Ron Paul is a State’s Rights activist. He is not a Libertarian, atleast not in the classical sense. It’s not so much that Ron Paul is against laws that limit liberty, It’s just that he is against the federal government making those laws. He implicitly supports laws that limit liberty, but hides behind the guise of State’s rights to absolve himself of any ideological or moral responsibility. For example, he doesn’t have an issue with banning same sex marriage at the state level, although this is a basic violation of an individual’s right to enter into contract with another individual. Another example is the Drug Laws. It’s not so much that Paul is opposed to drug laws on principle; he is just opposed to drug laws at the federal level. But if MS for example decided to give people 10 yr prison sentences for the first possession of a dime bag of weed, Ron Paul would support that decision.
Ron Paul has pushed for a bill to reduce the power of the federal courts in interpreting religious rights. He believes the separation of church and state only applies to at the federal level – specifically to congress. Therefore if the state of Texas wanted to adopt an official religion or ban certain religions or teach religion at state schools, it is within their right to do so as a state. His “We the people” act” was aimed at reducing the power of the federal government in matters of religion, sexual orientation and marriage.
Ron Paul has done a great job of hiding behind libertarian rhetoric and has fooled a lot of people. But the more you examine his philosophy, the more you realize that he doesn’t really advocate for liberty or to get the government off our backs, he just wants to transfer the power of the federal government to the states.
= new reply since forum marked as read