Did you listen to his talk at Google and his replys to very tough questions from Google's progressive employees.?
I do not think your characterizations are fair but we agreee to disagree. The right to choose has a legitimate counterpoint in the rights of the child to be to life. At some point there is a balance between the two. Some put it at conception, some at the end of the first trimester, and some it the moment of birth. Nearly all agree that once born. an unwanted baby cannot just be put in a plastic bag and thrown in the dumpster. The fact is that it is a very difficult issue and that wherever you draw the line, the State's legitimate interest in protecting innocent weak life from stronger aggresers comes into play.
Paul has made it very clear that as President, he belives this is Constitutionally a State matter. He personally , as an obstriticain, opposes abortion.
Limiting the Federal governments intrusion into this issue allows the 50 states to decide. Many will ban abortion. NBut many will not. So long as freedom of expression and business are maintained, planned parenthood could adveritise in the states where abortion is banned and give poor folks tickets to California or New York. Charities may even help loved ones to come along.
I think some tolerance of social conservatives is important. Culture wars can be very dnangerous to a society, especially if fought at the national level , and they tend to deteriorate into violence and repression. The left won the war in Germany from the end of World War One until the Reichstag fire. Perhaps it is best to find some way to diffuse the culture war, cuz there will never be a winner as long as there is religion, or even thinking people who do not know wherethe death of a fetus lies on the spectrum of competing values. Having the issue decided by judicial fiat at the national level has invited , rightly or wrongly, serious resistence and a certain amount of politically illegitimacy to the issue of choice. Letting each State , or even locality decide may help to diffuse some of the emotions and avoid the danger of a different court declaring an all out ban, a result that Paul would vehemently oppose on the same constitutional grounds.
