ph2006070801123.jpg

I do not support Ron Paul. In my eyes he is akin to so many other, few-sandwiches-short-of-a-picnic social conservatives that seem to travel through life wearing horse blinders while they’re busy thimping a bible. All the symptoms are there. He talks of crazy conspiracy theories, thinks theocracy can work in America, and prides himself on being a Constitutional expert. So, I checked some of his writings, only because his name has popped up a bit more than usual this past week due to his increase in fundraising.  

How well does he know the Constitution you ask? He wrote this:

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion.

“Replete with references to God?” That seemed odd to me, so I checked it out. By the way, replete means abundantly supplied or filled. So…how many times is God mentioned in the Constitution? Roughly about zero. I confirmed that fact by visiting Ron Paul’s own congressional website where he has posted a copy of the text. If you don’t have time to read the whole thing, just do a page search for “God” and you will be bombarded with all zero results that are returned. 

Jefferson himself was lukewarm on the teachings of Christians and had little compassion for priests. Jefferson believed he was a Christian only in one sense, that he thought the moral teaching of Jesus made sense. I tend to agree with him. He did not believe in prayer, divine revelation, the trinity or the resurrection..and all this is documented in case Mr. Paul wants to check it out. However, right wing lunatic Christian fundamentalists are busy pushing their their view of American history in order to fit their theocratic brainwashing agenda. To this end, as his writings suggest, Ron Paul is willing to contribute. 

I must assume Ron Paul has read the constitution. Why lie? He brags about his in depth study of the Constitution. He has the Constitution on his website. So why claim that it is filled with references to God when there is not a single mention of God anywhere in the document? The answer, concentration of political power around the Chritian right with an eye on imposing their theocratic agenda on this country…no matter what it takes - lying included. 

The problem with Ron and all the other Christian fundamentalists who yearn to control government is that their views are rigid and their agenda reactionary. They simply do not critically analyze things and think through the consequences of their actions to the logical conclusions. A few examples…

If Roe v. Wade was overturned, as Ron Paul and other Christians would like to see, what would happen to all those seeking abortions? Answer - they would still get them…1920’s style - in some store front backdoor clinic or by some quack in their own bedrooms. Of course death rates among these women would skyrocket, but hey, all is good in the name of Christ. How about a return to strict constitutionalism? Well, I guess that means we bring back slavery. Ron Paul is so in tune with the founding fathers, then he must know most owned slaves. You can also kiss the U.S. Federal Reserve System goodbye, all social safety nets enacted during the New Deal, the U.S. Tax Code and everything it funds, the U.S. Highway System…I could go on but why waste any more time. The mere thought of all this is shear lunacy.  

It is well know by the liberal bloggers that Ron Paul’s cult (and that is exactly what they are) spreads vicious rumors around the Internet with the goal of boosting him and his Christian revisionist lies, while ambushing anyone who disagrees with him, labeling those people socialists and liberal conspiratists. He is also up in the fundraising race because other like minded Christian-Jesus-Freaks are fueling his hateful and deceptive message, much the way they fueled another liar…George Bush. If America has an ounce of brainpower, they will avoid Paul and the like during this and every other election cycle. I’ll stick with candidates that actually think before they speak…thanks.

Too bad we couldn’t reincarnate Jefferson.

[?] Share This
Sphere: Related Content

18 Responses to “Ron Paul…Constitutionalist or Just Another Christian Fundamentalist Nut?”

Actually, of Roe v. Wade were overturned, it would not make abortion illegal. If Roe v. Wade were overturned, the debate over abortion would shift from the Federal level to the State level. With the debate on the State level, even if a few states chose to outlaw abortion, residents of that state would be able to drive a couple hours and get an abortion. This would be bad, but it’s better than nationalizing the issue, and opening the possibility that Kansas and Utah will impose their views on all of us.


How about a return to strict constitutionalism?
Well, I guess that means we bring back slavery.

Actually, even for a state to allow slavery would be unconstitutional, since the 13th Amendment forbids the practice, and state laws passed to allow slaver (which requires positive governmental support) would not be constitutional.


You can also kiss the U.S. Federal Reserve System goodbye,

I hope so! The Federal Reserve System is the greatest scheme in history to redistribute wealth from the poor to the rich.

You’d have to understand economics to understand why. I suggest “Economics for Real People”.

Correct on Roe v. Wade and at no point did I write in my post that overturning tht case would make abortion illegal. I simply painted a picture of what would happen if conservative states cited that precedent to outlaw the practice. You need to connect the dots a bit and I know conservatives have trouble with that.

Ron Paul sells himself as a strict constitutionalist and often cites the founding fathers, their writings, and their practical intent as the basis for his political platform. If he thinks Jefferson really wanted theocracy, then I don’t think it’s much of a leap to conclude that he would also endorse slavery - although the point is subject to debate I guess.

On the economy - I wish to inform you that I understand economics perfectly well thank you, as I hold a Master’s Degree in Social Policy with concentrations in Economics and Labor Policy.

Redistribution from the poor to the rich?

Have you any clue as to why the Federal Reserve System was created in the first place - or do you simply vomit up the official, yet mindless and unfounded talking points spoon fed to you by the Paul campaign? Maybe you missed that lecture in history class? I suggest you do some light research before you make foolish statements on this blog because we come armed with the facts here, not conspiratorial rants.

Matthew:
Thanks for visiting my Blog and leaving that positive comment. I’ll add this website to my Blogroll as you can do the same with mine.

Thought Merchant
www.thoughtmerchant.wordpress.com
Politics and Commentary for the Thinking Person of Color

I’m with you on this one. I’ve been trying to battle back the Ron Paul cult, and keep Democrats from switching party affiliation to vote for Mr. Paul. It seems the Ron Paul camp is making some headway getting liberals– honest-to-goodness liberals with the wool pulled over their eyes– to switch party affiliation so they can support this “good man” who wants to pull us out of Iraq and eliminate the IRS and central banking system.

He’s saying just what they want to hear– Enough to entice them to drop their party affiliation– and then what happens when the GOP nominate the usual neo-con fascist instead of Ron Paul? There’s a whole bunch of former Democrats– now Republicans– who will be disenfranchised by some electronic voting systems that insist you vote straight ticket along party lines.

I don’t KNOW that this is the case, but then, I didn’t KNOW that the election was rigged the last two times either, but it sure as hell looks that way.

Yes, the idea of a central banking system was always a lousy one, and feeds the goals of some fairly sinister people in our world– But electing an isolationist, anti-semitic, racist, bigoted, fundamentalist Christian gun nut to the Presidency is NOT the answer!!!

The Ron Paul cult needs to be stopped.

Wilder,

Thanks for the comment on liberals switching affiliation angle. That rarely gets any traction on the blogs but I’ll keep an eye on it. Paul must be stopped.

You do not understand, but you are full of your own understanding. How arrogant of you to say you completely understand economics. People who study economics for their entire life still say that they have barely scratched the surface. When you really learn about it, you realize that you have really learned nothing.

Who cares if the candidate is hindu, muslim or christian? If the candidate is for getting the government out of our lives, then that is the major issue. Stop being so afraid of every conservative christian. It shows your weakness.

The federal reserve board is not inherently bad, but central banks have historically been a point of contention — a topic of conversation that is completely absent in today’s society. Look into the debates of the 1st and 2nd central banks of the US. Why were there people so vehemently against it? Because, it can be used by the powerful to shape policy. This is not some “Ron Paul mantra” that is being regurgitated. Nothing is as simple as you think it is. This is actual discussion that is deeply rooted in our nation’s history.

I think it was a Rothschild that said “Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes the laws.” There is an issue here that will not go away just because you belittle people. There is a revolution and you have yet to figure it out. This revolution is bigger than some stupid political party. Democrats and Republicans with moral views completely different are coming together over an even bigger issue — government is for the people, by the people.

Matthew Boyd

Matthew,

First of all I was responding to an arrogant an insulting comment directed at me. I never said I understand all there is to know about economics. I couldn’t agree with you more about the complexity of the American economy and all of the dynamic forces that drive it. You completely took me out of context.

Secondly, I am at odds with Ron Paul and his Christian fundamentalist ideals because I believe he would lead us to Christian theocracy, and that is inherently dangerous. The founding fathers were very clear on this point, in particular Jefferson. I tend to agree with Jefferson and his reasoning.

Lastly, I disagree with you that people are coming together around Ron Paul. I think his candidacy is a fringe movement at best and all this talk of revolution and conspiracy is just silly. Corporations own us my friend, but Ron Paul will not be the force to change that. Only massive economic and social chaos will do that and I believe we will live to see it.

A return to Constitutional constructionalism is not the answer.

i don’t think Paul has a theocracy in mind. His personal beliefs are his own and understands the ideas of a tolerant society towards belief. his main focus is about the rule of law, primarily the ’supreme law of the land’, the constitution. if you want to change the constitution then just say so.

the major issues confronting the nation today are economy and war. i don’t see any other candidate addressing these issues as candidly and directly as Paul does. The basic fundamental laws established really do contain tools that we as citizens can use to scale back the powerful interests that are dominating the socio-political arena today.

secrecy, lobbyists, federal reserve, taxes,

decentralize and repeal

if you think government ended slavery, think again.
people and their ideas should be given that credit.
law is merely the tool we need to use to uphold ‘individual rights’
minimize tyranny and maximize liberty.
if you can’t trust the people… who can u trust?

If you not only study the constitution, but also the actual men and their writings including the federalists and anti-federalists papers you will comprehen