Friday, February 8, 2008


Loaded topic, no?

Molly is talking about voting based on abortion stance. Something that I am wrestling with as well. Her blog seems to mirror my wonderings, and inspires me to think it through more.

Right now I support Ron Paul, and I'm not sure what I think of his stance on abortion. It's not so bad that I can't vote for him, and I tend to think it's the most effective way, but I'm not convinced it is *right*. This is what I understand about him: He believes that the unborn are *real* babies, and is against killing them. But he believes the federal government should leave it up to the states to vote on it (?)

I believe this is the most effective way of starting to get abortion to be illegal in some areas of the US. Right now I believe the vocal minority (NY and CA mostly) are causing it to be legal in all states. I would be willing to bet that if it was up to states to decide, a lot of the middle ones would vote against abortion, like Montana, where I am. I believe this could potentially save more lives sooner than trying to re-work the entire nation at once.

But is it right? My ideas are that we need to have less laws. Either it's okay to kill innocent people for convenience, or it's not. End of story. To me it would be *right* to not say that abortion is illegal, but just to throw out whatever moron statement says that the unborn aren't people. There already is a law about killing innocent people in the US, or so I'd imagine, and I think they should just be using that law and not making new ones.

The reason I can still vote for Ron Paul is because I believe he is doing what he can to save the most babies as soon as possible. I'm willing to compromise on principals in order to save lives.


Rosaries,  February 14, 2008 at 4:29 PM  

The law and politics is so twisted that for voters like us there is not simple way out and we end up voting for less evil. Unspeakable irony!

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by 2008

Back to TOP