's rights issue, but only one candidate actually walks the walk instead of just talking the talk."

I'm not sure about a "religious" answer, but if the US still respected state's rights then more than likely at least some states would make abortions illegal. The "all in one" let the fed do it has made abortion legal in every state and good luck getting anything changed at the federal level. The people have much more influence at the state level and your Santorum supporter may be more successful getting the laws changed in his or her own state instead of swinging for a homerun and trying to change all 50 at once.

Santorum dropped. Ron Paul is the only candidate offering religious freedom, which means Catholic Hospitals don't have to issue birth control or perform abortions. Ron Paul is saying that moral issues are best left to the church, not the state. So let the state be for "the world", and let the Church be for those who need and want moral values. I respect you need and want for moral values and that's why I'm voting for Ron Paul, as I trust he will fight for our right to be moral people, and for those who chose not, let the state have them, not us.

1. State's prosecute murder without intervention from the federal government! Do you propose to take this prerogative away from states?

2. The alternative is to elect a long line of pro-life presidents, hope they elect enough Supreme Court Justices to one day over turn Roe v Wade, AND keep electing pro-life candidates so that it is not later overturned. This is the plan since Roe v Wade, how's it working for YOU? It will NEVER happen using this approach! NEVER! If he insists on making it a federal issue, he is insuring that it always stays legal!

3. The ONLY hope of limiting/outlawing abortion in most states is by making it a states issue! Otherwise, it stays just like it is now!

4. The Constitution does not give this jurisdiction to the federal government.

5. Mitt promised to protect a woman's choice in 2004, and he wants Mitt to win?

Bottom line, Rick, GWB, and all these politicians that "USE" abortion to get elected DON'T want it outlawed any more then the American Cancer Society wants cancer cured! It gives them a huge, guaranteed voting block! Without it, people like this fellow would split off to other pet issues and be harder to corral.

Scour around the web, and find links to various religious groups/people and/or pro-life organizations that have come out in support of Ron Paul.

Also, if I remember right, Paul is the ONLY remaining candidate running major party who signed the Susan B. Anthony pledge promising to only appoint pro-life people to key positions in his administration.

If he balks on the pledge - aftet all, politicians almoat always breach them anyways - remind him that Paul's record and rhetoric have ALWAYS been consistent, and maybe sneak in a few examples from secondary/tertiary issues your friend consisdera somewhat important.

Sure. If we all could have our own way, we'd just outlaw this procedure and be done with the matter. But in the real world, we know that won't happen. Too many would be too upset and fight for legalizing this matter and keep us at square one.

But if we have it at the state level and focus on educating the public of the horrors and sins of the practice, we can begin outlawing this one state at a time. This follows the natural process of change.

When the whole tree is too large to chop down, cut it down one branch at a time. Soon, the tree is removed.

Many have been fighting the Roe v. Wade battle for almost 40 years. They haven't managed to defeat it. Maybe a different approach would work best.

he doesn't believe those in Congress or the Federal courts should tell people what they can do or can't do in the eyes of God. Dr Paul believe the issue needs to be stripped from the Feds hands and sent to the individual states to decide. The abortion issue has a much better chance of being defeated in the individual states where the elected officials are closer to the people, rather than bureaucrats in Washington or Fed courts. You should ask them how they can support the killing of unborn and/or children in these unconstitutional wars without end. As a Christian, supporting 'unjust' wars are no different than supporting abortion, as murder is murder. Tell them they need to sole search and read the New Testement, instead of just following what they should support by their ministry.

Christians Feed Their Own To The Lions

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/4454

Ron Paul OWNS Santorum Bachmann with Biblical argument of a Just War

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u3iWydQrEU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Dyyd4rcuZc

Ron Paul is Pro Life and for States Rights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNFF614YyFA

'If you can't protect life you can't protect liberty, because liberty is a consequence of life.'

The Bible & Ron Paul, pt. 1: Introduction
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tYk5mEli68

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzVdfNhWAaU&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjsmwJkYHXA&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQKctZ2FyKc&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RF6_cNhaJ4&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DBdCPqT5Gg&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JjpdT1aShQ&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5sXNSeK92U&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5sXNSeK92U&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzjm7IsVavM&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4stsHjDQVdM&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RZX2u5se8A&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktMhm0eYUaE&feature=relmfu

This is a 13 part series that will hit everything and answer all of there questions definitely!

It is up to each man and woman, to look into their own hearts and read the answer God has placed there just for them. If they truly believe abortion is a taking of a human life, that God made, then they must vote for Ron Paul. Doing other wise would leave the choice completely up to our Federal government, which has not held the interest of the people, or our morals, for years. In voting for Ron Paul, on the matters of life such abortion, each person will get to vote their conscience. And when the time comes, and they meet their Maker, their conscience will be clear in the matter.

But I remember Dr Paul's words (not an exact quote)
Life , liberty and the pursuit of happiness, Life comes first.

Why does he like abortion so much?

People like Santorum who want to make abortion into a federal issue have been at it (profitably for them) for 40 years, and nothing in the way of reducing the number of abortions has happened. The number of abortions has only increased along with the federal funding of planned parenthood to talk more and more women into having abortions.

It's safe for these people to pretend to be against abortion, because they know that it will always be there for them to use as an issue to get the support of the gullible. Realize this: They have no intention of reducing the number of abortions. They know nothing will be accomplished at the federal level.

So, you want to keep it a federal issue? Then you have your outcome. Abortion freely available and funded by your tax dollars. What's your big objection to reducing the number of abortions? That's the question.

He is a one issue person? He can not see all the other benefits of having a Ron Presidency? RON himself is very strictly pro-life. He just does not agree that it is the federal government's domain, to set laws on this subject. I do NOT agree, myself, with every single position Ron has..he thinks Romney or Obama is better? Really?

"Ineptocracy: a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers."

You don't need to get into the entirety of the legal case law and facial challenges, but that is a fact. In other words, the states already did kinda overturn Roe v. Wade to some extent... We all know that Roe v. Wade is a litmus test for any SCOTUS nominee for the Democrats - who do you trust: Romney or a OBGYN who delivered 4,000 babies?

What do you plan to do with your vote?

If they plan on giving it to Romney, then the Pro-life issue clearly isn't the #1 sticking point. Find out what actually is the problem, because EVERY Santorum supporter should be more than aware of the fact that Romney's pro-life credentials are basically non-existent.

If by some chance they actually thought Romney was somehow pro-life (which I find amazing), then I'd mention any of the previously mentioned answers, like states handling murder laws, and the Sanctity of Life Act he's introduced, and the fact he's not only been pro-life in rhetoric, and in record, but as an OB/GYN, he's also been pro-life as a career.

Good luck.

Ask him/her if he/she thinks that abortion is a crime. If she says it is a crime, ask how many other crimes (theft, murder, rape, etc) are handled federally or by the state. Most are handled by individual states.

The whole reason we have abortion is the Supreme Court overturned State laws against it in Roe vs Wade, and forced States to have abortions.

Your friend doesn't know anything. Dr. Paul wants to overturn Roe vs Wade, and anyone that was pro-life in the 70s and 80s was trying to do the same thing.

... by addressing the abortion issue through legislation, rather than waiting for the day when there is enough support to pass a pro-life Constitutional amendment.

Dr. Paul's campaign Website lays out his position on abortion:

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/abortion/

As the above link clearly indicates, Dr. Paul wants to:

1. Pass legislation modeled after Paul's "We the People Act," which would prevent Federal courts from hearing abortion-related cases that arise from state law, and would allow state courts to ignore Federal court precedent on abortion (such as the Roe v. Wade decision):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_the_People_Act#We_the_People...

2. Pass the "Sanctity of Life Act" (introduced by Paul in each of the last 4 Congresses), which would define legal personhood as beginning at conception, and would strip Federal courts of jurisdiction to review any law that prohibits or restricts abortion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctity_of_Life_Act

3. Prohibit taxpayer funds from being used for abortion or any "family planning" program.

If you feel it is advisable, you can also contrast Paul's record with Santorum's. While Dr. Paul was sponsoring pro-life legislation, Sen. Santorum was voting for funding for Planned Parenthood:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291845/santorums-histor...

Santorum may excel at talking the talk, but Paul walks the walk.

it is a states rights issue. Where in the constitution does it say the Federal Government has the right or moral authority to tell states what laws they can enact? As it is, there have been millions of unborn babies killed because states can't enforce their own anti- abortion laws due to the unconstitutional Roe v Wade decision, and any law against abortion at the Federal level would be just as unconstitutional.

That is why Ron Paul introduced 4 years ago HR958, the "We the People Act" which would overturn Roe v Wade overnight with a simple majority vote. While we continue to wait decades for Roe v Wade to be overturned millions of babies are being murdered because we refuse to pass HR 958 and allow states to enforce their laws!

Jesus gave us free will to do what we want as long as we keep the Commandments and he did not tell us to have overbearing, federal, unconstitutional laws governing our lives. All laws against murder and other acts of violence are made at the state level.

Not wanting states to have the right to enforce their anti-abortion laws is purely selfish and that person sounds like he/she would be the typical congressional leader telling us how to live.

Sway the Santorum supporters. Grassroots RP support is not enough yet to win enough votes to win the popular vote. A big percentage of the Santorum supporters would put us in the frontrunner position within weeks.

Still I see no large scale efforts on this.. :(

Everybody is bound by own record:
http://youtu.be/x3BE2jMQS8Q
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61296.html

My brother posted the Tom woods video on Catholics and Ron Paul. Below is a conversation about it.

Adam E Fairchild Some more that might be useful: http://www.tomwoods.com/catholicsforpaul/
Catholics and Ron Paul | Tom Woods
www.tomwoods.com
Let's kick off this page with my Open Letter to the Catholic Community from 2007...See More
January 21 at 6:05pm · Like

Michele Verret-Ayala As an educated Catholic man I don't understand his endorsement...however, as a historian Tom Woods has as much an opinion as anyone else. What is most perplexing of his endorsement of Paul for me is -- how does leaving the value and life of a child to a vote of the people in each individual state square w/ Catholic moral teaching...I submit it doesn't -- but I still like history and will read Mr. Woods perspective on history ;0)
January 22 at 11:51am · Like

Tyler Fairchild Michele, I am curious, how specifically is Dr. Paul’s position not in line with the Church? What about the crime of murder? Should it be up to the will of the people in each individual State?
The States are doing a better job outlawing capital punishment than the Federal Government has (see Court Cases Furman vs Georgia and Gregg vs Georgia). Based on the views of the people in the United States we have done pretty well with the issue. 15 States have abolished capital punishment.
Back to the Abortion issue, the Federal Government has had 39 years to get the abortion issue right (today is the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade). It is time to take the issue back to the State level and start fixing it. The Federal Government in particularly the Republicans have had numerous opportunities to overturn Roe vs Wade and they have not done it. Even if it was overturned think about what would happen, it would be years and years of federal politics and bureaucracy as usual. The issue would go back in forth and back and forth depending on which party was in control.
In my opinion both parties like having the issue up in the air, it lets each party have a huge talking point come election time. (this whole post is a perfect example of it, lol)
The smaller the government the easier it is to control (things are easier to change at the State Level compared to the Federal Level) So like Dr. Paul said in the last debate we need to take the jurisdiction away from the Federal Courts and give it back to the States. But, let’s be totally honest with ourselves the laws will not change the problem, only the morality of the people will.
With all due respect I think Santorum means well but I believe the lobbyist will get the best of him if he was in the White House, just like they did when he was a Senator in PA.
Now, just because I want to get my two cents into the conversation….. I know abortion is important, but just think of the millions of innocents who are killed in the unjust wars around the world; Irag, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, etc. Catholics still believe in the Just War Doctrine. Based on Santorum’s voting record, his words and actions he would not follow the Just War Doctrine. The United States military would continue to fight wars for the Military Industrial Complex and millions of innocents would continue to die without having a say in the matter.
The United States has the opportunity to show the world that Christians don’t enjoy war and killing innocent people. And that is why I am voting for Dr. Paul.
If you haven’t seen it yet, take the time to watch Dr. Paul’s Speech at the Value Voters Summit, especially 12:00 min to the 15:00 min mark, it really hits home and makes me tear up every time I see it. http://www.tomwoods.com/catholicsforpaul/
January 22 at 5:30pm · Like

Michele Verret-Ayala Tyler, I appreciate your well thought out post, however, my question remains, how is leaving the value and life of the unborn child up to a vote for each individual state pro life?? I would be more than happy to discuss each issue presented. But the high priority for me as a Catholic -- hands down, abortion is first and foremost.
January 22 at 7:41pm · Like

Tyler Fairchild This is fun, the more I research the more I find documents supporting my position, based on my interpretation of course lol.

Based on our Republic form of Government is there a better and rational alternative? Additionally my question still remains how specifically is Dr. Paul’s Position not in line with the Church?

Answer to your question: Based on our form of government, getting the issue out of the hands of the federal government is as Pro Life you can get right now. Letting the states deal with it GUARANTEES action to be taken against abortion! It sounds to me as if you want there to be a Constitutional Amendment. Well, giving the issue to the States is the first step toward that type of action. Remember, three quarters of the States would have to vote for the Amendment after the House and Senate passed it by two thirds.

Below is directly from the Catechism: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2...

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."

This is how I interpret this key portion of the Catechism. If we don’t protect every living human (including the unborn of course) our foundation of law is in danger. With that being said I ask you what is the foundation of our law? My answer: The Constitution including the bill of rights and the 10th amendment. The states have the ability and right to handle these types of issues. Look at it this way; wouldn’t you like to have the ability to show outright support to a ProLife state until we have a Constitutional Amendment passed. Wow, just imagine how much the ProLife States would be celebrated by the Catholic Church and all Christians. It would only be a matter of time before the ProChoice states would follow the ProLife States lead.

Would this not be a giant step in the right direction? We need to take that step rather than standing still or walking in the wrong direction.

is that the Federal Gov. got involved in the very first place, leaving this decision to a handfull of judges who I truly believe think they are the answer to all of humanity's ills (hardly).

Ron Paul has said many times that it should have been left at the state level bcause he feels the American people would make the moral choice.

The American people were left out of the decision making...

He also believes that there are two lives involved and each should have the benefit of individual freedom...one life needs an advocate because of age...just like any child would.