Date:   8/16/2007 4:42:54 PM ( 17 y ago)
Hits:   3,095
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=943130

2 readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

That is the wonderful thing about our "FREE DEMOCRACY" that gives us a mere TWO handpicked choices to decide between so that no matter the outcome, the candidate that "they" wanted wins and the steady beat goes on towards one world government and erosion of freedoms and much worse.

Paul is perhaps the only one with even the slightest chance who is NOT handpicked.

I did not say everything in the post article was inaccurate, just that the post's message was inaccurate.  One inaccurate or distorted piece of information makes an entire article inaccurate, and that message has several.

Regarding abortion, Paul has stated that it is an issue for the states to decide - but I agree that his personal stance and voting record indicate otherwise.  I do not think that it would be top priority with him and he IS indeed a very staunch states rights person per the constitution.

I can understand and respect how many would have a problem with his stance, but I happen to think that in this instance at least one other issue is an overriding one - halting the juggernaut that is bent on taking away our health freedoms and steamrolling us towards one world government which will entail the loss of a great many freedoms. AND depopulation is near the very top of their list.

If they are successful, instead of the issue being a woman's right to have abortions, the issue may well become a woman's right to have a child and to say no to the horror of mandatory abortions and sterilizations. If that happens, then the phrase "a woman's right to choose" would take on a whole new meaning.

DQ
 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.00 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=943130