Rand Paul Standing for Persecuted Christians

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Glad to see the guy who coined the phrase "Compassionate Conservatism" is now writing op-eds for WND.

It's not his main line of work. Wead was very high up in the Ron Paul 2008 and 2012 campaigns and is part of Campaign for Liberty.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The idea that there is a war against Christianity in this country is so unbelievably idiotic, and proof that Paul isn't a real libertarian.

Yes, because standing up for religious freedom is not a Libertarian ideal, apparently.. Rand hardly claims to be a Libertarian, and when he does, he quickly adds "Republican" or "Conservative" to the end.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The fact that there isn't a 'war on Christians' doesn't matter. The relevant issue is that Rand Paul is showing that he is willing to pander to christian conservatives which shows he can expand his base beyond the usual libertarian wing.

But where does the young Paul stand on SSM and the various 'vice' laws (porn, drugs, prostitution, etc)? The libertarian position tends to be the opposite of the christian conservative position. Seems to me he can't have it both ways in those cases.

You can hold Christian and Libertarian views on both. I don't approve of some things, but what right do I have to tell others? I might not like marijuana for example, but does that give me the right to prohibit others from it? The entire message behind libertarianism is personal choice and non-violence.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The fact that there isn't a 'war on Christians' doesn't matter. The relevant issue is that Rand Paul is showing that he is willing to pander to christian conservatives which shows he can expand his base beyond the usual libertarian wing.

But where does the young Paul stand on SSM and the various 'vice' laws (porn, drugs, prostitution, etc)? The libertarian position tends to be the opposite of the christian conservative position. Seems to me he can't have it both ways in those cases.

You can hold Christian and Libertarian views on both. I don't approve of some things, but what right do I have to tell others? I might not like marijuana for example, but does that give me the right to prohibit others from it? The entire message behind libertarianism is personal choice and non-violence.

Yes Libertarians dont want to impose their views on others. However the likes of Huckabee and Santorum and Pat Robertson (and the people that voted for them) very much do want the state to impose their morals. Which is my point. Paul cant have it both ways.

He does not want it both ways. He has not voted in favor of the Santorum and Huckabee proposals to my knowlege, and many Santorum and Huckabee voters can be coopted into his movement

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

and for Paul's next trick he will convince the neocons to become isolationists

and then he will turn water into wine!

Considering how people like my Grandma (who, circa 2002 was the biggest war hawk you could ever meet) are now anti-war that a Democrat is in office, it is not impossible. Paul and his father have strong pro-life records, which is the most important issue for evangelicals by far.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

sorry but in the end there will be a real evangelical in the race, probably Paul Walker. If not, they always have Santorum. And you can be sure that the christian conservative candidate will go after paul on all the issues where he doesn't adhere to their orthodoxy.

It is naive to think Paul can perform some magic trick and unite the libertarian wing with the christian conservative wing. He is better off going after more moderate wing who supported the likes of McCain, Huntsman and Romney with his message of free markets and civil liberties.

Again, a large chunk of evangelicals supported Ron Paul in 2012. Santorum got most of them, but he got enough support from evangelicals to effectively tie with Romney and Santorum for first place in Iowa (Santorum 24.54%, Romney 24.51%, Paul 21.41%-basically a three way tie.) All he needs is to get a small chunk of evangelicals to win Iowa, and be the second or third choice of the evangelicals for the rest of the primaries until the day he is nominated (if he makes it that far) in which he can strongly unite the base behind him and go on to face Hillary, Biden, O'Malley, etc.