Hi /r/Libertarian,

I have enjoyed reading your posts and discussions even though many of your view points I would disagree with. I wanted to take a moment to talk about Ron Paul and why voting for him is a non-starter for me, and get your thoughts on my hold-ups and reactions to my criticisms.

I want to start out by saying that I agree with him on most everything he says. There are just two things that I can't get past:

The first one is his stance on Abortion. While I fully accept his personal reasoning for not supporting it, I strongly believe that this is a personal choice for a woman to make alone. I do not agree with his stance that "the federal government has no authority whatsoever to involve itself in the abortion issue." I absolutely think that is is the place of the federal government to step in an protect people from the tyranny of the majority, and in this specific case, to protect women from others in states that would limit access to abortion. I don't want to go into the full argument on abortion, but to just generally outline why I disagree with him on this point.

The second issue with Ron Paul I have is the idea of Free-market environmentalism. The main thrust of this is that history has shown us that corporations do not respect the environment and will do everything in their capacity to hide environmental damage so long as it is profitable. Then when it is found, citizens have the uphill legal battle of proving damages. This is practically impossible for single individuals to do and even in class action suits, corporations often get off with not much more than a slap on the wrist. They immediately go back to business as usual having learned, not to act as better citizens of the world, but how to hide what they do better. We need to have strong environmental regulations to set a baseline for what is acceptable and what is not. I agree that we should not rely on the EPA to protect us, but I do want someone paying constant attention to issues so that I can let my guard down on occasion.

It is his rhetoric on these two issues that would keep me from voting for him. Any other disagreements I could overlook as I do support the vast majority of what he says. And as a self-described socialist, I think that is saying a lot for him. If he could change these two things, I think he could appeal to a much wider audience.

I look forward to your polite and thoughtful commentaries. I don't have a ton if time to respond to replies but I'll try to put in a few hours tonight. Thanks!