The Bible & Ron Paul, pt. 5: Private Property
Uploader Comments (cutwithouthands)
All Comments (9)
-
I'm not really a religious person but natural law just makes sense to me and is the only logical way to have an ethical and just society.
-
The IRS steals the private property of people. All property taxes are legalized theft. The Bible says the Antichrist will be a raiser of taxes (Daniel 11:20). Poly - ticks means a bunch of blood suckers.
-
Ron Paul = Tax Payers best friend!! Repeal the income tax and replace it with NOTHING! Thanks for posting this video series.
-
@margaritaszechenyi I think it would probably be enforced the way it use to before Roe vs. Wade - at the State level. It will be absolutely wonderful to have Roe vs. Wade overturned!
-
FIVE STARS!
-
Exodus 30:15! Taxes are to be uniform. Seems our Art. 1., sec 8 devised that same foundation, but we never used it. :/
-
Thanks for this video series! I read the infanticide sentence in his book the same way you do: abortion *is* infanticide, since, as Ron Paul stresses, life begins at conception; therefore the States *have* legalized infanticide. I'm confused about 2 things though: isn't Art 4, Sect 4 directed at the Federal Level, not the States? Also, if RP supports removal of the Supreme Court's jurisdiction over abortion and he's opposed to Federal policing of abortion, how would this be enforced?
Also, apparently Ron Paul cosponsored 2 anti-federal-funding bills this year, which both contain exceptions for rape, incest & potential death of mom. Ron Paul has stressed freedom of conscience and that Americans should not be forced to fund something against their conscience. Since he acknowledges life begins at conception and that many of us are against these exceptions, how could he possibly cosponsor those two bills? I was heartbroken to find out about them cuz I love Ron Paul.
margaritaszechenyi 1 month ago in playlist The Bible & Ron Paul, 13-part series
@margaritaszechenyi, Without seeing these bills myself, and assuming your synopsis is true, this doesn't reflect an inconsistency on Paul's part. It is a very practical move to limit as many abortions as possible. If you have the option to limit abortions (even though there are exceptions) it would be unwise to ignore that avenue. Besides, Paul does have legislation that would outlaw ALL abortion (w/no exceptions). So, him supporting both options is merely a practical step.
cutwithouthands 1 month ago