So how many people here know of Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty Movement?

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/

How many people here knew about this before I posted this thread?

After Ron Paul dropped out I was saddened but than he grew a movement and now 70,000 people and more will march on September 2nd I think in St. Paul, MN for the Republican Convention after Ron Paul was kicked out of it!

I often look to a christian conservative with old fashioned ideals for starting a revolution...

http://www.visitingdc.com/images/george-washington-picture.jpg

I'm not saying that he is similar to Paul, but rather that you make retarded over-reaching statements.

George Washington advocated separation of church and state and was deist.

Ron Paul doesn't believe in evolution and thinks we should pray in schools (of course he isn't going to make people pray in school, but the fact he wants prayer in school is ridiculous...) Paul has some good ideas but his religious stance pisses me off to no end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw

And please explain to me how calling Ron Paul a christian conservative is over reaching? He's christian...He's conservative...What else should I call him? And how is that retarded?

You look to his religion? Religion is irrelevant... Look to the political beliefs and yes you will find he is a good man to lead a revolution. He believes their should be prays in school BUT He knows better and will not infringe upon others to force them to do so. He's Republican/Libertarian first and foremost, so if this is true that he believes that everyone has the right to do whatever they want so as long as it does not infringe upon the rights of others.

No, hell just allow other people to do it for him. How wondeful!

This has been discussed in other threads many times before: Ron Paul isn't against intervention in people's lives. He's only against it when the Federal Government does it, but if the state wants to violate your privacy, put prayer in schools, remove evolution from the curriculum, that's fine with him.

But since he is pro-bill of rights, he knows people have the right to petition and demand change if enough people do not want something in the curriculum.

OR

I say let the mid-west states teach creationism it will just draw those who believe it to that side of the country and allow those who do not believe it to move to a place that teaches evolution. The idea if you will is supposed to create competition between states, the one who teaches the more supported ideology will have more people and more money coming in, the one who does not will have less money coming, once this happens the state with less money will change their ciricculm to the more popular supported Idea: Evolution

OR

Home school your kids in the ways of evolution and not creation, tell them that creationism is hog-wash. Tell them that: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I mean really their is more than one way to avoid your children being raised up on baloney. I am not a big fan of government / public school education, because, as the numbers have shown the big the government gets the dumb the kids get, homeschool, private school educating is by far much more better than public education in so far as kids come out even smarter and less programed by the state, I dont know about you but, I would rather teach my own children than leave the education to strangers.

Jesus Christ you're retarded. You expect that entire families would be willing to up and move their entire lives because their children would be taught creationism?

I'm sorry but not all families have the financial security to just up and fucking leave on a whim over such an issue. It just so happens that these same families probably have both parents working to support them, which means, you guessed it, no home schooling for junior.

I'm surprised you can breathe without detailed instruction, let alone mash your empty, deformed little skull on a keyboard to create this vapid mess of logical diarrhea. Fuck you.

What does that have to do with anything I said? The problem is not that he's following the Bill of Rights - I'm not criticizing him for that. The problem is he's supporting ridiculous ideologies. That he does so constitutionally doesn't make them any less ridiculous.

For example, Person A could be a racist that supports his racism in a constitutionally valid way (i.e. he wants constitutional amendments that support his racist views, wants state legislation etc.). That doesn't magically mean that what he supports (racism) is suddenly good. It's still an disgusting ideology.

Similarly, he supports irrational things like creationism, and believes the state has the right to dictate what you can or cannot do in the privacy of your own bedroom. That he believes these things should be achieved through state legislation and not federal legislation does not suddenly make him a saint. Instead of blindly following what he says and making excuses for his flaws, you should accept them and criticize him for them in an effort to change them.

As for the school bit, not only is expecting people to change their whole lives just because some uninformed idiotcs have decided to allow nonsense to infiltrate their schools an absurd proposition (reas MaddMan's post for more), but you're dead wrong when you claim that "private school educating is by far much more better than public education":


"The new study is the first published study to show that public schools are at least as effective as private schools at promoting student learning over time, they say.

Combined with other, yet-unpublished studies of the same data, which produced similar findings, “we think this effectively ends the debate about whether private schools are more effective than publics,” said Christopher Lubienski, whose research has dealt with all aspects of alternative education.

This is important, he said, because many current reforms, such as No Child Left Behind, charter schools and vouchers for private schools, are based on that assumption.

The debate essentially began three years ago with the publication in Phi Delta Kappan of a previous study by the Lubienskis, which challenged the then-common wisdom – supported by well-regarded but dated research – that private schools were superior.

In that 2005 study they found that public school students tested higher in math than their private school peers from similar social and economic backgrounds.

In another, more-extensive study in early 2006, they built on those findings, and also raised similar questions about charter schools.

Both studies were based on fourth- and eighth-grade test data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

The conclusions of the husband-and-wife team seemed “crazy radical” at the time, Sarah Lubienski said, and generated significant controversy. They were supported, however, later in 2006, with similar findings in U.S. Department of Education studies comparing public schools with privates and with charters which looked at NAEP test data on both math and reading.

(Unlike literacy, math is viewed as being less dependent on a student’s home environment and more an indication of a school’s effectiveness, Sarah Lubienski said.)"


http://www.news.uiuc.edu/news/08/0523schools.html

I don't see what all this shit about education is for. The power over education wasn't delegated to the federal government and according to Amendment #10 it's actually a state's right to make laws about education and to regulate it and whatnot.
I don't like it when the federal government finds new ways to trample the Constitution, but it's more the supreme court and congress's responsibility to deem say things are unconstitutional and to make constitutional laws and amend the constitution respectively.