Why do evangelicals ignore Ron Paul?
That's the question Rev. Chuck Baldwin asks here. But he misses the answer: evangelicals don't support Ron Paul because they are not small-government conservatives. They really want government to impose their moral values on the rest of the country, and they want the goodies that government can provide. That's why they wet themselves over Bush's "Faith-based initiatives"; they wanted to get their own ladles in the cannibal pot. And Ron Paul has proven that he isn't going to give them what they want. Oh yeah, he's pro-life (the one area where I disagree with him, but he makes it an internally-consistent position), but he's not pro-War on Drugs, Porn, or Iran. And Falwell and Robertson have had Beltway Fever for way too long, and would do well to relocate their ministries to a state not bordering D.C.
Comments
Posted by: P Campbell
Posted on: February 28, 2007 09:26 PM
Baldwin had some valid points; your's is also valid. Some of the religious right (and I'm a conservative Christian)seems to forget that even Jesus doesn't use force, but rather lets us use our free will to choose.
Posted by:
Posted on: March 1, 2007 08:17 AM
Mr. Paul is a paleo-conservative. Evangelicals are neo-conservatives.
Posted by: Jeffrey Quick
Posted on: March 1, 2007 10:19 AM
Campbell: nice site there. Yes, everyone can go to Hell in his own fashion...it's beautiful.
Anon: yes, I know. But the difference between "neo-conservative" and "no conservative" is a failing grade.