”

The US Constitution DOES NOT grant rights to the people, it grants rights to the GOVERNMENT.

I disagree. The US Constitution (or at least the “Bill of Rights” that consists of the first ten Amendments) doesn’t “grant rights” to the government”

The Constitution (not just the bill of rights) specifies the specific powers (rights) of the government.

Without going into an Austrian School rant, Paul is no economist. He should stick to treating hemorrhoids rather than causing similar discomfort.

Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be…

I recall there was an awful lot of that going around after Lawrence v. Texas, when conservative pundits attacking the decision were careful to qualify their remarks by noting, “I personally think anti-sodomy laws are silly / absurd / nonsensical, BUT…”

Sure, and when the Soviet Union sent dissidents packing off to Lubyanka prison, that was a laff-riot worthy of the Marx Brothers. And Chinese oppression of Christian house-churches is comedy gold!!

I’m reminded that Ayn Rand (who, unlike Ron Paul, always denied being a “libertarian”) was known to be quite homophobic, and described homosexuality as “disgusting”. But she flatly asserted that anti-sodomy laws were an immoral use of state power, and not merely “silly.” (She was also squeamish about pornography, but said that government censorship of pr0n was “immoral,” too, and was emphatic about the point that state-level censorship was no less morally evil than the federal kind.)

P.S. Paul wrote (as did many, many conservatives after Lawrence) that there’s no explicit mention of “privacy” or “sodomy” in the U.S. Constitution. This is true, but one might observe that there was nothing in the constitutions of the USSR or PRC to prohibit the State from infringing on freedom of speech or religion. Most libertarians would argue, however, that citizens of totalitarian countries nonetheless possess these rights, inalienably, by being human.

After his defeat, he tried to gather signatures for another initiative to repeal the anti-discrimination law and to repeal Maine’s limited domestic partnership law. Even though Maine makes it very easy to get initiatives on the ballot, Heath found no enthusiasm for the effort, and it fizzled out. Both laws remain on the books and none of the anti-gay groups are working to repeal them.

Finally, Paul’s writing implies an all to popular misconception about the US Constitution (and apparently this includes US supreme court justices). The US Constitution DOES NOT grant rights to the people, it grants rights to the GOVERNMENT. The US constitution is about what the government is and IS NOT allowed to do, not the people (except to the extent that it would interfere with the government’s authority) are and are not allowed to do. this fact was what the 9th Amendment was intended to emphasize.