Ron Paul and supplements

RenegadeRows said:
Ron paul will never win a debate let alone the partys nomination. hes too fringe.
huckabee is a good canidate but he wont win either. it will come down to guiliani i think :( :(
Click to expand...

If any American no matter what the affiliation to any party, knows what's good for them, they will vote for Ron Paul!

Ron Paul will win and times will be good!

And also if you are referring to the East attacking your country, they haven't yet no matter what you want to believe about 9/11...your own government is killing you. No maybe not "Bush" specifically or the other faces but the powerful elite that pull the strings and do whatever they want because they have all the money / power.
 
neoborn said:
If any American no matter what the affiliation to any party, knows what's good for them, they will vote for Ron Paul!

Ron Paul will win and times will be good!

And also if you are referring to the East attacking your country, they haven't yet no matter what you want to believe about 9/11...your own government is killing you. No maybe not "Bush" specifically or the other faces but the powerful elite that pull the strings and do whatever they want because they have all the money / power.
Click to expand...

And with each war (the war of terror, the war on drugs, the war on poverty) they will continue to acquire pieces of our liberty until the day that we all require a chip. Sounds a little far out there? Maybe....maybe not. Just a little tweaking of the Patriot Act and we all will have one. Now that is power and there are a few people out there that crave this power.
 
Jove said:
I like Ron Paul a great deal, however he would completely do away with the FDA, the Department of Education, etc. Now, certainly these agencies have several problems, but quite frankly I don't want to buy a steak with no one but the company selling it telling me that it's safe to eat.
Click to expand...

The FDA can't guarantee the safety of your meat.
 
Ron Paul is a good man, and his ideas on freedom are right--especially as it pertains to supplements, etc. as you point out. He is a Libertarian at heart, in fact, he ran for president in 1988 as the Libertarian candidate. In theory, and as the champion of "individual liberties" (as described by our founding fathers) I agree with his philosophy quite a bit. When it comes to the idea of foreign policy, among other things, I side with you guys who wonder how, in today's world, we could simply not engage ourselves in what the world is doing.
 
herkfsu said:
Yet they tell us in school that we came from "nothing" and the universe came from a big bang(in which galaxies spin in different direction... hmmm). Life came from NO LIFE...

You can't tell me this requires any less faith than believing in God. I am a Christian, but do respect others' religions, and don't think Christian views should be forced upon anyone, much like I do not want anyone pushing Islam on me or my kids. But it sounds like the government has its own religion its pushing down our kids throats and its unfortunately under the name "science".

If I honestly believed in this evolution garbage I would be the worst person alive. Why would it matter how I acted or how people treated me? I would be dead in 50 years or so anyways and none of it would have mattered. But God gives life meaning. It just makes sense, and I know Ive been blessed by him because of my faith.

Sorry, this is going to turn into a Religious topic I am sure. Mods might want to close this.
Click to expand...

THis is YOU, which means you are immoral...you are ACTING moral, not for its own sake, but to avoid punishment. A kid that does not steal to avoid punishment does not make a GOOD kid, only the kid that sees the wrongness of the action, understands the concept of reciprocity, and chooses not to commit the action based on the value of the action.

As for the rest, some of the most conventionally moral people I have ever met have been skeptics/agnostics, atheists...while some of the most vile trash have paraded under the flag of Christianity.

How many millions have been slaughtered in the name of this god?

Now back to Ron Paul...
 
zbtboy said:
One thing no one is taking into consideration is; What can he realistically change? What support is he going to get when trying to rid the country of the FDA, Energy Dept, and the others he wants gone? His libertarian views will go no where which only leaves his Foreign Policy.

I like a lot of what he has to say, but its going no where.
Click to expand...

His first goal is to get us out of Iraq. That can be accomplished rather quickly and without the Congress. He would be, after all, the CIC of the military. His other programs are intended to be phased out types of things he wouldn't abolish these things right off the bat because he realizes that our nation has become dependent on government to provide EVERYTHING. With the type of mandate a Paul presidency would have, and the ensuing changes in the Congress if they didn't play ball, I would expect he could accomplish alot in four years.
 
Sematary said:
His first goal is to get us out of Iraq. That can be accomplished rather quickly and without the Congress. He would be, after all, the CIC of the military. His other programs are intended to be phased out types of things he wouldn't abolish these things right off the bat because he realizes that our nation has become dependent on government to provide EVERYTHING. With the type of mandate a Paul presidency would have, and the ensuing changes in the Congress if they didn't play ball, I would expect he could accomplish alot in four years.
Click to expand...

At the very least give us a shove in the right direction, and start momentum back that way.
 
Sevename said:
That statement is untrue and really completely backwards. This country was partially founded by Christians who wanted the right to choose their own religion. For the most part it just came down to the right to choose what sect of Christianity. If Christianity is taught/used in any branch of the government then the principles on which this country were founded would be violated.
Click to expand...

Actually incorrect. That's the modern interpretation of the seperation of church and state. When the country was founded Christian principles were very much a part of the government and the law. The First Ammendment merely prohibitted the federal government from establishing a national church such as the Church of England. I favor the modern interpretation to a point, but the founders pretty clearly did not.

Also if Christianity were to be taught at public schools then there would be fighting over who gets to do the teaching and what bible is to be used and..........well it would never end. For an example of this just look to Ireland.
Click to expand...

The public school system was started originally by Yankees from New English with the expressed purpose of Christianizing the children.

Another principle this country was founded on was taxation without representation. Yet another is over taxation. Do you feel your beliefs are being well represented in the government? Do you feel you're getting your moneys worth? My answer to both those questions is no.
Click to expand...

More or less correct on this one.
 
CDB said:
Actually incorrect. That's the modern interpretation of the seperation of church and state. When the country was founded Christian principles were very much a part of the government and the law. The First Ammendment merely prohibitted the federal government from establishing a national church such as the Church of England. I favor the modern interpretation to a point, but the founders pretty clearly did not.



The public school system was started originally by Yankees from New English with the expressed purpose of Christianizing the children.



More or less correct on this one.
Click to expand...

Once again, MANY of the founders of this country were Deists...NOT CHRISTIANS.
 
Sevename said:
Most of the founding fathers were members of Christian churches, however they preached the ideas of Deism in there public speaches.
Click to expand...

Many of them were also openly hostile to Christianity.
 
I've got a new topic: The justice system.

We need to have a new justice system. Never going to happen, I know, but we do. One like Israel's would be nice.
 
dsade said:
THis is YOU, which means you are immoral...you are ACTING moral, not for its own sake, but to avoid punishment. A kid that does not steal to avoid punishment does not make a GOOD kid, only the kid that sees the wrongness of the action, understands the concept of reciprocity, and chooses not to commit the action based on the value of the action.

As for the rest, some of the most conventionally moral people I have ever met have been skeptics/agnostics, atheists...while some of the most vile trash have paraded under the flag of Christianity.

How many millions have been slaughtered in the name of this god?

Now back to Ron Paul...
Click to expand...

No, I do not live in fear of Hell so I believe. With God being real life makes sense. Its all for a purpose. I guess a better way of putting it is this. If there is no God who cares who or what is right or wrong. It does not matter. We are just atoms floating together in space. With God, there is a whole purpose to life. It is to have a relationship with him and the others of this world.

I too know people who are agnostic and appear moral by Christian standards. I am not saying people who are not Christian or people who do not believe in God should not be moral, but rather I do not see their line of thinking. If no God were my reality I could not justify waking up every day to go to work only to come home and go sleep and do it again until I die.

Just because millions have been killed IN THE NAME OF God does not mean it was because of God. Humans have free will and can chose to do whatever they want and say its in the name of God or whoever they want. On my own accord I could go kill innocent people in the name of Tom Cruise. What would that say about Tom Cruise? Nothing.
 
Sevename said:
Yet they tell us in school that we came from "nothing" and the universe came from a big bang(in which galaxies spin in different direction... hmmm). Life came from NO LIFE...

But, Poof..........and there we were, as we are, seems reasonable? Now lets reveiw the viewpoints of religion over the years. The earth IS flat! The sun revolves around the earth! These statements are both true and if you don't agree we'll just excommunicate you.

You can't tell me this requires any less faith than believing in God. I am a Christian, but do respect others' religions, and don't think Christian views should be forced upon anyone, much like I do not want anyone pushing Islam on me or my kids. But it sounds like the government has its own religion its pushing down our kids throats and its unfortunately under the name "science".

Evolution isn't taught by any religion that I know of, but you could make the argument that it is therefore its own religion. The solution, I believe, is to just stop teaching the subject at all. What I don't understand is why its ok, in the views of those that have "faith", to use all the science for everything else but not this. For example, this website and all the data in it is a creation of thousands of years of science. How is that line drawn?

If I honestly believed in this evolution garbage I would be the worst person alive. Clearly this would make you worse than Hitler or Osama Bin Laden.

Why would it matter how I acted or how people treated me? I would be dead in 50 years or so anyways and none of it would have mattered. Why would've none of it mattered? If your child were playing in an unsafe location and was only seconds from being injured. But someone who doesn't share your religious views intervened to prevent the injury, would that persons life not have mattered?

But God gives life meaning. No, an individual gives his/her life meaning. One could argue that this is the greatest responsibility bestowed on any/every human. Then again, I believe the real problem with this country is the seemingly total lack of personal responsibility present in most of it. Maybe we could take the time our schools are using to teach creation to teach personal responsibility.

It just makes sense, and I know Ive been blessed by him because of my faith.

Sorry, this is going to turn into a Religious topic I am sure. Mods might want to close this.
Click to expand...

Where did I say we should force people to believe in God? I said it takes no less faith to believe evolution than it does to believe in God. So why is it being taught almost as if it were fact in our public school system. I actually have one of my old 5th grade science books(I am 22) and in one chapter it says Big Bang Theory as the header, but thats the only time theory is used, the section it presents the theory as fact.

I was obviously being sarcastic about being the worst person alive. (but Hitler isn't alive anyways) But I wouldn't treat people with respect for the sake of simply being nice. I would only be nice to someone if I knew I could get something out of them. Why else be nice?

You say a person gives his/her life meaning like its fact. I believe God put us here to have a relationship with him and others around us. That is what life is about.

I don't get what you are talking about when you say someone with different religious views saved my child. In my reality, of course his life would matter. It would matter if he saved my child or if he was a bum on the street corner. I never once said if you don't believe in God your life does not matter. I said if I did not believe in God TO ME all life wouldn't matter.

I hope this doesn't come off as appearing cold and heartless, but that is what I believe life would be with no God. Scares me to think if it were true, but it is something unfathomable to me to believe it could be real. I absolutely love life and everyone I am around. I give to the needy as much as possible and always try to care for people who need it. I form great, loving, and long-lasting relationships with God, family, and friends. I believe this is where joy is found in life.
 
Sevename said:
Yes, that is the modern interpretation. But the fundamentals of Christianity were withheld from the blueprints of our government for good reason, they were not just christians but humanitarians. They had the foresight to see that humanitarianism was/is/should be greater than any single religion.
Click to expand...

Not actually. The concern was because the churches were split largely by region/colony, and no one group wanted another to get control of the central government. They were quite happy enforcing their moraltiy locally, to the point of putting people to death for belonging to the wrong church. Check out some of Thomas Woods's historical work on the subject, he cites instances of such conflicts between Quakers and Protestants and what not ad nauseum. I believe at the time of the ratification of the constitution Virginia had an official state church and it was not in any way considered unconstitutional.
 
dsade said:
Once again, MANY of the founders of this country were Deists...NOT CHRISTIANS.
Click to expand...

Actual history disagrees. The founders are not just Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, but every colonist and settler who was here at the time. The central government was forbidden the establishment of religion because no one group trusted the other. Locally they were more than zealous in enforcing morality and demanding adherence to a certain church. In some states you couldn't vote if you weren't a church member with three people to vouch you were a member in good standing. People were put to death in New England for not belonging to the prevailing church, I forget which one it was. At least one state, and more if I remember correctly, had official state churches before and after the ratification. Religion, and specifically the Christian sects, were very much a part of the founding of this nation and its laws. The deism of some of the 'founding fathers' is correct, but it's also easily shown to be the minority position of the time, generally latched on to by people who want to portray the founding the US in a certain light that deviates from the actuality of what happened.
 
This thread isn't about religious crap, it's about Ron Paul and his stance on supplements. Get religion out of this thread.
 
I did a poor job of representing myself, let me try again.

herkfsu said:
If I honestly believed in this evolution garbage I would be the worst person alive. Why would it matter how I acted or how people treated me?

Why would the belief of evolution determine how you are to be treated or how you treat others?

I would be dead in 50 years or so anyways and none of it would have mattered.

Why would none of it had mattered? I cannot understand why all your actions in life would not have mattered. Because you wouldn't be in heaven in the afterlife life wouldn't matter?

But God gives life meaning. It just makes sense, and I know Ive been blessed by him because of my faith.
QUOTE]

This paragraph, or any line in it, didn't sound like sarcasm to me, if it was I misunderstood. To me it sounds like a Christian point of view that those who don't believe in Christ don't have morals.
Click to expand...
 
Tiberius said:
This thread isn't about religious crap, it's about Ron Paul and his stance on supplements. Get religion out of this thread.
Click to expand...

Know how many people use their religion to equate drugs and supplements of any kind with evil, and thus try to make illegal?

Be that as it may, I seriously doubt anyone here truly likes Ron Paul's stance on supplements, as the only thing he's likely to oppose with regard to them is innaccurate labeling under fraud provisions of some kind. Other than that he'd likely be okay with anyone selling anything to anyone else so long as they were honest about what was in it. Most people seem to want to intervene in such decisions, so long as their particular corner of the market is left alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top