In a big turnaround from Ron Paul's first debate in South Carolina, where the Texas congressman was booed by the audience for advocating the "golden rule" of statesmanship, last night's audience took to Paul's defense when moderator John King tried to switch the topic away from abortion without letting Paul answer the question.
'John, I'm a doctor!'
In the closing minutes of the CNN debate, the conversation turned to the subject of abortion.
Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum were all given a chance to defend their pro-life stance, and began to bicker amongst each other about which position was the strongest and the most sincere.
But when it came time for Rep. Paul to speak, which the Texas congressman very obviously wanted to do, moderator John King attempted to move on to another topic.
"All right, let's take another question," King said. Let's take a question now from social media..."
The audience at the second debate was having none of it.

there is more

Ron Paul on abortion and liberty -> http://files.meetup.com/504095/Ron%20Pa ... iberty.pdf

Medically and scientifically the argument is not whether a human life exists immediately after conception. It does.
...
If anyone thinks it through, the decision must be made to protect life from conception or allow abortion up to the moment before birth.
...
The unwritten commitment to the life conceived occurs at the time of conception. If we don’t accept this proposition, the basis for personal responsibility for all acts, the key to a free society, is destroyed.

No morning after pill for Ron Paul.
For this brand of libertarianism, you should only have (potentially procreative) sex if you're prepared to carry the child to term.
The contraceptive failed? Tough luck, you have a duty of care to the zygote.

No morning after pill for Ron Paul.
For this brand of libertarianism, you should only have (potentially procreative) sex if you're prepared to carry the child to term.
The contraceptive failed? Tough luck, you have a duty of care to the zygote.

And tough titties if the child is very sick and the insurance company fucks you over.

Yes, it is tough luck, you have a duty of care to the child.

Have you ever had a one-night stand with a member of the opposite sex?
If so, did you draw up a contract with this person to delineate each party's rights and responsibilities in the event of a contraceptive mishap?

I think that most Libertarians are pro choice.

Ron Paul's views on abortion may come more from his medical backround and his literal interpretation of the hipocratic oath.

Oh please, his medical background, gimme a break. Like all of these conservative/GOP US politicians Paul realizes that tea partiers and other extreme right white people will not tolerate anything other than a fundamentalist view of abortion. You will find it very difficult now to find a pro choice republican in office in this country. The liberal wing of the republican party is extinct. Thats why Paul is a fundamentalist, even if he might not believe it.

The remains of the East Coast wasp republican party is the only place where you will find any kind of nuanced treatment of the abortion question, and it too is dying. Snow and Collins are the last hold outs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympia_Snowe

Its very simple for Paul, if he wants support from republicans then he needs to be an unwavering supporter of patriarchy and christianity.

Oh please, his medical background, gimme a break. Like all of these conservative/GOP US politicians Paul realizes that tea partiers and other extreme right white people will not tolerate anything other than a fundamentalist view of abortion. You will find it very difficult now to find a pro choice republican in office in this country. The liberal wing of the republican party is extinct. Thats why Paul is a fundamentalist, even if he might not believe it.

Have you not kinda defined anything other than the pro-abortion view to be fundamentalist and extreme right there? What would a "non-fundamentalist non-extreme" pro-life stance look like in your view?

Have you not kinda defined anything other than the pro-abortion view to be fundamentalist and extreme right there? What would a "non-fundamentalist non-extreme" pro-life stance look like in your view?

You need to read back a bit. Paul is saying life begins at conception, about as fundamentalist a position on abortion as it is possible to have. So all this rubbish about 'partial-birth' abortions etc is just more of the same, disinformation and propaganda. Edward Tiller was murdered by wackos who buy into this same shit as Paul.