As a candidate for state office, one of the things you need to deal with is a deluge of surveys and candidate questionnaires. Some are from groups you have heard about, like the UEA, and others are much more obscure, like Pink Guns (a pro gun-pro homosexuality group in SLC). Part of the dilemma is trying to figure out which ones to respond do and which ones not.
That brings me to today's survey. Rather than letting you wonder where I stand on certain issues, I thought it would be useful to post my survey responses here and then elaborate on the positions taken since little opportunity is given elsewhere to do so.
Equality Utah sent me a questionnaire about my perspectives on the homosexual rights agenda (click to enlarge):
Here are the topics covered in the survey:
Anti-Discrimination Housing Laws
Two of the questions regarded anti-discrimination housing laws. I don't think they are necessary because I don't believe that discrimination is a real problem in our community. I have rented to "alternative lifestyle" tenants before and had a very good experience being their landlord. As far as I am concerned, asking about sexual orientation on a rental application and rejecting applications based on orientation is simply a poor business practice and because of that, I do not believe it is happening at a discernible level in our community.
Two questions regarded a same-sex couple's right to share health insurance and inherit property. There is no law currently barring someone from willing their property to someone else upon death. Therefore changing inheritance laws is unnecessary. Also, health insurance companies have the right to choose whether to cover same-sex couples under different policy guidelines than traditional couples. This is a matter for the private markets, not the government.
I am unsure what this question was getting at. Do people have the right to enter into a same-sex relationship and cohabitate? Sure. Does that require an act of the legislature to condone? It does not.
Two of the questions regarded allowing same-sex couples to adopt and provide foster care. I am absolutely opposed to this idea. History has proven that children are best reared in a home with a father and a mother. Creating and condoning yet another less than perfect situation, which can be likened to the unfortunate cases of single-parent households, exposes children to challenges that would prove detrimental to future generations.
Finally, one of the questions regarded hospital visits. I believe this should be handled on a hospital basis and not through the legislature. I think its reasonable that friends and family, however defined, should be able to visit the sick. Perhaps lobbying these institutions would bear results without resorting to the legislature for recourse.