Ron Paul's position on abortion is that it is not the jurisdiction of the Federal Government to decide on. His position is that the Constitution implicitly defines this is as an issue for each State to decide on its own.

Dr Paul's resoning is sound in that Roe V Wade was based upon the interstate commerce law. Basically abortion itself wasn't the issue but the right of abortionist to perform said procedures across state lines. This is where the decision superceded the Constitution. And should be unconstitutional.

Call me crazy but didn't choice mean CHOICE, so why are the women's righters so angry when women CHOOSE to have the baby? I never could figure that out. And can somebody explain to me why conservatives are Pro-life but against welfare? It seems kinda weird to me. If all life is sacred, then ACT like it!

Although I am personally pro-life I firmly agree with Dr. Paul that is the decision of each separate state to allow or disallow the act. The feds are ignoring the Constitution.

My thanks and praise to Miss McCorvey for her stand.

"And can somebody explain to me why conservatives are Pro-life but against welfare? It seems kinda weird to me. If all life is sacred, then ACT like it!"

-What needs to be explained? Welfare is stealing from everybody who works hard and giving to someone who won't. The majority of conservatives I know give voluntarily to charity and many of them volunteer their own time at charities.Charities (such as the Red cross) and most non-governmental human aid projects are inspired by Christianity. So is free market economics. The first true hospitals were founded in the middle ages by monks and nuns. Charity is a personal duty. Welfare is the way atheistic humanists comfort their consciences. But its not the same thing. Charity is voluntary act of giving. Welfare is a violent act of stealing and it is depersonalized and inefficient to boot.

How can anyone be pro-market and pro-welfare? How can anyone believe in property rights and limited constitutional government but also accept welfare?

Ok ABC.. I'll be sure to make note of that.. Ron Paul's going to get a "boost" tomorrow, "but don't expect it to change the publics TIDE in Paul's favor"

WHATEVER THAT MEANS ...

Lets get this Revolution rollin people!

I've heard alot of pro-lifers talk, I've yet to see them get involved. If more people backed up what they believed with action, I would believe them. But until they are the majority, welfare will continue. Bottom line. You and I may not like it or agree with it, but that's the way it is. Conviction is a luxury for those on the sidelines. It's time for those who believe to ACT.

josephshire, I take exception to one comment you made:

"Welfare is the way atheistic humanists comfort their consciences."

I'm an atheist who opposes the welfare state. And there are many more like me, who view the welfare state as promoting poverty not helping to alleviate it.

Ergo, I encourage you to beware of stereotyping.

We all hear about a woman's "right to choose" but we don't hear the rest of the sentence - the right to choose what?
The right to choose to kill her unborn child? What about the baby's right to choose not to die? What about the baby's constitutional right to life etc.? Remember, in a pregnancy there are 2 people, mother and baby, not 1.And remember the saying "The right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins." If a woman does not wish to be pregnant that is her right. But she does not have the right to kill her baby to become non-pregnant. Dr. Paul is an honorable man who recognizes the baby's right to life and he deserves credit and our support for that.

This is the most disgusting display of media bias. Why can't you simply report the news and stop trying to tell the American people how to think? If I hadn't found the link to this article on another site I can't think of any reason I should waste my time and intelligence on reading anything from ABC News ever again. The blatant attempts by ABC and other news networks to turn every Ron Paul achievement into a negative is despicable. Shame on you.

I'll be watching for Ms. McCorvey's endorsement of Ron Paul but I'll be watching on the Internet, the only place I'm able to find the real news without the bias.

Ms. McCorvey's endorsement of Ron Paul doesn't have to turn the tide of my favor. Even though I had never heard of Ron Paul before the 1st Republican Debate, I am now a staunch supporter. And no matter how insulting, degrading and in general rude to Dr. Ron Paul, I will be voting for him.

Nice swipe at Dr. Paul at the end. What ever happened to unbiased reporting?

Dear Sey Naci:
Thank you for making that post. I am not an athiest, but I will support the constitution and fight for your right to choose a religion or no religion at all. It is not right for us to name call and we shouldn't stereotype...except when it comes to Faux News and the usual biased talking-heads in the MSM. LOL!
Thank you ABC for having the courage to post this article...I now consider you more credible than Faux of CNN.

Ron Paul Love!

Stevo

Thank you for covering Dr. Paul. Your article would have been even better without the negative comment about Dr. Paul's chances at the end. Please report the news without taking swipes. Thank you.

Once again...Repoting with bias. This is not journalism it's advertising. and eventually the rest of America will find out that all main stream media was bought out by news supressing globalists with a bigger agenda.
Stand up for America, and help us with our fight for liberty.

Thank you for reporting on this positive development in Paul's campaign. Although, with your bias as evidence, don't expect me to trust abc as a reliable source for news anytime soon.

It's a shame that you get better coverage from Al-Jazeera English and BBC, than in the us.

Justice Ruth Ginsberg has said that Roe vs Wade was unfounded. She would have found the right to abortion under the equal protection clause: a woman's ability to compete in the marketplace!!!! Is that sickening??? These people have no right to foist their sick ideas on the American public.

Do the right thing and get rid of our "old habits"! Vote for Ron Paul and help us take our country back before it's too late! He is not just another Republican....he stands alone, but stands firm and is HONEST! You can actually BELIEVE him, WOW! Imagine that, believing a politician! Woohoo!

I am personally pro_choice and that's why I like Paul's position that it is up to the States to decide. Some states may allow it, others won't but at least it will be relegated to the states where decisions like this belong. Arguing this at the federal level gives the government too much power.

Every year Ron Paul introduces bills which would 1)remove the issue of abortion from the jurisdiction of the federal courts, and 2) affirm that life begins at conception. With a simple majority vote, Congress could have overturned Roe.

The majority opinion on Roe stated that should it ever be medically determined that the fetus was a living human being from the time of conception, that Congress could affirm this fact and effectively reverse Roe. (Roe was based in part on the "fact" that it could not be known whether the fetus was alive.)

Oddly enough, Dr Paul's bills were not supported by the Republican majority. Leads me to wonder just how "pro-life" our Republican leaders are.