(Source: patchesthegreat, via stfuprolife)

oligarchies:

theoceanisawake:

• 5. He thinks global warming is a hoax. In his words, it’s “the greatest hoax, I think, that’s been around in many, many years — if not hundreds of years”. But that’s just the tip of the crazyberg. Ron Paul winning the presidency would be a disaster for the environment. He wants to completely disband the Environmental Protection Agency, abolish environmental regulation, and lift, it seems, just about all the restrictions on drilling for oil. Including in National Parks.
• 6. He doesn’t believe in evolution. When asked about it in 2007, he was pretty clear: “I think it’s a theory. The theory of evolution. And I don’t accept it as a theory.”
• 8. He is radically pro-life. And vehemently opposed to a woman’s right to choose. He signed the “personhood pledge” making the rounds on the current campaign, suggesting that abortion should be legally considered to be the same thing as murder.
• 13. He believes we’re waging a war against Christmas. In his words, he claims that “the elitist, secular Left” are waging an “ongoing war against religion” to “transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity.” And as if that wasn’t crazy enough, he adds, “Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.”
• 17. He wants to U.S. to seize control of the Panama Canal. Paul’s isolationism doesn’t seem to apply to the Panama Canal. The United States signed a treaty back in the 1970s gradually ceding control of the canal to the government of Panama. But Paul wants to overturn that. Because if the U.S doesn’t seize control of it, he claims some hostile regime might seize control of it instead.

(All the rest at The Litte Red Umbrella)

(via stfuhypocrisy)

livealifethatscompletelyfree:

Gawker.com via Washington Post

The Washington Post is out with an excellent update on the history of the racist, homophobic, survivalist, nutcase newspapers that were published under his name in the 80s and 90s, which comes awfully close to confirming the most likely version of the story: He may not have written every word of them, but he sure signed off on them and wanted them written that way to pick up more subscribers and make more money.

The Post quotes Renae Hathaway, a Paul supporter and former secretary at Ron Paul & Associates, the company that published them, saying, “It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it.” Ouch.

And who could confirm that Paul was behind the editorial decision to make his newsletters so offensive? The head of the most prominent libertarian think tank in Washington D.C. should suffice:

Ed Crane, the longtime president of the libertarian Cato Institute, said he met Paul for lunch during this period, and the two men discussed direct-mail solicitations, which Paul was sending out to interest people in his newsletters. They agreed that “people who have extreme views” are more likely than others to respond.

Crane said Paul reported getting his best response when he used a mailing list from the now-defunct newspaper Spotlight, which was widely considered anti-Semitic and racist.

Let’s throw in one more anonymous source for kicks:

A person involved in Paul’s businesses, who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid criticizing a former employer, said Paul and his associates decided in the late 1980s to try to increase sales by making the newsletters more provocative. They discussed adding controversial material, including racial statements, to help the business, the person said.

It’s a welcome reminder that the libertarian movement that’s now headquartered in lush glass, brick, and steel think tanks and research centers, populated by savvy young intellectuals, made its money in the early years by pandering to deep-pocketed extremist lunatics. This history doesn’t set it apart from that of many other proud American institutions, but after years of hearing petulant neener-neeners from all libertarians about how they’re the only group in American politics that lives and dies by profound moral principles and nothing else, let’s send a hearty neener-neener back their way.

But if you’re already dedicated to Ron Paul’s campaign, who cares? The goal here is to use the first viable libertarian candidacy in a major political party in some time to pick up enough delegates in nominating contests to matter, mathematically, and then leverage that into a major convention speech, insertion into the party platform, or role in playing kingmaker to the eventual nominee. The specific nominee’s editorial history from decades back — which wasn’t that different from the mainstream Republican party’s at the time — needn’t derail that. It’s just an icky compromise every supporter will have to make. (Neener neener.)

But he’s not racist right?

(via stfuconservatives)

(Source: brain-food, via 3mstewart)

(via gvven)

sageoflogic:

Anastasia looks appropriately sassy as fuck xD

This is awesome.  Stylish Disney Princesses.

(Source: ladiesmakingcomics)

(Source: olivierl)

Stop crying, Batman.

(via thecakesokay)

stfuprolife:

impuretale:

stfuprolife:

sunshineinyourface:

Warning, gets a bit graphic.

Enjoy.

What defines a human? A heart beat? Breathing? Brain waves? Studies have proven that even though unborn a fetus has and does all of these. If a person by all means other then being out of the womb it should be protected, location should not matter. Deep down,…

Most of the information here isn’t cited and/or came from biased sources.  Most of the information here is also outdated and just plain wrong.

Here are some sources you need to check out and use for future academic purposes:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmsctech/1045/1045i.pdf

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/pn094.pdf

http://bham.academia.edu/StuartDerbyshire/Papers/9488/Can_fetuses_feel_pain

http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/statistics/adoption.cfm

http://www.womenshealth.gov/pregnancy/you-are-pregnant/pregnancy-complications.cfm

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Abortion_in_Australia

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/abortion.html

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/abortion-miscarriage

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/births_deaths_marriages_divorces/family_planning_abortions.html

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5212a1.htm

http://birmingham.academia.edu/LisaBortolotti/Papers/70735/Stem_cell_research_personhood_and_sentience

http://www.ithaca.edu/faculty/cduncan/230/adoption.htm

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/09/3/gpr090308.html

http://www.chsourcebook.com/articles/waxman2.pdf

All legitimate, government, academic, scientific, and medical sources. 

I’m saving your reblog. The next time I get papers turned in on this subject I’ll direct them toward this list of links. This was a serious problem in the last argument class I taught.

I hope it serves you well!

stfuprolife:

reesesspieces:

shit i don’t believe in 

Good thing this doesn’t exist and has been federally banned.

Abortion is usually done via pill and 9/10 before 12 weeks.

Usually when it looks like this, this, and this.

writtenmemory4:

nonplussedbyreligion:

Yes, yes it was too easy.  For those of you who don’t know what’s going on and that it’s still not over, please check out the blog Defend Internet Freedom. ~ Kim

Signal boosting!

(via stfuprolife)

stfuconservatives:

azspot:

Matt Davies

Wow, now that is a caricature. He looks like a Dick Tracy villain, maybe one named Slab or Bricks.

-Joe

ladygoggle:

what a shame another band

perpetuating the virginwhore dicotomy

i chime in with a haven’t you people ever heard of

the fact that the hymen isn’t really a breakable membrane and there’s no way to know someone else’s sexual history without asking them

it’s much better to face these kinds of things with a sense of real life events and facts.

LOL awesome ^

(Source: shameless-thoughts)