Spring Break
Ron Paul: Fighting freedom since 1976
Seth Anthony
Issue date: 1/31/08 Section: Opinion
Friends of mine who know that I consider myself politically libertarian keep asking me what I think of Ron Paul.
Paul, the long-shot anti-war Republican presidential candidate, was the Libertarian Party's nominee for president in 1988. He still gets a lot of support from those who, like libertarians, distrust the federal government's continuing pursuit of power and control over our lives.
On the surface, there's a lot to like about Ron Paul: He opposed the Iraq War from the beginning, opposes the use of torture, the "PATRIOT Act" and detentions at Guantanamo Bay. He also, like many libertarians, isn't a fan of the income tax, government-run heath care, the war on drugs, No Child Left Behind or federal subsidies for big business.
Ron Paul has become, for better or for worse, what many people think of when they hear "libertarian." But a libertarian is someone who believes in the merits of liberty - in the freedom of individuals to decide for themselves what course is best, without being dictated to or obstructed by government.
On a wide range of issues, Ron Paul fails the test of actually being libertarian. I'll just run down the most egregious examples.
Ron Paul opposes the freedom of women to control their bodies.
Calling himself "an unshakable foe of abortion," Ron Paul's "Sanctity of Life Act" would define life to begin at conception - a definition that would also criminalize emergency contraception, in-vitro fertilization, embryonic stem cell research and many forms of birth control.
In Ron Paul's America, abortions take place unsupervised in back alleys, and couples lack longstanding family planning or fertility tools.
Ron Paul opposes the freedom to worship without government dictating or endorsing religion. His "We The People Act" would forbid federal courts from ruling on a range of local actions, including government endorsements of religion or infringements on religious liberty.
In Ron Paul's America, a local public school could refuse to hire a teacher because they were a Muslim or atheist, and there could be no legal recourse.
Paul, the long-shot anti-war Republican presidential candidate, was the Libertarian Party's nominee for president in 1988. He still gets a lot of support from those who, like libertarians, distrust the federal government's continuing pursuit of power and control over our lives.
On the surface, there's a lot to like about Ron Paul: He opposed the Iraq War from the beginning, opposes the use of torture, the "PATRIOT Act" and detentions at Guantanamo Bay. He also, like many libertarians, isn't a fan of the income tax, government-run heath care, the war on drugs, No Child Left Behind or federal subsidies for big business.
Ron Paul has become, for better or for worse, what many people think of when they hear "libertarian." But a libertarian is someone who believes in the merits of liberty - in the freedom of individuals to decide for themselves what course is best, without being dictated to or obstructed by government.
On a wide range of issues, Ron Paul fails the test of actually being libertarian. I'll just run down the most egregious examples.
Ron Paul opposes the freedom of women to control their bodies.
Calling himself "an unshakable foe of abortion," Ron Paul's "Sanctity of Life Act" would define life to begin at conception - a definition that would also criminalize emergency contraception, in-vitro fertilization, embryonic stem cell research and many forms of birth control.
In Ron Paul's America, abortions take place unsupervised in back alleys, and couples lack longstanding family planning or fertility tools.
Ron Paul opposes the freedom to worship without government dictating or endorsing religion. His "We The People Act" would forbid federal courts from ruling on a range of local actions, including government endorsements of religion or infringements on religious liberty.
In Ron Paul's America, a local public school could refuse to hire a teacher because they were a Muslim or atheist, and there could be no legal recourse.
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 25
JP
posted 1/31/08 @ 2:28 AM MST
Wow! Where to start? Well lets start with the fact that Dr. Paul wants the feds out of your direct personal life. States rights have been forgotten. (Continued…)
TW
posted 1/31/08 @ 3:00 AM MST
I think the biggest misconception about this article, though you bring up some viable concerns from a pure libertarian standpoint is that Ron Paul isn't against those things. (Continued…)
Bdygard
Craig Hawley
posted 1/31/08 @ 4:34 AM MST
I agree Ron Paul has no chance at getting elected. And since I am not a libertarian I will acquiesce to your expertise as a libertarian.
But I have one bone to pick with you. (Continued…)
TJS
posted 1/31/08 @ 8:08 AM MST
The author is all wrong:
Ron Paul opposes FEDERAL involvement in abortion. Overturning Roe v Wade would return control to the states. That is a libertarian position. (Continued…)
Jason Williams
posted 1/31/08 @ 9:16 AM MST
I am a libertarian and I disagree strongly with the characterization of Dr. Paul's views. First of all, it is not decidedly libertarian to be pro-choice. (Continued…)
Bdygard
Craig Hawley
posted 1/31/08 @ 9:28 AM MST
Nicely said Jason. I disagre with you and Ron paul on issue , but I appreciate you input and they way you went about it.
May the best man or lady win. (Continued…)
mpolzkill
posted 1/31/08 @ 10:34 AM MST
I can't add much to these fine comments here other than: You're worse than WRONG on everything you say Mr. Anthony, you are SUPERFICIALLY CORRECT. You've knowingly made a hit piece, because you probably support one of the corporate candidates. (Continued…)
frank
posted 1/31/08 @ 10:36 AM MST
Seth Anthony wrote in the article:
"... abortions take place unsupervised in back alleys, and couples lack longstanding family planning or fertility tools. (Continued…)
Steve
posted 1/31/08 @ 11:59 AM MST
There's a big difference between liberal and libertarian, duh... One is left wing progressive, the other is for the freedom of the founding fathers.
Colt-1
posted 1/31/08 @ 1:29 PM MST
With all due respect, in no way do you understand neither the positions of Paul or Libertarian positions.
The abortion issue: wrongly decided by a federal court, only enacted by a sweeping social construct. (Continued…)
Post a Comment