It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
From my Platform, Item II: Separation of Church and State:
I believe in the necessity and sanctity of both religion and government. Therefore, I believe in their absolute separation from one another. As a representative Constitutional Republic, the values of our Judeo-Christian majority have been reflected in our history, currency, monuments and federal buildings. In my opinion, such imagery does not constitute a violation of Separation of Church and State. It is merely representative of our heritage and unparalleled growth as a nation.
However, our government must remain neutral to religious affiliation or influence in its actions. Government is constitutionally obligated not to give preference to one religion over any other. This obligation includes not giving preference to absence or censorship of religious expression. Government should have no opinion whatsoever on matters of faith, beyond acknowledging its moral intentions and contributions to human society. Government must never interfere with any US citizen’s free exercise of religious faith, unless their religious practices infringe the Constitutional Liberty of others against their will or conspire to overthrow the government.
From my Platform, Item 3: Job Creation: Job Creation will be stimulated by sweeping reforms in a number of different platform areas, including National Defense, Border Security, Education, Tax Reform, and Resource Sustainability. I firmly believe the United States must restore its manufacturing sector by any means necessary, in order to restore sustainable middle-class jobs on the scale our country requires
From my Platform, Item IV: Border Security:
No area of national security has been so blatantly disregarded by the federal government as Border Security. I will work with state governors and legislatures to immediately secure our porous, lawless and volatile southern border with Mexico, from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean. In this era of international terrorism, our northern border with Canada is also a serious national security concern. Additionally, seaport and airport security must be legitimately improved with effective screening procedures. Port security along the Great Lakes and northern border waterways cannot be ignored.
There is often concern about how securing our borders may affect relations with our northern and southern neighbors. To those concerns, I respond: shouldn’t Border Security be our mutual, shared concern? If a poorly-secured border poses a threat to the United States, does it not pose the same threat to the citizens of Mexico and Canada? That which we fail to properly secure threatens us all.
From my Platform, Item 5: National Defense and Security: My life was transformed by the enormous personal, professional, educational and financial benefits of military service. I want to ensure those benefits remain available to every capable, qualified person willing to voluntarily support and defend the Constitution of United States of America – without exception.More than our diminishing military readiness and capability, cyber security has been this nation’s most vulnerable threat environment in the 21st century. The federal government has repeatedly, dismally failed to secure and protect its citizens' and employees' personal information.
I do not consider Gun Rights, Free Speech, or Religious Freedom to be social issues. Those are guaranteed Constitutional Liberties protected by the 1st and 2nd Amendment. ANY attempt to restrict or regulate those rights is unconstitutional. Period.
LGBT rights, abortion and other legitimate social issues are not specifically addressed by the Constitution. Therefore, according to the 9th and 10th Amendments, all such matters are solely reserved for the People or the states to decide.
The 14th Amendment almost universally prohibits laws which discriminate or infringe upon our individual Liberty. It's not a stretch or a "Constitutional interpretation" to extend that protection from discrimination to the rights of LGBT Americans, or women seeking an abortion. That is why the Supreme Court has consistently decided in their favor. It's not an infection of "liberalism". It's the correct application of the 14th Amendment's widely-encompassing language.
For anyone deeply concerned about my personal positions on LGBT rights, abortion or any other divisive social issue... I have given you my vow as an elected representative. I will support and defend the Constitution and your personal Liberty. When I swear the Oath of Office upon the Bible, that oath will be a binding covenant between me, you and God. I expect that we will all hold me accountable to it.
So all that remains are my irrelevant personal opinions on these matters. If they are really that important to you, here you go:
On LGBT rights:
Every American is entitled to pursue their own personal definition of Life, Liberty and Happiness. If that means a lifetime commitment with someone of the same gender... or assuming a more appropriate gender identity... so be it. Decisions about life partners and gender identity are personal matters, not public ones. People don't have to like or accept the LGBT community. Prejudice and intolerance are also personal matters, not public ones. But no level of government... local, state or federal... has Constitutional authority to create or enforce discriminatory laws against any American. The 14th Amendment forbids it. It's that simple. From a moral standpoint, I sincerely believe that we are ultimately judged more for how well we loved in this life, than who we loved. You're entitled to disagree.
Personally, I am strongly opposed to abortion as a means of birth control. If anyone in my life were considering one, I would urge them to make any other decision and honor the life entrusted to them. But I would respect their decision. Because it's ultimately their decision to answer for. Additionally, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that abortion is a Constitutionally protected practice. Short of a Constitutional Amendment outlawing the practice, an infringement of Liberty that I would never support, it really doesn't matter how I feel about it personally. That said, I am vehemently opposed to Planned Parenthood providing abortions and selling fetal tissue, aborted fetuses and potentially terminating live births for profit without specifically informing the mothers of their activities. I cannot see those actions as anything but criminal, and grounds for complete termination of federal funding. The government should not provide funding for any such heinous "for profit" endeavor.
So... what am I?
A bleeding-heart liberal?
A fascist conservative?
A crazy libertarian?
Sorry, but it's none of the above. This what being a Constitutional centrist looks like. If you are sincerely committed to supporting and defending the Constitution, you often have to support and defend Liberties you may find personally objectionable. You really have no other choice.