Abortion
Many people consider the issue of abortion to be a delicate subject, one that should be handled gently and debated only in the most controlled of environments. Tempers usually flair, and feelings are sometimes hurt. I have heard some claim this to be the political civil war of our time in that family members are divided on the subject. I have no clue why this is.
Why is the debate over killing a child of 1 year of age not such a big debate? If all of the facts surrounding the abortion are exactly the same on the 1-year birthday of the child as they are 9 weeks after conception, why do the advocates for “Pro-Choice” not fight with the same passion and determination as they do for an abortion? A 1-year-old can be a financial burden for the mother. A 1-year-old child can be an impediment to the career path of a mother. We do not allow for this debate because everyone universally recognizes a 1-year-old as a person. Those of us against abortion see that same person while he/she is in the womb. Why others do not is beyond me.
I am against abortion. I know every life is sacred. I know we must do all we can to protect the most innocent and vulnerable in our society. I come to this conclusion from a couple of different viewpoints. As a political candidate, I will do my best to use my logical reasoning instead of my religious beliefs. Not that I am discounting my religious belief, in fact quite the contrary. People on the other side often dismiss any and all debates that involve religion by simply saying something along the lines that I have no right to want them to live under my religious views. That is a separate debate.
If we can all agree life begins at conception, it becomes very hard for Pro-Choice advocates to make a legitimate debate. All arguments in which I have been involved, which number in the thousands I am sure, there is no logical reason to allow the killing of an innocent child, whether that person is 3 weeks after conception, or 2 years after birth. So I asked myself the question many years ago, “When does life begin?” Does it begin at 3 months after conception? During the birth process? I did not know, and sought many experts and read much on the subject. Through all of that, I have derived my own belief that stems from simple logic and deductions. There are two finite points during the period of time that this debate entails: conception and birth. Every other point relies on speculation and assumptions. Every other point can be debated about when it occurred, or if it has occurred. For instance, if one declares life begins at 12 weeks after conception, what is the mass of tissue inside the womb at 11 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours, and 59 seconds? It reminds me of the question, “If you were holding all of the feathers you could possibly hold because of your strength limits, and one more feather was placed on top, would you fall and collapse?” If the answer is no, and most answer thusly, then you were not in fact holding all of the feathers you could possibly hold. If this “mass” of tissue is a being at 12 weeks after conception, simple logic will say one second before that point, nothing has changed in a physical or noticeable difference. So if we can say one second before the arbitrary point of life beginning the “mass” is the same, then the “mass” is in fact a person. This logic can be taken all the way back to one defining moment of pregnancy: conception. Thus, to have an enforceable policy, we must define that life begins at conception. The other point is birth. Even the most hardened advocates of Choice have a hard time defending an abortion at eight months after conception, though I know some do, and always will. No, life begins at conception, if for no other reason than that is the only definable point of a pregnancy.
Agreeing that life begins at conception really makes it tough to defend an abortion. Since life begins at conception, killing that life should have the same consequences as killing the 1-year-old or a 27-year-old. The baby in the womb should have the same protections and assumptions of safety as we assign to ourselves, our children, and our senior citizens. There is simply no logical reason to do otherwise.
Knowing now what I believe about the state of life and when it begins, the question becomes, “What 'exceptions' do I have for my stance on abortion?” I make the same exceptions on abortion that I make when it comes to killing any human. In the most common denominator, this is self defense. If the mother’s life is in peril and known danger, a choice must be made, by the mother, to protect herself, which would require killing the baby, or take the chance. If an intruder came into my house tonight and pointed a gun at me, I would need to make a choice at that moment, do I pull the trigger on my gun to kill him, or do take the chance that his gun will misfire or is not loaded? I believe I would pull the trigger and kill the intruder to save my life. My decision might be different from the decision others might have made, but it was mine. In the eyes of the law, I have protected myself. The only time I am permitted to take the life of another is when my life is in danger. I believe that is the only time a mother/doctor should be allowed to end the life of an unborn child. This ends the list of the exceptions of killing a baby still inside a mother.
Why is the debate over killing a child of 1 year of age not such a big debate? If all of the facts surrounding the abortion are exactly the same on the 1-year birthday of the child as they are 9 weeks after conception, why do the advocates for “Pro-Choice” not fight with the same passion and determination as they do for an abortion? A 1-year-old can be a financial burden for the mother. A 1-year-old child can be an impediment to the career path of a mother. We do not allow for this debate because everyone universally recognizes a 1-year-old as a person. Those of us against abortion see that same person while he/she is in the womb. Why others do not is beyond me.
I am against abortion. I know every life is sacred. I know we must do all we can to protect the most innocent and vulnerable in our society. I come to this conclusion from a couple of different viewpoints. As a political candidate, I will do my best to use my logical reasoning instead of my religious beliefs. Not that I am discounting my religious belief, in fact quite the contrary. People on the other side often dismiss any and all debates that involve religion by simply saying something along the lines that I have no right to want them to live under my religious views. That is a separate debate.
If we can all agree life begins at conception, it becomes very hard for Pro-Choice advocates to make a legitimate debate. All arguments in which I have been involved, which number in the thousands I am sure, there is no logical reason to allow the killing of an innocent child, whether that person is 3 weeks after conception, or 2 years after birth. So I asked myself the question many years ago, “When does life begin?” Does it begin at 3 months after conception? During the birth process? I did not know, and sought many experts and read much on the subject. Through all of that, I have derived my own belief that stems from simple logic and deductions. There are two finite points during the period of time that this debate entails: conception and birth. Every other point relies on speculation and assumptions. Every other point can be debated about when it occurred, or if it has occurred. For instance, if one declares life begins at 12 weeks after conception, what is the mass of tissue inside the womb at 11 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours, and 59 seconds? It reminds me of the question, “If you were holding all of the feathers you could possibly hold because of your strength limits, and one more feather was placed on top, would you fall and collapse?” If the answer is no, and most answer thusly, then you were not in fact holding all of the feathers you could possibly hold. If this “mass” of tissue is a being at 12 weeks after conception, simple logic will say one second before that point, nothing has changed in a physical or noticeable difference. So if we can say one second before the arbitrary point of life beginning the “mass” is the same, then the “mass” is in fact a person. This logic can be taken all the way back to one defining moment of pregnancy: conception. Thus, to have an enforceable policy, we must define that life begins at conception. The other point is birth. Even the most hardened advocates of Choice have a hard time defending an abortion at eight months after conception, though I know some do, and always will. No, life begins at conception, if for no other reason than that is the only definable point of a pregnancy.
Agreeing that life begins at conception really makes it tough to defend an abortion. Since life begins at conception, killing that life should have the same consequences as killing the 1-year-old or a 27-year-old. The baby in the womb should have the same protections and assumptions of safety as we assign to ourselves, our children, and our senior citizens. There is simply no logical reason to do otherwise.
Knowing now what I believe about the state of life and when it begins, the question becomes, “What 'exceptions' do I have for my stance on abortion?” I make the same exceptions on abortion that I make when it comes to killing any human. In the most common denominator, this is self defense. If the mother’s life is in peril and known danger, a choice must be made, by the mother, to protect herself, which would require killing the baby, or take the chance. If an intruder came into my house tonight and pointed a gun at me, I would need to make a choice at that moment, do I pull the trigger on my gun to kill him, or do take the chance that his gun will misfire or is not loaded? I believe I would pull the trigger and kill the intruder to save my life. My decision might be different from the decision others might have made, but it was mine. In the eyes of the law, I have protected myself. The only time I am permitted to take the life of another is when my life is in danger. I believe that is the only time a mother/doctor should be allowed to end the life of an unborn child. This ends the list of the exceptions of killing a baby still inside a mother.
I have decided to run for congress after many years of people asking me, "Why don't you run for congress?"
I believe the current Republican leadership has failed Republicans everywhere, but more than that, they have failed Americans.
There is nothing wrong with true Conservative principles. The problem is the lack of actually living up to those principles.
I hope that my one voice in Congress, along with the thousands of voices of support for me, will usher in a new wave of conservative Republicans that will always stand by the principles of the Republican Party. In doing so, our country will have better days ahead than anyone could ever possibly imagine.
