Comments on: Third Party Presidential Debate http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-11-02/third-party-presidential-debate-2/ Ron Paul is America's leading voice for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies. The Ron Paul Revolution continues. Thu, 18 Mar 2010 06:21:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Skiphttp://www.ronpaul.com/2008-11-02/third-party-presidential-debate-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9143 Skip Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:57:03 +0000 http://www.ronpaul.com/?p=429#comment-9143 I watched parts of this debate and was disappointed to see Chuck Baldwin bring up his opinion on traditional marriage. The constitution gives no authority to the federal government to define marriage. Furthermore, under the constitution, no state has the right to ignore the civil agreements reached in other states. So if MA and CA decide that it is the civil liberty of homosexuals to marry, every state shall have to abide by this ruling.In fact, if you look at his defense for traditional marriage on his website he doesn't even mention the constitution. Instead he defends his position with cultural and religious platitudes. (see here: http://baldwin08.com/Pro-Traditional-Marriage.cfm)In a John Stossel interview Ron Paul stated his reason for not voting for NAFTA even though it promoted free-trade. He said even though he is for promoting free-trade, he does not believe he should compromise with government intervention. I essentially feel the same way with Chuck Baldwin, as I'm sure many others do. He is not a strong candidate because he appears to be placing religious / cultural authority before the constitution.Can someone tell me why then I should vote for Chuck Baldwin and not Bob Barr? Bob Barr does not have the best voting record, but he at least apologizes for his past un-constitutional positions. I watched parts of this debate and was disappointed to see Chuck Baldwin bring up his opinion on traditional marriage. The constitution gives no authority to the federal government to define marriage. Furthermore, under the constitution, no state has the right to ignore the civil agreements reached in other states. So if MA and CA decide that it is the civil liberty of homosexuals to marry, every state shall have to abide by this ruling.

In fact, if you look at his defense for traditional marriage on his website he doesn’t even mention the constitution. Instead he defends his position with cultural and religious platitudes. (see here: http://baldwin08.com/Pro-Traditional-Marriage.cfm)

In a John Stossel interview Ron Paul stated his reason for not voting for NAFTA even though it promoted free-trade. He said even though he is for promoting free-trade, he does not believe he should compromise with government intervention. I essentially feel the same way with Chuck Baldwin, as I’m sure many others do. He is not a strong candidate because he appears to be placing religious / cultural authority before the constitution.

Can someone tell me why then I should vote for Chuck Baldwin and not Bob Barr? Bob Barr does not have the best voting record, but he at least apologizes for his past un-constitutional positions.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]>