Ron Paul: Personally opposed to same-sex ‘marriage,’ but….
WASHINGTON, November 29, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - As polls show Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul tied for first place in Iowa, media outlets have struggled to understand his distinctive stance on the issues, including same-sex “marriage.” Sheldon Alberts of Canada’s National Post, for example, wrote Monday that “Paul believes: Gays should be allowed to marry.”
The truth is more complex…and perhaps confusing. Congressman Paul’s view of same-sex “marriage” can best be summed up in one phrase: states rights. Ron Paul believes homosexuals should be allowed to “marry”…in states that legalize the practice.
At the same time, Paul is a lifelong Christian who says he personally believes in traditional marriage. In 2004, Paul said on the House floor, “I oppose federal efforts to redefine marriage as something other than a union between one man and one woman.” In August, Paul repeated, “I think that marriages should be between a single man and a single woman.”
The Texas Congressman and 1988 Libertarian Party presidential candidate has a consistent record of supporting each state’s right to define marriage for itself: opposing attempts to overturn state anti-sodomy laws on one hand and to implement a federal constitutional amendment protecting marriage on the other.
However, Paul has also taken his libertarian views even further, repeatedly stating that he hopes the state will stop sanctioning marriages altogether.
“I think the government should just be out of it. I think it should be done by the church or private contract, and we shouldn’t have this argument,” he said recently. “Who’s married and who isn’t married. I have my standards but I shouldn’t have to impose my standards on others. Other people have their standards and they have no right to impose their marriage standards on me.”
“But,” he continued, “if we want to have something to say about marriage it should be at the state level, and not at the federal government.”
In his newest book, Liberty Defined, Paul’s chapter on “Marriage” states, “In a free society…all voluntary and consensual agreements would be recognized.” He adds, “There should essentially be no limits to the voluntary definition of marriage.”
“Everyone can have his or her own definition of what marriage means, and if an agreement or contract is reached by the participants, it would qualify as a civil contract if desired…Why not tolerate everyone’s definition as long as neither side uses force to impose its views on the other? Problem solved!”
As might be expected, his position has not sat well with commentators on the Right. Syndicated columnist Ann Coulter took Ron Paul to task in a June column, writing that if states stop sanctioning marriages, legal chaos will erupt:
“How are child support and child custody issues determined if the government doesn’t recognize marriage? How about a private company’s health care plans - whom will those cover? Who has legal authority to issue “do not resuscitate” orders to doctors?...Who inherits in the absence of a will? Who is entitled to a person’s Social Security and Medicare benefits? How do you know if you’re divorced and able to remarry?”
After hearing Paul’s stance at the recent Thanksgiving Family Forum, Bob Vander Plaats of The Family Leader told the Des Moines Register, “I think he let his libertarian view trump his moral compass.”
On the other hand, the homosexual Republican group GOProud released a statement in May thanking Paul “for rightly making the case that marriage and family laws should be decided at the state level.”
Paul’s conflicted congressional record on homosexual issues reflects his commitment to federalism across-the-board. He voted to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” after previously supporting the policy. But he also opposed federal “hate crimes” legislation and criticized the Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence v. Texas case for overriding state anti-sodomy laws.
In 2004, Paul said on the House floor, “If I were in Congress in 1996, I would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’s constitutional authority to define what official state documents other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a ‘same sex’ marriage license issued in another state.” The same year, he co-sponsored the Marriage Protection Act, which would have removed judicial challenges to DOMA from federal courts’ jurisdiction. (The Marriage Protect Act passed the House, but not the Senate.)
Paul’s views are similar to those of two other Republican presidential hopefuls. Fellow Libertarian New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson has said, “I support gay unions. I think the government ought to get out of the marriage business.” Former Louisiana Governor Buddy Roemer has agreed, saying, “Each state has a right to determine how it defines a marriage.”
However, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum has strongly challenged Paul, saying: “It sounds to me like Rep. Paul would actually say polygamous marriages are OK…We can’t have 50 marriage laws.”
Paul’s position may receive more scrutiny because of initiatives such as a New Hampshire bill that would legalize civil unions between any two consenting adults, including siblings.
Paul views his opposition to same-sex “marriage” as a personal, religious decision. However, he is unfailingly pro-life on abortion. While he believes the Constitution makes abortion a state issue, he believes “being pro-life is necessary to defend liberty.”
The doctor’s views were solidified after he witnessed a late term abortion. In his 1983 book-length tract Abortion and Liberty, Paul shared Ludwig von Mises’ view that abortion is “egregious and repulsive,” and he continues to believe abortion has been legalized because traditional morality has eroded.
He wrote in Liberty Defined that he considers protecting the unborn “a state-level responsibility.” His 2007 Sanctity of Life Act would have declared “the term ‘person’ shall include all human life” from the moment of conception. He supports the full defunding of Planned Parenthood at home and all “family planning” measures around the world. Paul told LifeSiteNews.com in an interview last February that he would favor a bill that would bar federal courts from ruling on abortion-related matters.
LifeSiteNews attempted to contact the National Organization for Marriage but did not receive a response by deadline.
View CommentsClick to view or comment.
Share this article
Princeton’s Robert George: Are you ready to pay the price? The days of socially acceptable Christianity are over
ORLANDO, February 4, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- “It is no longer easy to be a faithful Christian, a good Catholic, an authentic witness to the truths of the Gospel,” said Princeton Professor Robert George to a large crowd at the Legatus Summit in Orlando, Florida last weekend. Professor George added that people can still safely identify as “Catholic” as long as they don’t believe, or will at least be completely silent about, “what the Church teaches on issues such as marriage and sexual morality and the sanctity of human life.”
He said “the guardians of those norms of cultural orthodoxy that we have come to call ‘political correctness,’” will still grant a comfort to a Catholic ashamed of the Gospel, “or who is willing to act publicly as if he or she were ashamed.”
The Princeton professor, who has been a leader in the fight for life and marriage, reminded his audience of Christ’s words: “If anyone wants to be my disciple, let him take up his cross and follow me.” “We American Catholics, having become comfortable, had forgotten, or ignored, that timeless Gospel truth. There will be no ignoring it now,” he remarked.
Are we “prepared to give public witness to the massively politically incorrect truths of the Gospel, truths that the mandarins of an elite culture shaped by the dogmas of expressive individualism and me-generation liberalism do not wish to hear spoken?” he asked.
For Catholics, and Evangelicals in America, he said, “it is now Good Friday.” To a rousing standing ovation Professor George concluded:
The memory of Jesus’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem has faded. Yes, he had been greeted—and not long ago—by throngs of people waving palm branches and shouting ‘Hosanna to the Son of David.’ He rode into the Jerusalem of Europe and the Jerusalem of the Americas and was proclaimed Lord and King. But all that is now in the past. Friday has come. The love affair with Jesus and his Gospel and his Church is over.
Fearing to place in jeopardy the wealth we have piled up, the businesses we have built, the professional and social standing we have earned, the security and tranquility we enjoy, the opportunities for worldly advancement we cherish, the connections we have cultivated, the relationships we treasure, will we silently acquiesce to the destruction of innocent human lives or the demolition of marriage? Will we seek to ‘fit in,’ to be accepted, to live comfortably in the new Babylon? If so, our silence will speak. Its words will be the words of Peter, warming himself by the fire: ‘Jesus the Nazorean? I tell you, I do not know the man.’
The saving message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ includes, integrally, the teachings of His church on the profound and inherent dignity of the human person and the nature of marriage as a conjugal bond—a one-flesh union….
The question of faith and fidelity that is put to us today is not in the form it was put to Peter—“surely you are you this man’s disciple”—it is, rather, do you stand for the sanctity of human life and the dignity of marriage as the union of husband and wife? These teachings are not the whole Gospel—Christianity requires much more than their affirmation. But they are integral to the Gospel—they are not optional or dispensable. To be an authentic witness to the Gospel is to proclaim these truths among the rest. The Gospel is, as St. John Paul the Great said, a Gospel of Life. And it is a Gospel of family life, too. And it is these integral dimensions of the Gospel that powerful cultural forces and currents today demand that we deny or suppress.
One day we will give an account of all we have done and failed to do. …
One thing alone will matter: let me say this with maximum clarity—whether we stood up for the truth, speaking it out loud and in public, bearing the costs of discipleship that are inevitably imposed on faithful witnesses to truth by cultures that turn away from God and his law. Or were we ashamed of the Gospel?
If we deny truths of the Gospel, we really are like Peter, avowing that “I do not know the man.” If we go silent about them, we really are like the other apostles, fleeing in fear. But when we proclaim the truths of the Gospel, we really do stand at the foot of the cross with Mary the Mother of Jesus and John the disciple whom Jesus loved. We show by our faithfulness that we are not ashamed of the Gospel. We prove that we are truly Jesus’s disciples, willing to take up his cross and follow him—even to Calvary.
But lest we fail the test, as perhaps many will do, let us remember that Easter is coming. Jesus will vanquish sin and death. We will experience fear, just as the apostles did—that is inevitable. Like Jesus himself in Gethsemane, we would prefer not to drink this cup. We would much rather be acceptable Christians, comfortable Catholics. But our trust in him, our hope in his resurrection, our faith in the sovereignty of his heavenly Father can conquer fear. By the grace of Almighty God, Easter is indeed coming. Do not be ashamed of the Gospel. Never be ashamed of the Gospel.
View CommentsClick to view or comment.
Share this article
Planned Parenthood investigator Daleiden refuses plea deal: ‘What we really want is an apology’
HOUSTON, February 4, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) - This morning, Harris County prosecutor's office offered David Daleiden a plea deal. His legal team, in turn, made a counter-offer.
"The only thing we're going to accept right now is an apology," said Terry Yates, one of four attorneys who flanked Daleiden down the corridors of the courthouse as he visited two court rooms to face felony and misdemeanor charges.
He confirmed an offer had been made but was unlikely to be accepted.
Instead, Yates said that a hearing before Judge Brock Thomas of Texas District 338 had been scheduled for March 28. "At that time, we anticipate filing a couple of motions" asking that all charges be dismissed at once. "We believe the indictments are factually and legally insufficient."
"The old Texas expression 'all hat and no cattle' - that's what we believe these indictments are. There's not much to them," he said.
Peter Breen of the Thomas More Society reiterated that stance during a press conference co-hosted by LifeSiteNews at 11 a.m. local time.
When asked if Daleiden would plead guilty to lesser charges offered by Harris County District Attorney Devon Anderson, Breen replied, "At this point, no."
"What we really want is an apology," Breen said, standing next to fellow counsel Briscoe Cain, Texas attorney for Operation Rescue. "He deserves an apology...He is innocent."
His legal team felt certain he would prevail on the substance of the charges without admitting guilt to any of them.
"The reality is David is a modern day hero," Jared Woodfill, another Daleiden attorney, told LifeSiteNews inside the courthouse. "He has exposed the wrongdoing that has been occurring at abortion clinics all across this country. And the fact that he's here today is a miscarriage of justice."
"He will be vindicated," he said.
The 27-year-old Daleiden appeared unflappable - smiling, well-groomed, wearing a black jacket, blue shirt, and black tie as he spoke briefly with reporters, including LifeSiteNews.
"I'm very grateful for all the support from the public, especially from the people of Houston," he said, some of whom held handmade signs that said "I Stand with Sandra and David" as he presented himself for booking and paid bail this morning.
Attorneys did not disclose the terms of the agreement prosecutors had offered. If convicted, Daleiden and fellow pro-life investigative journalist Sandra Merritt face up to 20 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
However, the charges could be dismissed at any time. LifeSiteNews delivered the first batch of signatures, more than 106,000, on its petition to the DA's office asking that all charges against Daleiden be dropped at once.
If that fails? "We're ready to go to trial," Woodfill told LifeSiteNews.
First 100K petitions to drop charges against Daleiden delivered: ‘let’s double that’
HOUSTON, February 4, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) - Pro-life leaders have presented more than 106,000 signatures to the Harris County district attorney's office, demanding that charges be dropped against David Daleiden.
It was the first batch of signatures to be dropped off in LifeSiteNews' ongoing petition. It asks prosecutor Devon Anderson to dismiss the charges facing Daleiden and his fellow investigator Sandra Merritt, which could result in 20 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
"Houston, we do have a problem," said Rev. Patrick Mahoney of the Christian Defense Coalition at a press conference at 11 a.m. local time.
"We are standing in solidarity and say, 'When you attack David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, you are attacking us and our community,'" Rev. Mahoney continued. "Do not proceed with these unjust indictments."
Congressman Kevin Brady, a Texas Republican, sent a statement to the gathering saying, "Instead of society persecuting the truth tellers, Planned Parenthood needs to answer for their gruesome practices," as well as apologizing to adoptive families like his own, which the abortion provider has "prevented from being whole."
The local indictment, made by the Houston-area grand jury last Monday, has drawn national coverage as the first skirmish in a war between Planned Parenthood and those who sought to expose their practices.
"In delivering these petitions, I am representing more than 100,000 people who demand that these charges against this 27-year-old man and his fellow investigator be dropped at once," said LifeSiteNews reporter Lisa Bourne.
"The next move is up to the Harris County DA's office," she said, reading a statement prepared by LifeSiteNews. "These petitions prove that the world is watching."
"The indictment is another example of Planned Parenthood's bare-fisted intimidation tactics," she added, similar to campaigns taken against former Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline and the Susan G. Komen Foundation.
Andy Parrish, PR director for LifeSiteNews, who was in Houston with Bourne, said he was honored to tell David of the 106,000 LifeSite petition signers who were standing with him. "These signatures are just the beginning. The coalition standing behind David is growing. We've got 100,000, but let's double that."
David Daleiden addressed the crowd alongside two of his attorneys, Peter Breen and Briscoe Cain, and thanked all those who showed their support for him during his latest legal showdown.
"I just want to say thank you to everyone at LifeSiteNews and everyone who shared the petition, who signed it, and made it possible to deliver that today," Daleiden told LifeSiteNews. "It means a lot to me, and to Sandra, and to the Center for Medical Progress. Thank you for your faithfulness and for standing up for us."
He hoped everyone would remain united in demanding justice be done - and, like Cheryl Sullenger of Operation Rescue, hopes that Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast be indicted.
"I firmly believe that if we stay the course, if we stay together, we will bring about a day when there is no longer a price tag on human life," Daleiden said.
During the windy 45-minute-long press conference, speakers at the rostrum defended Daleiden's undercover journalism tactics in the face of sometimes hostile questions from the established press.
"No one can deny that this was the number one investigative journalism story of 2015," Rev. Mahoney said, citing statistics of the story's impact on the mainstream media.
In the new media environment of 2016, someone does not need a degree from Northwestern or Columbia to be a journalist, he said.
"He broke one of the biggest stories of the year," agreed John Hawkins of Right-Wing News, who sent in a written statement to the conference. Pressing charges against him sends a message to conservatives and Christians: "Sit down and shut up, or this just might happen to you."
"If this were a meat-packing plant investigation, there would be no question about his integrity," said Alexandra Snyder, executive director of the Life Legal Defense Foundation. "He would be universally lauded as a hero. I think he's a hero...for getting the truth out."
"In the meantime, we're going to do everything we can do to stand with David," she said, "and see justice prevail."