Monday, May 24, 2010

Candidate Survey: Planned Parenthood

Its time for another survey.  This week's questionnaire comes from none other than Planned Parenthood.  Given my strong social and fiscally conservative attitudes, I was surprised to find that I did agree with a couple of their questions.

Before we get to those though, here is the vision statement of Planned Parenthood's organization:

On many levels I disagree with Planned Parenthood's approach to reproduction.  Reproduction is not just a right...its a responsibility.  Given such, I believe that their emphasis is focused on the results of abortion, contraception and sex education rather than focusing on preventative causes and correct attitudes toward sex and its consequences.  In essence, I feel their organization promotes eliminating the natural physical consequences of sexual activity and thus a "liberation" from social mores that would otherwise cause healthy restraint among our citizenry.     

Now, lets review our survey:

1.  The first question is in regards to requiring kids to be taught age-appropriate information about contraception and abstinence.

My Response:  Surprisingly I found myself agreeing with this statement.  I believe that sexual relationships are something that are best shared in marriage.  My wife and I will be having our first birds-and-bees discussion with our 7 year old daughter here in a few months.  We will not be talking about contraception (hopefully) but talking to our daughter about the special and private nature of her body.  Given our faith and moral values, we will be teaching our daughter the virtues of abstinence.  However, as she gets older, it will become important for her to know the realities of preventing pregnancy as she comes closer to adulthood and begins to make important decisions for herself.  However, not every child comes from a family with conservative moral values.  Nor does every child choose to listen to parents who espouse those values. Therefore, I believe that AGE APPROPRIATE education on abstinence and contraception would be beneficial to our young adults.      

2.  The second question should be reworded.  It should read "Will you give Planned Parenthood more money?" 

My Response: My answer is no.

3.  The third question asked whether I would support forcing insurers to cover prescription contraception like they are forced to cover other drugs. 

My response:  Why is government forcing private business to provide specific products to its clients in the first place?  If we wonder why our premiums are high, this may be the first place to look.  If people want an insurance company to provide coverage for a specific drug, perhaps they can cancel their policy with the company that doesn't provide that coverage.  The same goes for contraception. 

4.  The fourth question asks whether I support educating and promoting "emergency" contraception. 

My response:  No.  This gets back to pushing the perception that there are no consequences to our actions.

5.  The fifth question asks if I support minors secretly receiving contraceptives, abortions, and STD testing.

My response:  Absolutely not.  This kind of policy is an open affront to the family and subverts the governance that occurs in the household.  Minors have no right to privacy.  If minors can't legally sign a binding contract due to age, how in the world can we expect them to make life altering decisions about their bodies and the bodies of the unborn?  This proposal is complete folly.

6.  The sixth question asks if I support a doctor and woman choosing the most healthy way to terminate a pregnancy.

My response:  While the thought of a mother willingly terminating the life of her unborn child is repulsive to me, the law of our land still gives her the right to chose such a course.  Therefore, I do support the doctor and woman in being able to choose the most appropriate way to pursue such a course.

7.  "Do you support a minors access to confidential abortion services?"

My response:  NO! (See question 5.)

Monday, May 10, 2010

Candidate Survey: National Right To Work

I recently received a questionnaire from the National Right to Work Committee. Two of the issues facing states right now are bulging pensions and increasing public employee payrolls. Despite the contraction in the private sector with jobs and payrolls, it seems in many states across America, the public payrolls have grown larger.

This is unfortunate because it is taxes from private industry that pay for public employee benefits.

Worker's unions played a significant roll in balancing the work vs. quality-of-life dilemma that was being addressed during the turn of the 20th century. Thanks to the unions we have a 5-day work week, Labor Day, and a myriad of other quality of life enhancing practices that are part of our work environment.

However, since most of the 19th century labor abuses have been solved, the unions seem to be falling into irrelevance. Some of the issues now being pushed by unions are now simply out of line with benefiting society and have more to do with benefiting union power than anything else.

The National Right to Work Questionnaire addresses a few of those issues. Here are my responses: