FOR THE RECORD: Ron Paul: Sign the marriage pledge

Exclusive: Molotov Mitchell urges GOP contender to 'strike blow against tyrannical judges' ...more

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.

One response on “2”

  1. edwardnvirginia says:

    … this flaming performance fails to speak the truth … Mr Molotov’s flamboyant and queenly performance is certainly interesting to watch, and he performs the ‘but I’m not gay’ act very well,  butthe point of his argument  – that some states have had votes declining support for same-sex marriage, and these votes should be protected from judicial review by candidates supporting the US Constitution – is profoundly UN-Constitutional.  We are not a direct democracy, where direct votes decide all laws and policies of government.  Popular votes are not the all and only of governance.  The Founders designed – through great labor, putting themselves at risk of danger and death, summoning through humane insight and rational discussion as best they could within the limitations of their times – a balance of governing powers, in a ‘republican’ (small ‘r’, not Republicanist Party ‘R’) form.  Judicial review is part of the balance. It is a sad shame that the gentleman’s ‘but I’m not gay’ performance so abuses the truth. Note:  see below excerpt from Mr Jefferson’s First Inaugural, which is an exquisite short tutorial on what the Founders intended. Highlights to note:- Founders intended a ‘republican’ (not Republican) form of governance-  Founders intended broad acceptance and employment, without restraint, of free speech to all views, but aiming toward avoiding ‘error’ through rigorous ‘reason’ – Founders insisted that it is ‘sacred’ to our polity and society that the will of the majority is ‘rightful’ only if it is ‘reasonable’; and that a majority vote that is not reasonable is ‘oppression’; and that law must protect minorities from the oppression of majorities- Founders insisted that governance, polity, and society motivated by ‘religious intolerance’ should be ‘banished from our land’These highlights provide an impressive commentary on Mr Molotov’s poorly reasoned argument.  Which portrays religious intolerant (notice the slur on Mr Huntsman’s name, which combines an anti-LDS slur with a heterosexist slur (more of Mr Molotov’s ‘but I’m not gay’ schtick)  and racist slur (notice the anti-Chinese slur added graphically to Mr Huntsman’s image). But, of course,  we support his right of expression.  The Founders ask us to comment on the commentary, however, in debate and dialogue, with reason, to defend truth. From Mr Jefferson’s First Inaugural Address, of Wednesday March 4 1801:” … according to the rules of the Constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression. Let us, then, fellow-citizens, unite with one heart and one mind. Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions. During the throes and convulsions of the ancient world, during the agonizing spasms of infuriated man, seeking through blood and slaughter his long-lost liberty, it was not wonderful that the agitation of the billows should reach even this distant and peaceful shore; that this should be more felt and feared by some and less by others, and should divide opinions as to measures of safety. But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it…. “Oh, and btw, I think a Presidential contender match-up of Obama and Paul would be a smart way for our society to learn about and from one another, across many divides, in a grand debate regarding the direction of the nation! hopefully to reach a new common sense!

  2. craig says:

    edwardnvirginia – The video never gives the reason why Ron Paul does not endorse in this…but you give the reason–thanks for that.
    Enough with federal attacks on the Bill of Rights / States’ Rights AND The People’s Rights.
    Ron Paul for President 2012; the Republic needs him desperately!