Michael Jackson Dies!!

[Rightwing Nutjob]

Do you believe that murder statutes should be federal? That is the question that Ron Paul answers with a "no." It is not a backdoor for a pro-abortion position. It is a pro-life position, one shared by many conservatives.

Perhaps, you are suggesting we just abolish the states and let criminal law be set by the federal government, a flagrantly anti-Constitution position. That in and of itself doesn't make you wrong on a moral level, but neither does Paul following the Constitution on this matter as he consistently attempts (and sometimes failing) to do in every matter.

[Rightwing Nutjob]

Think about all this for a moment, federal "protection of rights" is how we got nationwide abortion already.

[RET423]

Murder cases are heard in federal courts as well as kidnapping, theft, embezzlement and many other crimes under certain circumstances.

In the abortion debate the claim of Ron Paul is that a state can choose to allow the killing of babies. It is not possible to hold that position if you believe babies qualify for Constitutional rights.

If a state decided to legalize murder would you say "oh well, I guess we just die now". What if a state decided to ban private gun ownership? would you say "oh well, I guess we can't own guns anymore".
Or speak freely about our faith or political opinions?
Or keep state agents from rummaging through our houses whenever they want?

The Supreme Court hears cases all the time determining the constitutionality of laws passed by states if they feel the laws violate the rights assured in the U.S. Constitution. They are regularly overturned.

Ron Paul's position is an attempt to keep some Conservative voters in his camp with a cop out.

If a state has the authority to deny citizens their Constitutional rights then we HAVE NO Constitutional rights.

[Rightwing Nutjob]

Under certain circumstances, yes.

But murder is not addressed by the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Anyway, he is not alone among conservatives, and I'm not referring to libertarian Republicans. There is a widespread belief, based on the words in the document, that powers not specifically granted to Congress are reserved to the states. That the federal government intrudes time and again is not a justification for further intrusion where it is not authorized.

[RET423]

It IS the responsibility for the federal government to intervene if a state denies Constitutional rights to its citizens.

Yes the feds abuse that responsibility but that does not mean they don't have the responsibility to intervene when rights are denied.
That is why cops must get a search warrant to enter our homes.
That is why Miranda rights must be read and observed.
That is why we can still keep & bear arms.

The states assuming the responsibility of enforcing laws that DON'T violate our Constitutional rights does not excuse the Federal Government of its responsibility to PROTECT our Constitutional rights when a state attempts to abolish them.

Any person who believes abortion is state matter CAN NOT believe that babies have a Constitutional right to life, liberty & property.

[Rightwing Nutjob]

First off, illegal search and seizure, a right not to testify against yourself and a right to own a gun are federal matters mentioned specifically in the Bill of Rights.

Second, do you prefer the situation we have now as opposed to the overturning of Roe v. Wade and three, nine, 16, 22, 37 or more states adopting anti-abortion laws? It was a state issue before the feds stepped in and legalized it throughout the entire nation. Wouldn't you prefer to work on what Ron Paul wants to do, overturn Roe v. Wade and at the very least return the issue to condition it was in before it was federalized.

Think about it this way.

Your way: An entire nation with legalized murder until you convince an entire nation to stop.

Ron Paul's way: Part of a nation with legalized murder. Part of a nation that protects human life if someone can bring a case to court to overturn that poor decision or nullify it through some other political channel.

RET423
Any person who believes abortion is state matter CAN NOT believe that babies have a Constitutional right to life, liberty & property.

Let's rephrase this in parallel to a non-controversial issue, shall we: Any person who believes that shoplifting is a state matter CAN NOT believe that anyone has a Constitutional right to life, liberty and property.

All of this because folks can't stand the guy's foreign policy, and then you Paul haters bring him up and start bashing on him in an unrelated thread because a Ron Paul supporter says something to the effect of, "Amazing how pro-lifers celebrate death."

[Rightwing Nutjob]

You should be supporting Paul. His goals and yours are in the same direction. If he is successful in his quest, it will be legal to ban abortion. Is this an undesirable outcome for you?

[RET423]

do you prefer the situation we have now as opposed to the overturning of Roe v. Wade and three, nine, 16, 22, 37 or more states adopting anti-abortion laws? It was a state issue before the feds stepped in and legalized it throughout the entire nation. Wouldn't you prefer to work on what Ron Paul wants to do, overturn Roe v. Wade and at the very least return the issue to condition it was in before it was federalized.

It is not relevant "what I prefer", what is relevant is whether citizens can expect the Federal Government to protect the rights of the citizens.

Let's rephrase this in parallel to a non-controversial issue, shall we: Any person who believes that shoplifting is a state matter CAN NOT believe that anyone has a Constitutional right to life, liberty and property.

Great example, if a state decided that citizens had no right to own property so shoplifting would not be a crime I would expect the Federal Government to overturn the law that abolished private property rights on Constitutional grounds.
Or if they took guns away
Or if they took free speech away
Or any other right.

The Constitution says the right to life, liberty or property can not be taken from a citizen without due process.
Ron Paul advocates ignoring the Constitution in regards to protecting life and other things as well.

This is not the thread to get into great detail on this, I will start one some time and go into more detail.

[Rightwing Nutjob]

I'll take care of the threadjack and make the new one.

[RET423]

I'll take care of the threadjack and make the new one.

Fair enough.