Sabrin's "Open Letter to Pro-Lifers"

Prof. Murray Sabrin explains Ron Paul's influence on his own conversion to respect the natural right to life for the unborn:

"...I knew Rep. Ron Paul, who I have known since 1982, was a pro-life libertarian Republican. I called him to get his input on the abortion issue. He told me he wrote a book on abortion making a libertarian case for the pro-life position. I asked him to send me a copy. I read his beautifully written 100-page Challenge to Liberty in one reading and from then on I became a pro-life libertarian.

I never ever thought I could ever be convinced that a pro-life position was consistent with liberty and limited government. But in Challenge to Liberty, subtitled Coming to Grip with the Abortion Issue, Ron Paul demonstrated that logic is an indispensable tool to change peoples’ minds, especially when it comes to hot button issues like abortion."

Sabrin is also considering the possibility of running for the New Jersey representative to the U.S. Senate for 2008 as a Ron Paul Republican, a decision he'll likely make in January.

New Video From Christians for Ron Paul

Ron Paul on Jesus Christ and Faith in Public Life

Statement of Faith

By Rep. Ron Paul, MD.

The Covenant News ~ July 21, 2007

We live in times of great uncertainty when men of faith must stand up for our values and our traditions lest they be washed away in a sea of fear and relativism. As you likely know, I am running for President of the United States, and I am asking for your support.

I have never been one who is comfortable talking about my faith in the political arena. In fact, the pandering that typically occurs in the election season I find to be distasteful. But for those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do. I know, as you do, that our freedoms come not from man, but from God. My record of public service reflects my reverence for the Natural Rights with which we have been endowed by a loving Creator.

I have worked tirelessly to defend and restore those rights for all Americans, born and unborn alike. The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideal of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.

In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, H.R. 1094. I am also the prime sponsor of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. I have also authored H.R. 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.” Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken and will continue to advocate direct action to restore protection for the unborn.

I have also acted to protect the lives of Americans by my adherence to the doctrine of “just war.” This doctrine, as articulated by Augustine, suggested that war must only be waged as a last resort--- for a discernible moral and public good, with the right intentions, vetted through established legal authorities (a constitutionally required declaration of the Congress), and with a likely probability of success.

It has been and remains my firm belief that the current United Nations-mandated, no-win police action in Iraq fails to meet the high moral threshold required to wage just war. That is why I have offered moral and practical opposition to the invasion, occupation and social engineering police exercise now underway in Iraq. It is my belief, borne out by five years of abject failure and tens of thousands of lost lives, that the Iraq operation has been a dangerous diversion from the rightful and appropriate focus of our efforts to bring to justice to the jihadists that have attacked us and seek still to undermine our nation, our values, and our way of life.

I opposed giving the president power to wage unlimited and unchecked aggression, However, I did vote to support the use of force in Afghanistan. I also authored H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. A letter of marque and reprisal is a constitutional tool specifically designed to give the president the authority to respond with appropriate force to those non-state actors who wage aggression against the United States while limiting his authority to only those responsible for the atrocities of that day. Such a limited authorization is consistent with the doctrine of just war and the practical aim of keeping Americans safe while minimizing the costs in blood and treasure of waging such an operation.

On September 17, 2001, I stated on the house floor that “…striking out at six or eight or even ten different countries could well expand this war of which we wanted no part. Without defining the enemy there is no way to know our precise goal or to know when the war is over. Inadvertently more casual acceptance of civilian deaths as part of this war I'm certain will prolong the agony and increase the chances of even more American casualties. We must guard against this if at all possible.” I’m sorry to say that history has proven this to be true.

I am running for president to restore the rule of law and to stand up for our divinely inspired Constitution. I have never voted for legislation that is not specifically authorized by the Constitution. As president, I will never sign a piece of legislation, nor use the power of the executive, in a manner inconsistent with the limitations that the founders envisioned.

Many have given up on America as an exemplar for the world, as a model of freedom, self-government, and self-control. I have not. There is hope for America. I ask you to join me, and to be a part of it.

Sincerely,

Ron Paul

(hat tip to maiki ;)

"Abortion on Demand is the Ultimate State Tyranny"

In the last presidential election, serious Catholics voted overwhelmingly for the pro-life candidate and cultural catholics were split between the pro-life candidate and the anti-war (pro-abortion) candidate.

When "Kerry Catholics" were challenged with the reality that, "You can't be Catholic and be pro-abortion," the usual erroneous response was, "You can't be pro-life and pro-war!"

When it came down to it, informed Catholics understood that voting for a candidate that supports a public policy that violates the Dignity of the Human Person is itself gravely wrong, no matter how well intentioned. The issue of war is serious, but ultimately it comes down to the prudential judgement of the legitimate state authority. War is a position the State can morally take, Abortion simply isn't.

Catholics are not single issue voters, they are voters who understand what issues are of singular importance!

No other issue is more gravely important than the principle of the inviolable Dignity of the Human Person - it is this idea which is so unique in human history (arising from the Judeo-Christian Tradition) and so critical for all our human rights, freedoms and duties.

The idea that human beings are endowed with certain inalienable rights comes from the genius of the Jewish story of creation and the unique anthropology that flows from it that man is made in the image and likeness of God. Contemporary creation stories make man into a slave of god(s), and thus this creates a very different set of assumptions regarding man's Liberty and his relationship with the State (but more on that in the days ahead).

Either God has endowed man with basic rights and liberties which the State must respect, OR the State gives man these rights and liberties and man must respect the State as god.

This is issue is critical, as it is the lynch pin upon which every civil liberty hangs; the whole social fabric will be undone in time if this basic truth is violated.

War is sometimes necessary, but when the State makes laws which violate the Dignity of the Human Person, it is a sign of deep sickness in the body politic which will bring about the collapse of all human liberty in the society.

So this issue is simply non-negotiable. If the United States desires to keep its Liberty, the it has to say NO to:

• Abortion
• Embryonic Stem-Cell Research & Cloning
• All Fertility Treatments which involve the destruction of human embryos, and
• Euthanasia

So where does Ron Paul stand on the issue of the Dignity of the Human Person?

Let Ron Paul speak for himself:

Libertarians believe, along with the Founding Fathers, that every individual has inalienable rights, among which are the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Neither the State, nor any other person, can violate those rights without committing an injustice. But, just as important as the power claimed by the State to decide what rights we have, is the power to decide which of us has rights.

Today, we are seeing a piecemeal destruction of individual freedom. And in abortion, the statists have found a most effective method of obliterating freedom: obliterating the individual. Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the "right" of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the "property rights" of slave masters in their slaves. Moreover, by this method the State achieves a goal common to all totalitarian regimes: it sets us against each other, so that our energies are spent in the struggle between State-created classes, rather than in freeing all individuals from the State. Unlike Nazi Germany, which forcibly sent millions to the gas chambers (as well as forcing abortion and sterilization upon many more), the new regime has enlisted the assistance of millions of people to act as its agents in carrying out a program of mass murder.
. . .

We must promote a consistent vision of liberty because freedom is whole and cannot be alienated, although it can be abridged by the unjust action of the State or those who are powerful enough to obtain their own demands. Our lives, also, are a whole from the beginning at fertilization until death. To deny any part of liberty, or to deny liberty to any particular class of individuals, diminishes the freedom of all. For libertarians to support such an abridgement of the right to live free is unconscionable.

There you have it.

Ron Paul understands that the Dignity of the Human Person is essential to preserving our Liberties and a cornerstone for living in a healthy society.

This is the single most important reason why Catholics should support Ron Paul for President.