Voting For Ron Paul

[dairygirl4u2c]

ty

[Spamity Calamity]

There is nothing wrong with stem cell research. Just embryonic stem cell research. Bush was never against stem cell research he just didnt want people using embryos to do it which is reasonable.

Since scientists have developed a way to clone embryonic stem cells without destroying the embryo this is rapidly becoming less of an issue. And it seems George Bush is justified in holding out till there is a better way. Here is an article that talks about it. [url="http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/24/healthscience/web.0824stem.php#end_main"]http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/24/hea...em.php#end_main[/url]

Now if Ron Paul is for embryonic stem cell research or not you havent clarified so I refuse to speculate.

Edited December 4, 2007 by Spamity Calamity

[dairygirl4u2c]

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Stem-cell_research_regulation"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_pos...arch_regulation[/url]

actually, that's a good question. i thought it was clear reading it teh first time but maybe not.

he did for against hte stem cell ban though. he thinks abortion should be banned the federal level but for some reason thinks stem cell research shouldn't.

now, i don't think he's being inconsistent necessarily, i could think of some arguments he'd make. i'm sure most think it's inconsistent though.

[mortify]

[quote name='Spamity Calamity' post='1429232' date='Dec 4 2007, 10:51 AM']Now if Ron Paul is for embryonic stem cell research or not you havent clarified so I refuse to speculate.[/quote]

Ron Paul is against embryonic stem cell research.

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66jpPCIzza8"]Youtube: Ron Paul on abortion and stem cell research[/url]

[goldenchild17]

If he did support embryonic cell research then I could think it was a sin to vote for him. I have not seen any support for the position that he does though, and wouldn't imagine that he did.

[Aloysius]

George Bush did not ban embryonic stem cell research, he banned federal funding of it, except on lines that had already begun research at that time. Given Dr. Paul's constitutionalist position, I would bet a lot of money against him being for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research... perhaps there was a vote for something like what bush did, which would include some funding but ban other funding, and he voted against the actual funding it would authorize? seems more his style. or perhaps there was a bill proposing a federal law prohibiting it and he voted against it because he didn't think it was a federal issue one way or the other, also seems more his style.

either of those positions would not disqualify him as a legitimate candidate in a Catholic voter's eyes the way support of abortion, torture, or use of nuclear weapons would; he is clearly against embryonic stem cell research but might not use the power of the federal government either for or against it.

[goldenchild17]

clarify for me real quick aloy, I don't know a lot about the government workings of the whole thing. But, if he is against Federal litigation either for or against stem cell research, then how does it play out that he would be for federal funding of stem cell research? Wouldn't that be Federal action FOR the issue? Now, I could see him supporting a state's right to make the decision either for or against state funds going towards such research, but wouldn't federal funds going towards the research be against his mentality of leaving the issue to the states? thanks

[Aloysius]

yes, I believe that would be against his mentality. He does not support federal funding.

here's the wikipedia thing dairy posted:
[quote]Paul supports stem-cell research generically, as evidenced by his sponsoring the Cures Can Be Found Act of 2005 (H.R. 3334), a bill "to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide credits against income tax for qualified stem cell research, the storage of qualified stem cells, and the donation of umbilical cord blood." However, Paul believes the debate over the embryonic category of stem-cell research is another divisive issue over which the federal government has no jurisdiction:

"Those engaged in this debate tend to split into warring camps claiming exclusive moral authority to decide the issue once and for all.

On one side, those who support the President’s veto tend to argue against embryonic stem cell research, pointing to the individual rights of the embryo being discarded for use in research. On the other hand are those who argue the embryo will be discarded any way, and the research may provide valuable cures for people suffering from terrible illnesses.

In Washington, these two camps generally advocate very different policies. The first group wants a federal ban on all such research, while the latter group expects the research to be federally-subsidized. Neither side in this battle seems to consider the morality surrounding the rights of federal taxpayers ...."[158]

Paul voted "no" on a bill banning human cloning at the federal level.[159][/quote]

tax credits are perfectly acceptable, and that just talks in general about 'stem cell research' and specifically mentions umbilical stem cell research. Paul would vote for tax credits/tax refunds to just about anybody, though. haha, he wants to get as much tax money back to as many taxpayers as possible. Of course, when he does stuff like that, people get confused about his position because they don't see his overall vision as to the role of government and the role of federal taxes.

[LouisvilleFan]

Several people here have mentioned stem cell research generically, indicating a lack of understanding about the differences between different types of stem cell research.

Ron Paul authored legislation to define life as beginning at conception. Read for yourself what he says about [url="http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/"]Life & Liberty[/url] and [url="http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/?tag=Stem%20Cells"]stem cell research[/url]. I'll give you that I don't see him personally making a statement against [i]embryonic [/i]stem cell research (other types of stem cell research are perfectly acceptable), but he is against federal funding for it and that at least discourages it.

Of course, considering the legislation he authored, I can't imagine he is personally in favor of embryonic stem cell research, and if that legislation did ever go through, it would by default make embryonic research illegal (as it is already unconstitutional).

Edited December 5, 2007 by LouisvilleFan

[goldenchild17]

Thanks aloy. Also I've been reading on his site and although a few things still bother me (I don't think they are essential issues right now) I saw this. He introduced and said "H.R. 1146 would end our membership in the United Nations, protecting us from their attempts to tax our guns or disarm us entirely."

Does he really want to break away from the UN? Not to start a new debate on that but that definitely is a positive from my perspective.

[Adrestia]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1430489' date='Dec 6 2007, 03:20 AM']Does he really want to break away from the UN? Not to start a new debate on that but that definitely is a positive from my perspective.[/quote]
He does.
[quote][url="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/09/22/paul-time-for-us-to-leave-un/"]http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/...us-to-leave-un/[/url]
(CNN)–Saying "I'm a believer in trade," Rep. Ron Paul says the World Trade Organization, is threatening the sovereignty of the United States.

"The WTO has now been able to come to our Congress and dictate to us, we as a Congress, and as a party has endorsed the idea that we should raise taxes on certain corporations at the directive of the W.T.O in order to satisfy and be upstanding members of the W.T.O.," The GOP presidential hopeful said Saturday. "We should never raise taxes period, but certainly because the W.T.O. tells us to do so."

Paul said the W.T.O., and other organizations that support free trade are an outgrowth of the United Nations. As a result, "I support this notion of protecting sovereignty by getting out of the United Nations," he said. The Texas Congressman said he has sponsored legislation calling for the U.S. to withdraw from the United Nations since he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.[/quote]