need help with a letter
Hi All,
I spent an hour or two last night letting our pro-life friends know about Ron Paul. The first email reply I got was:
"I was not for Fred Thompson but will vote for and promote Ron Paul
Jesus saves all willing to be!"
The second letter was much longer and I need your help. I'll post the whole letter in a moment so you can add your thoughts...I've responded to most of the points but need some help in responding to why Ron Paul is the most conservative and pro-life and the best choice. (better than the other Republicans)
So, from a pro-life, pro-Christian, pro-family perspective, why is Ron
Paul better than-
-Huckabee (uses religion?, broke?)
-Fred (dropped out)
-McCain
-Romney
Here is the letter I am replying to:
Hi there,
I'm sorry, but we can't endorse a candidate. We aren't a political action committee. As an individual, I am supporting the most conservative candidate. I supported Ronald Reagan and his eight years in office. I believe in peace through strength. I oppose Ron Paul's position on the war. Maybe if we go away everybody will get along. He doesn't even see a threat from these different terrorists groups. As if they are going to go away. They won't!!
I don't like his position on Israel. I am a Christian, and God is very supportive of Israel. In the Old Testament and the New. YOu can look up Romans 11, and check out Pastor Bob Coy from Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale's cd's on sermons about Israel. The facts are quite eye-opening.
I believe in a marriage amendment. I am not opposed to the federal government. I support a human life amendment to the US Constitution, because of the 48,000,000 babies that have been killed from abortion. I don't agree with Ron Paul when he says he doesn't want to say anything against homosexuality. You can go to an non-partisan ontheissues.org to see where he stands on all the issues he has voted on. He is not the most conservative.
I don't want to legalize marijuana, even for medicinal purposes. There are other medicines that are used. What's he talking about1
I could go on, but I won't. I appreciate your e-mail, but we are going to work feverishly to elect the best pro-life, pro-family candidate. If you go to ontheissues.org and compare all of them, you'll see the one who is the strongest in those areas!! iT ISN'T Ron Paul.
And you might consider putting your vote behind a candidate that can win. He is in the single digits in the polls. He is taking votes away from the candidates that are in the top tier. He is splitting the ticket, and hurting our party. So, I don't understand what he sees. Does he really believe that he can rise up at this point.
God bless you,
HERE IS MY DRAFT RESPONSE, UNFINISHED
(hope the formatting comes out)
>
> Hi there,
Hello,
>
> I'm sorry, but we can't endorse a candidate. We aren't a political action committee. As an individual, I am supporting the most conservative candidate. I supported Ronald Reagan and his eight years in office. I believe in peace through strength.
I do agree.
> I oppose Ron Paul's position on the war. Maybe if we go away everybody will get along. He doesn't even see a threat from these different terrorists groups. As if they are going to go away. They won't!!
That is precisely the exact reason why we need our troops home now - to protect our borders from any and all threats!!!! I love America but I don't believe we should tell everyone else how to live. It's interesting because out of all the candidates Ron Paul has the most support from active and retired military. What does this say about they think? (You can check this if you don't believe me.)
Besides, when George Bush won I was so happy. He was perfect. I agreed with going into Iraq. The people had lived in terror. But I didn't see us staying ...for years....I am also very disappointed that there really was no 'weapons of mass destruction'. This was a major reason for going there...then with all the scandals of oil and George Bush's connections to members of the oil companies etc, I am starting to believe that this really might have been 'pulling the wool over our eyes' - a war for ulterior motives and not the noble ones that we all love. So many Americans have given up their lives and how many more will have to die?
>
> I don't like his position on Israel. I am a Christian, and God is very supportive of Israel. In the Old Testament and the New. YOu can look up Romans 11, and check out Pastor Bob Coy from Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale's cd's on sermons about Israel. The facts are quite eye-opening.
I must confess ignorance on what Ron Paul has said about Israel, but looking at Romans 11 I'm not sure it says that we should finance them while our economy is heading straightforward into a serious recession.
>
> I believe in a marriage amendment. I am not opposed to the federal government.
You might not see anything wrong with it, but if you simply look at the financial 'bloating' that occurs when we have too much regulation and too much bureaucracy. Trimming the excess controls of the Federal government will free up funds to get us out of debt and seriously reduce your takes. I don't know what to say, but if you don't need it, this nation could sure use a tax break. Just one of the things I would like to see changed with our massive Federal Government is the way they are planning to merge us all into one North American Union. I know we haven't heard much about this, but you look online you can see that already some people in Texas are talking about the large highways that are being built - from Mexico - and they will go all the way through into Canada with not border controls or posts. It's the first step. Like I said, I do believe this is dangerous. We have to defend our nationality and individuality though only legal immigration - not opening up the borders completely and planning on merging with Canada and Mexico. You see how their plan is working in Europe. As I speak there are plans for one constitution across all of Europe...You probably guess what the end goal is. I don't mean to sound 'way out' - but please - do research it yourself if this is something that interests you.
> I support a human life amendment to the US Constitution, because of the 48,000,000 babies that have been killed from abortion. I don't agree with Ron Paul when he says he doesn't want to say anything against homosexuality.
I'm not sure about this either, but I guess Jesus didn't force people to follow him yet He will have the say when it is all said and done.
> You can go to an non-partisan ontheissues.org to see where he stands on all the issues he has voted on. He is not the most conservative.
How so?
>
> I don't want to legalize marijuana, even for medicinal purposes. There are other medicines that are used. What's he talking about1
This is confusing to me...But I believe the states could still make their own laws on the matter.
>
> I could go on, but I won't. I appreciate your e-mail, but we are going to work feverishly to elect the best pro-life, pro-family candidate. If you go to ontheissues.org and compare all of them, you'll see the one who is the strongest in those areas!! iT ISN'T Ron Paul.
I respectfully disagree. I believe Ron is only one with an actual strong record, not just words but 'fruits' as Jesus said. He is a Christian by voting records, not just by words. For example, I believe Mick Huckabee uses religion to get votes (such as the recent ad looking like a 'cross' behind him). Huckabee has.... whereas Ron is not in your face about it, but he has personally accepted Jesus as his Saviour (and I can find his exact words if you like) running out of money fast.
McCain, Romney, Fred is out and Giuliani is lagging behind Paul!
>
> And you might consider putting your vote behind a candidate that can win. He is in the single digits in the polls. He is taking votes away from the candidates that are in the top tier. He is splitting the ticket, and hurting our party. So, I don't understand what he sees. Does he really believe that he can rise up at this point.
Yes he does. He recently came second in Nevada. He also topped the highest fund raising amount by any candidate - from individuals - not corporations and special interest groups, so there is a lot of support. Just look the 92,250 supporters who have joined Ron Paul meetup groups across America.
> God bless you,
>
Thank you for your response,
Serena Gaefke
This guy is getting all of his info on RP from the MSM
In reference to his statement, "He can't win, he's taking votes away from the top-tier candidates" is patently ridiculous. This is the" electability" issue and has been commented on so many times, I'm not even going to go there. However, I would state that the PRIMARIES are for voting your "CONSCIENCE" and the GENERAL ELECTION is for voting "The Lesser of Two Evils" (unless of course one of the two is Dr. Paul then one would be voting for the GREATER GOOD). And as far as Dr. Paul taking votes away from top-tier candidates, I would state that is impossible, most Ron Paul supporters will not vote for any other candidate in either party. And many if not most will more than likely write his name in at the General Election if he does not get the nomination. So those comments alone do not hold water. Most of the other comments/arguments are similar with no factual basis and nothing backing them up.
Please! I need good responses to issues raised by a liberal
I've been coming out of the closet and letting my Democratic friends know I am voting for Ron Paul. This has been an enormously difficult process for me. The things I discuss are so alien to them, that they cannot comput.
I have sent them videos, such as the excellent one of Glenn Beck w the head of the GAO, explaining how the US is bankrupt and we cannot afford a health insurance program. I feel the oncoming Depression will finally jerk them into reality...and guess only then will they finally get it, but hell, let's give it one more shot...hope springs eternal...
__________
Please, I need some good response to issues raised in this letter by a liberal friend...
I will tell her how I asked for your help and I will gratefully mail her your answers.
~ tax are "good" if used to help people, but "bad" if used against
them, as in funding war
~ how a good govt will magically manifest to take care of things..."I'm not against govt, I'm against bad and corrupt govt"
~ despite high taxes, scandinavian countries have incredible
services and are superior to USA in their approach to
education & healthcare...have a track record to prove it
~ since we are no longer the wildwest, guns are obsolete and bad
~ abortion is a civil liberty and people have worked long and hard
for that liberty, so we don't want to lose it
__________
Hi, Sharyn,
I'm not as married to Democrat, Republican, and other labels as you may think. (although 'Libertarian' strikes a chord re: Paul as far as I can see)
I realize that the US is in dire, dire straits, and the war is bankrupting it. Many of the issues that Paul is driven by are important and valid, but there are also imbedded issues--as with every candidate--and issues can be spun to every candidate's benefit. Last I heard, choosing to have an abortion is a civil liberty--people have worked long and hard for that liberty. And if you want to compare starving to anything, anything's going to lose. I have no doubt, Sharyn, that Paul is a good man who believes in what he's doing. His plan to deal with the war is very appealing and I wouldn't mind seeing that happen. I love the idea of letting people with drug offenses out of jail and ending the ridiculous "war on drugs." But I'm not against government--I'm against bad and corrupt government. I'm not against taxes, as long as those taxes are not used to fund illegal and immoral wars, among other things that work against the people. We can look to our Scandinavian neighbors to see how countries should be run--the taxes are high, but they're put to good use. The people have incredible services in education, health, the workplace. There is low infant mortality, a stable economy, low crime, lengthy maternity leave (for mothers and fathers), and vacation time, and generally a very good way of life. The peoples' needs are addressed; people from all walks of life.
I find gun culture really offensive and scary. Yes, there is the 2nd Amendment, which was created at a time that guns were huge and a necessary part of life. But these days? It's like saying we have the right to own horses and buggies as far as I'm concerned. It's not the f*cking frontier anymore....
Serena, I have had to argue
Serena,
I have had to argue the Israel issue several times with Christian friends of mine. Here are some resources to help you show that Israel would actually be better off with Ron Paul: http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin423.htm http://www.americansforisrael.com/spread-the-word
As for the homosexual marriage amendment, point out that the reason Ron Paul voted against it is because he doesn't think the government should be interfering in marriage. God has defined marriage. If we give the government the power to define marriage, how do we know that 10 years from now they wont redefine it to be something else?
Ron Paul is, by far, the best candidate for pro-life, since his positions will actually save babies, NOW, not years and years from now. Here is a good article about that: http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin415.htm
In general, I have found Chuck Baldwin's articles to be a great resource for convincing Christians about Ron Paul. I am a Christian, but I had never heard of Chuck Baldwin until I started campaigning for Ron Paul. I don't endorse all of Baldwin's theology, but he is a famous pastor, and he writes so good pro-Paul articles.
This is
a great topic for this forum. Thanks, SerenaSarah for posting it.
I won't fuss or fudge over your reply to said pro-Christian group, I'm certain it was heartfelt and effective.
For what it's worth though, this is how I would have replied in my own words ... gleen whatever value you will from it. Enough for apologies, here's how I would have responded:
.............
*I'm sorry, but we can't endorse a candidate. We aren't a political action committee. As an individual, I am supporting the most conservative candidate. I supported Ronald Reagan and his eight years in office. I believe in peace through strength. I oppose Ron Paul's position on the war. Maybe if we go away everybody will get along. He doesn't even see a threat from these different terrorists groups. As if they are going to go away. They won't!!
I don't like his position on Israel. I am a Christian, and God is very supportive of Israel. In the Old Testament and the New. YOu can look up Romans 11, and check out Pastor Bob Coy from Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale's cd's on sermons about Israel. The facts are quite eye-opening.*
You don't know me, but I chanced to read your letter regarding Dr. Ron Paul on the DailyPaul forum. I'm a Christian, and firmly believe that the American Republic was founded on concepts in alignment with the teachings of Jesus Christ. I do not feel the same way about the aggressive direction our nation has taken, particularly in this past decade.
I too supported Ronald Reagan, and I think it is instructive to note that Reagan pulled US troops out of Lebanon following the bombing in Beirut. Our leaving that region did not result in a rise of anti-US sentiment in that country, in fact the opposite is true. The current hot -bed of anti-US sentiment now is of course Iraq, where the US has been meddling since the 70's, either in support of Saddam Hussein or to get rid of him. I share your concerns about terrorism, but it appears to me that the current foreign policy either had to be designed by people who wanted to start a holy war, or by fools.
The shamelessness of our support of a military dictator in Pakistan pales only in comparison to the fact that Musharraf's intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence or "I.S.I." as it is known, has long and well documented ties to the Taliban. How much US taxpayer money has gone to strengthen this radical element in Pakistan over the last 30 years? ...The most un-Christian deeds imaginable occur in Wahabist Saudi Arabia, who recieve tens of billions in support from the US yearly, not to mention that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi. What is going on here? Would McCain or Romney continue these apparently counter-productive policies? I have seen no evidence to the contrary.
Iran, ironically, was one of the only countries in the world to support the second US invasion of Iraq. No one in the world was more hated by average Iranians, following the devastation to that country resulting from the Iran/Iraq war, than Saddam Hussein. The Iranians hated Saddam, yet the US has successfully squandered the opportunity to generate freindlier ties with that nation thanks to the dogged villification of Iran by neoconservative policy makers. The ugly truth is, war means profit to too many in Washington, and for that reason the American people have been lied to regarding alleged threats to its security. The lies that were told to generate popular support for the second invasion of Iraq is the most obvious example of course, but did you know that Iranian president Ahmadinejad never threatened to "wipe Israel off of the map"? He was quoting Khomeini, who predicted the "regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time." He was projecting his hope for a regime change in Israel, Ahmadinejad never used the Persian word for "map", or even referred to the country of Israel by name, but rather addressed the current regime there, of who's oppression of the Palestinians he is opposed to. Would Christ twist the words of a country's leader in order to foment an aggressive foreign policy against that country? I am certain, rather, that Christ would have agreed more with the words of these gentlemen:
"There never was a good war or a bad peace" - Benjamin Franklin
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" - John Adams
"Conquest is not in our principles, it is inconsistent with our government" - Thomas Jefferson
"War contains so much folly, as well as wickedness, that much is to be hoped from the progress of reason" - James Madison
"Observe good faith and justice toward all nations, Cultivate peace and harmony with all" - George Washington
The founders did not face the anti-US sentiment in the Muslim world which America is confronted with in this age, but from where does that hatred derive? Ron Paul in fact understands the wisdom enshrined in the words of the founders, and that it is in fact US interventionism which lies at the root of this problem.
*I believe in a marriage amendment. I am not opposed to the federal government. I support a human life amendment to the US Constitution, because of the 48,000,000 babies that have been killed from abortion. I don't agree with Ron Paul when he says he doesn't want to say anything against homosexuality. You can go to an non-partisan ontheissues.org to see where he stands on all the issues he has voted on. He is not the most conservative.
I don't want to legalize marijuana, even for medicinal purposes. There are other medicines that are used. What's he talking about?
I could go on, but I won't. I appreciate your e-mail, but we are going to work feverishly to elect the best pro-life, pro-family candidate. If you go to ontheissues.org and compare all of them, you'll see the one who is the strongest in those areas!! iT ISN'T Ron Paul.*
While Ron Paul, a doctor, is decidedly pro-life on the abortion issue and fervently against the use of drugs, he believes these are issues for you and your local government to decide. Ron Paul is for getting the Federal Government off of our backs out of our lives and out of our wallets. He is for liberty, for letting people decide their fate and shape their society while taking personal responsibility for themselves. This is exactly what the founders tried to promote, and what made America great.
*And you might consider putting your vote behind a candidate that can win. He is in the single digits in the polls. He is taking votes away from the candidates that are in the top tier. He is splitting the ticket, and hurting our party. So, I don't understand what he sees. Does he really believe that he can rise up at this point.
God bless you*
Ron Paul won Louisiana in a landslide. This was stolen from him via a "pro-life/pro-family" slate which the delegates of the other Repubican candidates, once they sensed a Ron Paul win, all threw their support to. Ron Paul has won most of the straw polls across the country. Many telephone polls fail to offer Ron Paul as a choice. There is strong evidence of voting-fraud in Iowa and New Hampshire. You may be entirely correct when you suggest he cannot win, but is that simply an indication of the forces which are aligned against him? And more imprtantly, is that any excuse for true Christians to abandon the only truly Christian candidate?
I still hope for peace, I still hope for a return to true American values, I still support Ron Paul, and I hope you will as well.
Sincerely,
Eric
......................
What about Romney? Why is
What about Romney?
Why is Ron Paul better than him?
(I'm speaking with a conservative/pro-family/pro-life person here)
Is there anything I can say?
In case anyone else needs this...
# Defining mistake: supported abortion law despite opposing it. (Aug 2007)
# Committed to not change law on abortion as Gov., and did not. (Mar 2007)
# Opposes Roe v Wade, but won't tamper with abortion laws. (Dec 2006)
# Endorsed legalization of RU-486. (Mar 2002)
from www.ontheissues.org
and they say he's pro-life? ...but he's seen the light and changed now...really..(not)
'actions speak louder than words'
Regards Isreal: Ron Paul
Regards Isreal:
Ron Paul wants to end the confining relationship with Isreal not to abandon her but to allow her to act with total freedom. If Isreal is protected by God then why would it need America's help? If there is a call for aid from Isreal during a crisis then President Paul would follow the Consititution and if Congress voted for a declaration of war against Isreal's enimies then he would act. So if the American people want to help Isreal then it shall be so.
Regarding Abortion:
Ron Paul personally belives in life and rights of the fetus but does not want to involve the federal gov't. That is the best way since the states could decide what is best for them. The more difficult a problem is the more local should be the solution.
Regarding decriminalizing drugs:
This is difficult to accept - but alcohol exists but by being legal the safest forms of consumption are available. Also being legal allows charity groups to help users - drug addicts are forced to hide away for fear of imprisonment. The process should be slowly done however and remember this will take away a tremendous amount of money from the hands of criminals who often defend their trade with reckless abandon.
Thanks also for your
Thanks also for your thoughts.
Israel, Marijuana, Huckafraud
About Israel: Dr. Paul does not want us to provide special protection for Israel. In fact, he wants us to end all foreign aid. This makes sense and would actually be a benefit to Israel when we realize that we send more money and weapon to the *enemies* of Israel than to that country itself.
Marijuana: this is a much safer medicine than many of the toxic chemicals that are given to patients with certain diseases. It is effective at significantly reducing levels of pain and is actually the only substance that is effective for some people. It is not addictive and in a controlled situation there is no danger of it leading to use of "harder" drugs.
Huckabee insults adherents to other religions when he uses such blatantly "Christian" propaganda. HE is the one who could never be elected. How can you be the president of a country of Christians/Muslims/Jews/Atheists/Mormons/etc. if your whole platform is based on appeasing only one of those groups? Ron Paul and the liberty he stands for appeals to people of all faiths, including Christians. Furthermore, it was Jesus Himself who said "He who takes the sword will die by the sword" (In Matthew, at the scene of His arrest), so we clearly must we skeptical of the righteousness of those candidates who so eagerly take up the banner of war.
As to the marriage amendment issue, it is important for government to not impose one "moral" code on the country, in part, because it is hateful to those who live in opposition to that code. It is only appropriate in a situation where the immoral act is harmful to others (which is why Dr. Paul is so against abortion. It is harmful to the infant.) Gay marriage is harmful to no one and a Constitutional amendment banning it would only widen any gap between Christians and gays. Most Christians I know would love to have interaction with and show a loving attitude toward gays, but legislation like this will only further divide us into groups. This increases the hate. You convert people with your loving words, not your hateful legislation.
I hope this is helpful. I probably wouldn't push it too far. Many people simply don't want to see the truth and if you push too hard they will open fire on you. I certainly wouldn't want to excite "Huck's Army."
Thanks for your thoughts.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Anyone know anything about
Anyone know anything about this?
one pro-lifer was worried about the high rating ron paul got from NARAL??
How to respond?
"Dear Serena,
More info.
Just got a call from a McCain campaign worker in Pensacola, FL, trying to get to sign up for a profamily/McCain group. He said that Ron Paul has been given a rating by NARAL Prochoice America of voting for the prochoice side 65% of the time and that he voted against PPA. I was asked to check at the website prochoice.com
Just checked Google and Ron Paul supported the ban on PPA. Have not and will not check the prochoice website.
Hmmmmmm"
how to respond when someone
how to respond when someone doesn't want to hear from you:
> I have asked repeatedly to be taken off all Ron Paul mailing lists. Please do so!!
Hi, I'm sorry that you feel spammed. As a pro-lifer who certainly believes in Ron Paul I certainly did not intend you to feel that way - nor did I pick you from any 'mailing list'.
Please be reassured you shall receive no more requests from me to consider any candidate's pro-life position,
In Christ,
Serena Gaefke
Another positive
Another positive response:
Dear Serena,
I have voted early and I picked Ron Paul because he is prolife and against the war in Iraq.
Another positive response
Another positive response from a pro-life group:
Hi Serena,
I am supporting Ron Paul. Our "meet Up" group has his signs all over our town.
Keep up the good work,