Ron Paul's Stand on Animal Rights
Posted February 25th, 2008 by citizen_scott
output
While canvassing today i met a great woman who asked me his views on Animal Rights, well i didnt know the answer and after searching his site and every other resource i am no closer to an answer. I gave her other reasons to support Paul but told her i would find out more on Animal Rights and let her know.
Any help?
Bookmark/Search this post with:
The same as the Constitutions stand
namely, none. It would be up to state and local laws and people's own conscience.
Freedom isn't always easy. I have to admit that I have big government tendencies on this issue and on other environmental issues. I really think that you do get better results on single issues with government interference, but those single issues don't exist in a vacumn, they exist as part of the whole and taken as a whole whatever benefit that is accrued from interference on a single issue is far outweighed by the costs incurred to the whole.
Free and Brave
or Cradle to Grave
You can't have both
animal cruelty is not something the
president typically worries himself with. But, he has a huge family and I'm sure they have a butt-load of animals.
I think
I think they have a cat named Fluffy.
I'm an animal lover from a long line of animal lovers but I'm not a PETA-type. I guess THEY would be hard pressed to support Paul. My point is that for regular animal lovers it is getting harder to own animals because of all these regulations. Veterinarian prices have gone through the roof, also making it much harder to own an animal. The harder it is to own an animal the more homeless animals will remain unadopted.
They've been trying for years to legally award pets "companion" status. Your pet would then have to be treated with the same legal considerations as your human dependants.That means you would be legally bound to medically treat your animal. For example, if your 15 year old dog contracted terminal cancer, you would legally have to give it chemotherapy. Oh, and vets are immune from malpractice (of course being able to sue them for malpractice would only increase the already outrageous prices).
So to sum up: the current bureaucratic trends have made it more difficult to own an animal and, I believe, less likely for people to visit their vet with an ill animal.
As in so many things, I think the local government is better equipped to handle each communities animal needs. The Federal Government should only be involved if the crime crosses state lines. I mean I love animals but I think the time and money the Federal Government has spent on our pets would be better spent finding abducted children, among other things.
Animal Rights.
Tell her that if she don't vote for Ron Paul.
The only ones in this country that will have any rights will be the animals!
www.ronpaul2008.com
There is life at the end of the tunnel my friends!
Good reply
.
Individual States
Fortune Favors the Bold
Could Pass Animal cruelty laws and people who are concerned about fair treatment of animals could only buy from states that have passed those laws. If enough people cared, other states would adopt similar measures to remain competitive. It would be the best scenario for animal rights people.
RON PAUL HAS THE STRONGEST ANIMAL RIGHTS STANCE
This is a simple argument -- the strongest animal rights stance is that stance that most limits the subsidization of factory farming!!
Thus Ron Paul who is against all forms of farm subsidies stands the strongest on this issue.
The second area of animal rights would result from the candidate who would bring about the strongest judicial system. Right now the power goes from Executive to Legislative then to Judicial -- Under a Constitutional Republic (which Ron Paul would restore) the powers are balanced and equal. So, stronger judicial means stronger property rights!!
Ron Paul 2-for-2 and thus the Strongest Animal Rights advocate running for President in 2008!!!
Octobox
Wisdom is the anticipation of consequences!
Good Post
I wish I had a way to star it and save it on these forums. But I'll do my best to remember your line of thought when I am speaking to the liberal students on my pretty liberal campus.
This is a really good point
Today our American Government is subsidizing animal testing and unsanitary animal slaughter. Ron Paul has always been against subsidies because they never go to the small, independant American the subsidies always go to immoral corporations that buy their way around laws.
thank you...great insight...
...shows his humanity
Only Ron Paul
Posted by Lew Rockwell at February 23, 2008 12:25 PM
Maybe I should trademark that phrase? Nah. But as more and more dairies go raw, that is, produce healthier milk, only Ron Paul has worked to stop the leviathan from suppressing this market development in favor of the big FDA-approved dairies. Of course, Ron did grow up working in his Dad's dairy, but he is for protecting all free-market efforts from government's distortionary intervention.
http://www.lewrockwell.co...
Tell her not to feed the strays
Tell her not to feed the strays or they will keep coming back and then make a home in her yard just like the illegals have in our country.
Tell her that M. Vick got
Tell her that M. Vick got more time than Huckleberry's son for killing dogs.
I'm for treating all living
I'm for treating all living creatures fairly and with respect as intended. In the context of this election however, this question has little practical purpose or meaning. Let's first worry about our HUMAN RIGHTS and this COUNTRY and make sure we're not falling into total FASCISM before addressing this.
Thx
Is property capable of having legal rights?
Does my cow have as much legal rights as my dog? Or are they both my property?
I am not trying to be difficult, just asking a question.
In a court of law
Animals are property.The government should not be able to tell us what to do with our property.Just like having to get
permission to cut down a tree
on our land.Once they have control of everything,we own
nothing!
If her concern is in relation to the
recent videos that surfaced of mistreatment of downer cattle, you can assure her that Ron Paul is a strong proponent of Food safety, and I am sure would be appalled at this inhumane treatment of animals, as we all are.
Whatever his stance, we know it is in accord with our Constitution!
There is a video on his stance on animal rights
I remember seeing it and he said that the Federal government has no jurisdiction or something to that effect. He said that he didn't condone cruelty to animals but that it was best left to local governments to sort out.
some of us
... are quite new to the freedom movement and have been compartmentalized into our areas of personal interest. It is good to dialog- its the American way. And if ur rural you might not have a whole lot of ppl to consult. We ought to welcome those unelite who're seeking as Ron Paul would offer his hand to any who want to learn of Him and his message.
No sympathy for this lady
I'm sorry to be the one with the cranky attitude here, but that woman's main concern about where Ron Paul stands about animal rights shows how clueless and shallow she is. Oh, I have no doubt she really is caring for the plight of animals. But for crying out loud, we are on the verge of losing our inalienable rights and seeing the Constitution being trampled under the feet of our current government! We have young men and women being killed and maimed in a unnecessary war, and our economy is, to quote Bill Paxton from that great James Cameron movie, Aliens, "is on a express elevator to hell! "Where are her priorities!?!?! I say skip her,and others like her, that bring up such ridiculous questions. You would have to spend more time that you mortally allows to educate her what is going on right now. Move on to someone that has a clue! She should be spending here energy and time saving humans being abused by other humans!
Visit my Ron Paul blog at A Northern New Yorker for Ron Paul
"No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up!
---Lily Tomlin
ease up, at least she was asking questions!
We have been trained our entire life to focus on non-issues. Telling people about Ron Paul, it is normal for them to have some pet issue be "burning" for them.
I went to a GOP meeting last week where they were admitting they would loose to Obama, but ready to hold their nose and vote McCain anyway. No one there wanted to talk about issues at all. That is worth getting cranky about!
Proverbs 12:10
Which boils down to personal responsiblity and integrity, caring about your neighbor and leaving up to the state reps to write the laws according to the will of the people.
re3VOIution is what we need
It's a local matter.
Like so many other things that the feds have interfered with over the years.
-jcr
the doctor did say
"we should cherish all life"
"people have to be responsible"
Hmm
It'd definitely be a good question to ask him. Considering his stance on nonintervention and peace, it's pretty clear that he wishes no harm on anyone, that could very well include animals. We should try to seek an answer here, I bet his stance would be something we could all nod in appreciation to.
Animals don't have rights.
However they are protected by law from inhumane treatment.
That's your opinion
If you mean legal rights, you are correct. If you mean moral rights, that's your opinion. I think they do have moral rights, and should have legal rights.
I have no opinion on the matter.
But I would like to ask you a few questions. If an animal has moral rights can it be punished for doing something immoral? What remedy would an animal have in court should it accept legal rights? Are said rights corporeal, incorporeal, civil or distributive? What specific rule, statute or regulation operates on said rights? Tell me truly Ms. katjust.
I think they should have bbq
I think they should have bbq sauce rubbed on them before they are devoured.
But First NeoConned ,They Must Be...........
beaten very severely (while alive) to the point of death to insure proper tenderizing before application of bbq sauce.
precisely! Nobody like tough
precisely! Nobody likes tough meat!