Ron Paul: I Want To 'Legalize Freedom' What's So Bad About That?

Originally posted by The X
free of your soverieign rights.

Freedom and sovereignty are the same, so to have freedom you have sovereignty, it can not mean to be free of sovereignty, that would be like saying fire is hot, so fire is thus "free" of being hot. It doesn't make sense, as your statement does not make sense because when you have freedom you have sovereignty.

Originally posted by OneNationUnder
The bad thing about legalizing Freedom is that it then can be criminalized, or illegal at another point. Making Freedom Legal is a trap that the Powers would LOVE to get that on the ballot.

Everyone would vote for it and then Freedom would then be legal! YAY! What's so wrong about that?

What's so wrong about it is then the evil people can take away its legality based on National Security, and you know they would at some point. You GOTTA know that!

The only reason to legalize freedom would be so they can make it illegal soon afterwards based on National Security.

I say NO, don't officially legalize Freedom. It's a trap if I ever saw one!

edit on 6/21/2011 by OneNationUnder because:
Update:

Useless laws weaken the necessary laws!

edit on 6/21/2011 by OneNationUnder because: (no reason given)

People, people, people. Here, Here, Ron Paul is not trying to create legislation to the words of "Legalize Freedom". He plans, on removing certain responsibilities from the federal level of government. Responsibilities like, drug control, prostitution, federal reserve, ect. So to sit here and truthfully say that he is trying to "Legalize Freedom". Being basedoff of an ill perceived opinion of the manner in which he stated it, this is an attempt to discredit said person, off of simple misunderstandings.

This was meant to be somewhat satirical conjecture. Interviews are communication, not legislation.

I don't agree with Ron Paul on everything, but the one thing that I love about him is that he doesn't agree with me either, but he doesn't want to make what he doesn't agree with illegal. And his message is always the same. Personal freedom = Personal Responsibility. The two are interlocked and cannot be separated. What this country needs is a taste of both of those...

He's not going to change everything on his own, but I view the country as a huge ship that has been set in motion and one man can't push that ship or make it change direction. You need cooperation. Obama wanted the same thing, but he didn't realize how much resistance he'd get. I think Ron Paul is prepared for it.

Originally posted by peck420
Anybody that is trying to 'legalize' something that should be a 'right', should be held suspect.

Once freedom is 'legalized' some other politician could 'criminalize' it.

And how would that be any different from the system we now have in place? At least if they legalized freedom they would have to waste time trying to illegalize it, and in the process the country will experience a complete transformation even in that short period of time like it did following the passage of the constitution into law which gave people civil liberties. Better than that is education about freedom, which is what Ron Paul really meant, I think, the government can't legalize intelligence, just as it can't legalize freedom, but the message is clear: Ron Paul wants government out of the way, not some bureaucracy "legalizing" freedom.

reply to post by peck420


Oh good lord, will people please actually look into this stuff and grasp it before commenting...?

The only reason Ron Paul's saying he wants to "legalize freedom" is because he's been asked about his views and statements on legalizing drugs and prostitution, and so forth (FYI - he doesn't want to 'legalize' these things, he wants to get the federal government out of them, since they actually have no jurisdiction under the constitution, and let the states decide for themselves), as he has been asked tricked questions on this per his views.

What Ron Paul is SAYING is that he's trying to restore the power to the people, since the government has ILLEGALIZED freedom by telling the people and the states what they can and can't do.

The government has *already* criminalized freedom and taken it away from us. Paul wants to undo that.

Originally posted by Praetorius


The government has *already* criminalized freedom and taken it away from us. Paul wants to undo that.

edit on 6/21/2011 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)

Exactly, the fear mongers are trying to say that if Ron Paul legalizes freedom a politician will criminalize it and all heck will break loose...as if that's any different from what's happening now.

Ron Paul is a threat to the establishment (assuming he is legit). Everything he wants to do goes against what the establishment and the globalist corporate/international banking cartel movement is propping up.

I will fight alingside Paul and for his election because I believe in his views BUT I also acknowledge the fact that everything he is doing will make it very difficult for the establishment to allow him to become pres (or stay there for very long...)

I hope to god that we can expose the wrongs of this country and the world with the help of Paul, I mean hell...he even got the Fed to admit to having no gold a few weeks back!, but damn...is it going to be a fight.

Originally posted by filosophia

Originally posted by Praetorius


The government has *already* criminalized freedom and taken it away from us. Paul wants to undo that.

edit on 6/21/2011 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)

Exactly, the fear mongers are trying to say that if Ron Paul legalizes freedom a politician will criminalize it and all heck will break loose...as if that's any different from what's happening now.

It was hard to hide, but I am rather appalled that people can know about the patriot act, and still think our rights to freedom are legal. Must be getting paid some real good money, or just really invested in the system.

reply to post by The X



Ooo Oooh!! Please go f**k yourself!!

Sorry, I've always loved hangman. That is all.

Seriously, though, comparing Ron Paul and Barack Obama is like apples and oranges. They have a few general similarities, but a wise man once said "You shall know a tree by its fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit".

I like Ron Paul's fruit. And his fruit is always the same. I knew Obama's was rotten before the election...it changed, depending on what kind of fruit Obama thought the people might like to taste.

And you speak of complicity - I would much rather people pay attention and find actual consistent and right-thinking politician to try to get into positions of authority so they can try to turn the ship from its course, instead of these awakened souls just saying "Oh well, we can't do anything about it" and letting the mainline politicians and old guard voters continue empowering the same old garbage we've been getting.

You think the problem's going to get better in any way, shape, or form if you simply stand aside and let them keep electing Bushes, Johnsons, and Clinton types? No - but this is definitely exactly who you will likely end up with if you stand apart and let them carry on as they have.

In Paul, we have a potential game changer - someone who has shown himself to stand outside and against much of these problems (like Gravel, Kucinich, and Nader - but they support heavy-handed government when it suits their pet projects...don't recognize proper limits), who, as far as we can tell aside from being suspect just for the sake of such, actually is as disgusted with these things as we are, and wants a chance to change them - after trying to do so for some time in congress.

When there is something worth TRYING to fight for, then fight I will. And in this fight, doing what you seem to be advocating is the surest way to end up with what you say we should be expecting.

Just let it happen, without trying? Seriously? Think about it this way - all the people who pushed for Obama, sure, they got tricked...but would you rather have had Mccain? Granted, we still ended up with evil, but in that split, I think we likely got the lesser.

Now imagine if that choice was between Obama and Paul, and Paul won - what, exactly, would you not like about a Paul presidency (especially compared to any alternatives we have available) since his record runs laps around Obama's? Do you know enough about his platform and views on the issues to have thoughts here?

Americans simply don't want freedom. "Republicans" want a government that enforces their own personal religious based morality on everyone else. "Democrats" want a government that will take care of everyone from cradle to grave without letting us take care of ourselves. And BOTH parties want a giant juggernaut of a government that can tax us into oblivion while they line the pockets of their banker friends.

The rule of law is dead, and the constitution has become nothing but a metaphor for illusory freedom they will let us pretend we have. Both parties pretend they love the constitution, but they only do so when it serves their own political ends--thus making the whole thing pointless. Either you believe in individual freedom and responsibility or you don't.

Beware the republican who says he's a constitutionalist but supports drug laws, seat belt laws, FCC censorship, and laws against gay marriage. Beware the democrat who says he's a constitutionalist but supports affirmative action, hate speech laws, social programs, and "green" regulations.

We've lost. If you don't believe me, just take a look at your own life. How many activities can you actually participate in that aren't taxed, regulated, restricted, or criminalized by the government??? Do you call that freedom???

Originally posted by jude11
And why is it even a necessity to legalize The Constitution?

edit on 20-6-2011 by jude11 because: (no reason given)

Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR. Roosevelt is the most to blame though.

Treason In Government! Admiralty On Land!! Where's The Water?

"Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency....Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens." "A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 (now 78) years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency....from, at least, the Civil War in important ways shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency." - Senate Report, 93rd Congress, November 19, 1973

The United States is BANKRUPT by John Nelson

U.S.A. the Republic How You Lost It!



I know it sounds crazy and out there, but look around and it explains a lot. The information can be found, you just have to look. If you want some proof to this just look at Obama's Libya speech given at the National Defense University:



We all know the war in Libya is blatantly UNconstitutional, so how does he get away with it? Because the Constitution is being shredded. To win, we first must know what we are up against.

reply to post by Carseller4


Wow, what a meathead statement. They hate us not out of jealousy but because we keep butting into THEIR problems. Stay out of their problems and they would have left us alone and maybe not even heard of us in their caves. You fell for the false flag operation of 9/11 real hard didn't you?

ron paul yaaaaa yahoo

The media probably look at Ron Paul as a loony tune just for saying that

VOTE RON PAUL............................
HE WILL LEAGALIZE FREEDOM


That should be his slogan.

Some people say its a god given right and we should know better blah blah blah...

What about those in power that don't believe in god or even worse someone in power that believes everything about god literally.How do they define freedom? How do you define freedom? Is it not time freedom is legally defined if it isn't. By all means if you like how they are defining our feedoms, just keep on paying all these unjust taxes, fines, and fee on your freedom.

If freedom is not legally defined do you, really, then have a right to freedom. If freedom isn't defined then how do you know when your right to freedom is being violated. Is freedom defined leagally anywhere? I can't say for sure.

The point being in my opinion that gov't has gotten way to big and way out of hand. They are in the peoples personal lives to deeply. They dehumanize us with laws and penalties. The authority doesn't serve and protect us, they treat us like terrorists and beat us into submission.

To many lose thier freedoms for nonviolent crimes and for what really. Does it or has it helped any of the problems. Since the war on drugs was started. How much money has been spent to fight something with OUR MONEY and it keeps going and getting worse with no end. How many trips to the moon did we waste on this pitiful war?

Since the war for oil, decades they been promoting independence of it and for decades we been geting nothing but death and higher energy prices. We wiill never be free if we let this continue. This dependency has turned this nation into an empire not a republic. This is not freedom, this is slavery.

They continue to keep us as slaves by tricking us into beliving that thier is still scarcity in this world, when in fact we can produce enough for everyone and sustain. We have been able for sometime now but profit seems to trump human life alot more these days.

We don't even have a right to work but we are expected to pay for our food, clothes, board, taxes, fees, fines, healthcare, retirement and the list goes on. We may even lose our freedom if we are not able to do so. Is that freedom, seems like tyranny to me.

It seems to me that most politicians have turned thier backs on the American people. I see Ron Paul as the brightest beacon that this nation has seen in a long time for freedom. The sad thing is that he was basically ignored for 30 years. Most politicians seem to have thier own agendas like how they can fill thier pockets instead of the American people in mind.

WE NEED TO REDUCE THIS GOV'T AND ITS HOLD ON US!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WE NEED TO DEFINE FREEDOM TO PROTECT IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WE NEED TO REDUCE OUR MILLITRAY AND STOP BEING IMPERIALISTC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WE NEED THE BASIC RIGHT TO WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WE NEED TO BECOME EMPOWERED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ONLY THEN WILL WE HAVE OUR FREEDOM.

My definition of freedom has the words life, liberty, justice, employment, and the persuit of happiness in it, does yours?

The new election mantra for 2012 should be "if you don't vote for Ron Paul you're voting in another retard like Obama" AND I SUPPORT THIS MESSAGE

Originally posted by annonymous1234
I really have a deep feeling in my gut that says Ron Paul will be elected, but the elite won't allow it and will force Obama back into office. I'm guessing another conspiracy theory at the end of the 2012 election

this...

I think that since Bush junior, people don't really vote.
It feels like monarchy more then anything.

People amaze me. What is he really going to do in office? Is he another puppet? All politicians are the same. yada, yada, yada. Well IMHO, what the hell do we have to lose? Nobama sucked ass, and GW did as well. If he is another puppet, then we are no worse off than we are now. If he is the real deal, then we prosper and become a great nation once again. I think it is worth the chance. you know there must be something real about him when the Dem's admit they like him! They don't agree with him, but they admire the fact that his message has not changed in 30 years. That's what integrity is. So, you can vote the status quot, or like some have said, no vote at all and keep complaining, or you can do something about it and give the man his chance. If you don't vote, or vote for someone else, then when nothing changes you have only yourself to blame, and no one else.

I have no respect for anyone who voted for Obama. They drank the kool-aide, and even refilled their glass. Anyone with common sense and some intelligence researched the commie and saw through the veil. They now act disappointed he didn't do what he said he would. Duh! His promises were contrary to what his past roles were! Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what he was going to do in office! So before you write Paul off as a status-quot guy, do the research. See what he is about. See that his past is not contradictory to his current views. He does have integrity and he does genuinely love his country, unlike the commie bast*rd in office now!

I will write him in if he isn't on the ballot, guy gets attacked for going with the constitution, its ponderous. All these other candidates are the same corporate stooges.

reply to post by Jazzyguy


We can sense our own kind a mile away lol. We know what we're looking for so when we see it we know/