Matthew Laszacs

The state should not attempt to regulate abortion. Abortion is a sensitive and personal social issue that must be resolved in our households, churches, and communities - not through government interference.

Strongly Agree

Government should not be involved in regulating or funding abortion. I am consistent and principled in this regard.

None. The government should neither regulate nor fund abortion.

Strongly Agree

Do we own ourselves, or does the state own us? How can the state deny a person the right to end their own life if they so choose? Government should not be involved in this decision.

No

Government should not be involved in regulating abortion.

Strongly Disagree

Government should step aside and allow private individuals to freely determine how they may engage in commerce with each other. Only free individuals can grow the economy, and free markets are the ultimate poverty killer.

Get rid of it, all of it. Repeal the 16th amendment. Start over from scratch with a consumption-based tax that is truly “fair and progressive.” Otherwise, we should reduce tariffs, end all capital gains taxes, and reduce corporate taxes so that the United States once again becomes the preeminent global market for investment and innovation.

Strongly Disagree

Taxpayers are already footing the bill for college tuition through our government-backed student loan programs, which, along with the recent loan forgiveness, have served only to artificially inflate the cost of a college education. The government can’t guarantee a good college education for everyone, but they can guarantee to raise the cost of a college education for everyone.

Strongly Disagree

Private businesses should not be required by law or regulation to provide services that violate their beliefs. Further, government should not engage in punitive actions such as fines or revocation of business licenses in retaliation. I do, however, agree that individuals that feel their rights may have been violated due to discrimination by a business may seek restitution through our system of torts (civil courts).

Churches, their congregations, and clergy, are bound to the same laws that the rest of society follows. Other than that, they should be left alone to freely practice their beliefs.

Government should not endorse any religion and should protect the freedom of individuals to practice their beliefs. Religion should not seek to use the government as a tool to impose their beliefs on others by way of laws.

I think many people would be very surprised to learn that most of our healthcare dollars are controlled by either the government or employers and not by individuals. When individuals are removed from their healthcare transactions, scarce healthcare services are not efficiently allocated and prices skyrocket. We must end the employer healthcare tax exemption so that employers will return this money to their employees to control, and we must limit our government run healthcare to a bare-minimum safety net that serves at-risk populations such as pregnant mothers and the disabled, but not able-bodied adults.

Government should never be allowed to enforce a blanket mandate for all individuals to be vaccinated, as no government has the authority to dictate to individuals what they put into their bodies. However, employers (including government employers), schools, and other institutions do have the right to require vaccinations, because free individuals also have the choice to not work for a specific employer or attend a certain school. We must expand school choice options so that parents are free to educate their children at home or at a school that shares their specific values on vaccinations.

Strongly Agree

Government can fund education and not run the schools. We fund nutrition thought the SNAP program, but the government doesn’t run the grocery stores. Education should be no different. We should give all parents their education tax dollars and let them choose where to spend them. In this way, parents will allocate their dollars to the school that provides the best outcome for their individual children, creating a stronger, more diverse, and effective educational system.

Parents should always have the right to know what their children are being taught in school.

It’s up to the individual school boards to decide the rules of their meetings. Parents, however, should have the option to send their children to another school if they feel their voice is not being heard, or if their public school does not reflect their values. School choice solves this and many other of these contentious winner-take-all issues in our public schools. Fund students not systems.

Neutral

Many influences affected the development of our government and none of them, including Christianity, had a monopoly on the others. Thomas Jefferson was not a Christian, yet he was a staunch advocate for limited government and his values contributed greatly to the founding of this country.

Neutral

I support equality before the law; that means that all people should be equally protected by the law.

Neutral

I neither agree nor disagree with this theory. It is just that, a theory, and one of many that we may use to help us understand our world. It can be a helpful construct for viewing the world through a specific lens and may be beneficial to many - and it does have merit to be taught as a theory. However, I do not agree with this theory being taught as fact nor would I agree that this theory should be presented to our children as the preeminent lens by which they should view the world.

My beliefs are personal and have no bearing on my ability to effectively represent the citizens of North Carolina in the General Assembly.

Neutral

This is an issue manufactured by the partisans to gin up tribal bickering and posturing. I have no interest in this non-issue and voters shouldn't either.

There is neither voter fraud nor voter suppression. Both of these are mythical bogeymen created by Republicans and Democrats for partisan gain. Don't buy their snake oil.

Racism is still an ongoing concern for this country. We must continue to work together as a free society to confront this issue.

Private individuals have consistently been better stewards of land and natural resources than the government. When there is private ownership of any resource, there is also a built-in incentive to not deplete that resource. When a resource is public, no one owns it, and therefore there is little to no incentive to preserve or manage the resource.

Government should be limited to protecting the private property, life, and liberty of free individuals through a minimum of laws. Government should exist to preserve and enlarge freedom, not restrict it.

Choose not to answer

I am neither conservative nor liberal / progressive. I am a classical liberal and a Libertarian.

Please see my Facebook page: facebook.com/MattLaszacs4nc

No

I am running on a platform of returning the power of personal choice to individuals. We should be free to choose where and how we live, who we love and live with, how we earn a living and provide for our families, and how we receive healthcare services. Only free individuals empowered by choice, not government, can make our communities stronger.

Strongly Disagree

The vast majority of our law enforcement officers are good, hard-working people that truly care about protecting their communities and serving the people, but there will always be a very small minority of knuckleheads that cause trouble. The problem is that, when this minority engages in unconstitutional behavior, they destroy the community trust that is necessary for effective policing. They should be held accountable to the same laws as the rest of us. Nobody is above the constitution.

Strongly Agree

I absolutely support these efforts of police avoidance. We ask our police to do too much, and very often they are called upon to intervene in situations that would be better handled by a trained expert. Mental health and substance abuse issues are not a crime, and therefore should not require intervention by law enforcement. By freeing up our police officers’ valuable time, we could better focus their energy on much more fruitful activities such as community policing.

I support constitutional carry and I am a strong proponent of protecting our 2A rights.

Strongly Disagree

Driving up litigation costs through frivolous lawsuits to shut down a political opponent is an old trick that gun control activists borrowed from Civil Rights opponents in the Jim Crow era (see New York Times vs. Sullivan). This strategy represents a blatant end-around to the Constitution and we should be vigilant against its usage, as history clearly shows us that this is a tool that can be used to oppress many of our other civil rights and liberties, not just 2A.

No

Expanding school choice through vouchers, ESAs, and scholarships is the correct solution. If parents don’t agree with the sports program at a given school, they can elect to send their children to a school that more closely aligns with their values. Fund students not systems.