What Fresh Hell Is This?

November 22, 2011

Ron Paul's Libertarian Patriarchy

Back in 2007 when I wrote in a post titled "Ron Paul Sucks" that "[T]oo often I find that the same Libertarian males who kick and scream and cry and rend their garments over the thought of the government taking one thin dime of their money have no problem whatsoever with the thought of that very same government crawling up into a woman's womb," I got (and am still getting) clobbered in the comments section. I admit now that I was wrong. But, only in the scope of my comment. It isn't just that Ron Paul is against abortion -- he's full on pro patriarchy. If he's the standard bearer, then libertarianism is truly only a philosophy for white, straight, Christian males who don't like paying taxes (and their delusional allies).

Via Digby:
Ron Paul (at 15:22): “Matter of fact, when the people came to Samuel and said, “Look, we need more rules and more laws. We want more government to tell us what to do and we — we need more of this.” And Samuel was old and ready to retire and he says, “No, that’s a bad mistake. You don’t need more rules and more government. You don’t need this — the government will overreact.”

And today this is what I think has happened to us. We have deferred to.. to the federal government. We have weighed too much government. We should go in other directions. Before you know it the next step — what if the next step is, “Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the United Nations defined marriage?”

I don’t want to go that way, I want to go back down… all the way to the family and the Church — believe me it would be a happier and more peaceful world if we went in that direction, rather than asking the government and asking the King to solve all these problems… we need the family to deal with it.

And we can take our message and learn something from the Old Testament, how there was such a strong emphasis on the Patriarchal society and the disputes settled by judges rather than looking for Big Government.”


spork_incident said...

Bu...bu...but he's against the wars so progressive have to support him!

(Sorry, progressive support of "Doctor" Paul irks me.)


Maria Lupinacci said...

It drives me crazy! Which is why I can't just ignore him.

Plus, he's a local. :-(

Josh said...

He was talking about the authority to define marriage you moron. And he was the only Republican in that room full of Bible bangers with the balls to stick up for people's rights to define marriage however they individually or as a religion would please. He stuck up for gay marriage in that room full of hypocrites you complete retard.

Eric Dondero said...

Ron Paul is weak on Islamo-Fascism. He is essentially a Surrender-tarian; more than willing to hand our country over to the misogynist Taliban-style women-hating Muslim men. He has no plan for fighting what amounts to the greatest threat to our liberties in our lifetimes - Islamism.

His insance pacifism, and isolationist views, lead him to allegiance with those who would force women to wear black burqas from head-to-toe, disallow women from driving, and keep 'em pregnent in the halal-safe kitchens of the Middle East.

So, in that sense you are correct. He's not quite a patriarch, but his leftist stance on foreign policy leads him to ally with the worst of patriarchs - Islamic men.

Anonymous said...

Uh, the greatest threat to our liberties right now is our own government, with the corporatocracy's hand up its butt. I can't believe you've fallen for the islamofascist boogieman. What a tool

Dave said...

Ron Paul for life