My name's Justin, and I'm a Buddhist. I take bits from Hindu, and Taoist philosophy as well though. I blog about religion, politics, philosophy, and whatever else I feel like blogging about. I've grown a lot over the years, but I'm still far from where I want to be. If you have any questions then ask away! Don't be shy.
To every person who opposes Ron Paul and thinks he is a “misogynist” and “racist” or even a “homophobic” thank you, for if it weren’t for your oppressive and propagandist actions then we would have no one to defend and prove wrong. People don’t understand the action meanings of such words, misogynist, homophobic and racist definitions are as follows;
Misogynist: hatred of women
Racist: a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that a certain human race is superior to any or all others.
Homophobic: Fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay men.
Now as far as Ron Paul goes and people saying that his is both of those because of his alleged “words” towards them are complete ludicrous. Yes, his newsletter that he sponsored had racist comments within it, but as he was an avid OBN/GYN surgeon at the time, he did not take direct review over what his writers wrote and yes that is a fault on his part but it in no means he is a racist.
These quotes are taken directly from his own mouth and they show that he is indeed not a racist and they are as follows;
“I would like to believe that if we had a freer society, it would take care of blacks and whites and everybody equally because we’re all individuals. To me, that is so important. But if we had equal justice under the law, I think it would be a big improvement. If we had probably a repeal of most of the federal laws on drugs and the unfairness on how Blacks are treated with these drugs laws, it would be a tremendous improvement.”
“I’m not a racist. As a matter of fact, Rosa Parks is one of my heroes, Martin Luther King is a hero — because they practiced the libertarian principle of civil disobedience, nonviolence. Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called “diversity” actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist. The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence, not skin color, gender, or ethnicity.”
“But no, I just don’t think with the scientific evidence now — I think I read an article yesterday on the death penalty, and 68 percent of the time they make mistakes. And it’s so racist, too. I think more than half the people getting the death penalty are poor blacks. This is the one place, the one remnant of racism in our country is in the court system, enforcing the drug laws and enforcing the death penalty. I don’t even know, but I wonder how many of those, how many have been executed? Over 200, I wonder how many were minorities? You know, if you’re rich, you usually don’t meet the death penalty.”
As you can see above, he advocates individual liberty regardless of the color of ones skin, he actually supports them and their blatant mistreatment in the court of law and police. Now my question is, Why would a RACIST advocate such things? Why would he advocate everyone liberty, and more personally why would he support blacks and other minorities? He sees everyone as being equal and wants racism to end naturally, you can’t force people to see another as equal they have to see that for themselves and Ron Paul sees that vision.
Now that we have that cleared up lets move onto the problem that people see Dr. Ron Paul as a person who is a misogynist. As stated above a misogynist is someone who has a “hatred for women”. That is a very simple definition and it constitutes that someone who hates women would not want them to have any rights and would want to oppress them. Now the only thing the feminist can come up with is the fact that Ron Paul is Pro-Life, (or really Anti-Choice because he is also against the death penalty and torture which is what Pro-Life fully encompasses) now you can be Anti-Choice and not hate woman. Just because someone sees life in a different way then yours does not make them oppressive or hateful, he sees life as beginning at conception and will defend that as Pro-Choice people will defend that they have a right, but that is just a “view”. There is no fully “right” view because morals and rights are something humans invented. It’s all a matter of perspective, if that is what he believes then that is what he believes in, he’ll throw out Roe V Wade and give jurisdiction back to the states, so he is not actually OUTLAWING abortion, therefore he is essentially “neutral” to the argument so far in the fact he gives the states and the people the CHOICE to decide whether abortion will be legal in their state. Now I believe that is completely reasonable and in NO WAY constitutes that Ron Paul is a misogynist if anything he is giving the people the right to choose as to what is morally wrong or right whenever it comes to abortion.
Now onto the final argument saying that Ron Paul is homophobic which is again, completely absurd. He does personally believe because of his Christian faith that he thinks that marriage is between one man and one woman but he will not impose that onto the country with a federal definition of marriage, instead he wishes to leave it up to the states to decide and these quotes sums it up fairly well(and the first one applies to the above about abortion as well);
“It is great comedy to hear the secular, pro-gay left, so hostile to states’ rights in virtually every instance, suddenly discover the tyranny of centralized government. The newly minted protectors of local rule find themselves demanding: “Why should Washington dictate marriage standards for Massachusetts and California? Let the people of those states decide for themselves.” This is precisely the argument conservatives and libertarians have been making for decades! Why should Washington dictate education, abortion, environment, and labor rules to the states? The American people hold widely diverse views on virtually all political matters, and the Founders wanted the various state governments to most accurately reflect those views. This is the significance of the 10th Amendment, which the left in particular has abused for decades.”
“Having federal officials, whether judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose a new definition of marriage on the people is an act of social engineering profoundly hostile to liberty”
Now as you can see, he is all for individual liberty for everyone as I have stated above, even though his personal views differ from others he wants the people to decide with their liberty of CHOICE to decide what is right for their state. That is why he is called a Libertarian, he stands up for peoples rights and knows that in his power Racism or Homophobia or the oppression of woman won’t get out of hand because he has FAITH in the American people. He has HOPE that America can bond together and see itself as one and in such an inseparable unity that nothing can break the bond every human being shares.