Comment: Not quite "too pro-life"

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: WOW! Right to the point... (see in situ)

Not quite "too pro-life"

The way to put the question is "why don't you bomb abortion clinics or assassinate abortionists if the issue is so criticial?".

As far as I can tell, Ron Paul will do more in the first 24 hours or 1 week to end federal support (including the entire police power of protection) of abortion than Reagan and papa and baby Bush combined by issuing whatever executive orders to nullify roe v. wade, because the decision is unconstitutional AND Ron Paul considers the branches co-equal. It would be a Marbury-v-Madison, ok, let THEM enforce it kind of thing. Then the choice will be for Paul's actions (he could make them explicit) v.s. the hot air of the chorus.

The difficulty is it seems that many pro-life people (returning to the first sentence) want someone corrupt but on their side willing to use the corruption to enforce their views. The "he may be an SOB, but he's our SOB" idea.

Return it to the states (where it belongs, and where existing laws are generally 100% pro-life), and fight the battle there. A lot of politicians will then have to declare themselves by their actions instead of saying "I'm against it but can't do anything".