Only under very limited circumstance when the mother will die if carrying the baby to term. In those cases we should do our best to save both mother and child. We have the medical technology where no woman should have to make such a choice. In the very rare cases of rape or incest, we as a society should not make the situation worse by killing the child for the actions of the criminal "father". We should come together to provide support, both financial and psychological for both mother and child since as a society we have failed to protect them from a terrible crime which in reality is societies and governments first duty. To protect all of us from those that mean to do us harm.

Strongly Agree

Disagree

I believe you have a right to do what you want with your own life. However I do not believe anyone has a duty to help you. In addition, euthanasia laws have been shown to be used to eliminate those that are weaker or un-wanted by society. I think it is a dangerous road to travel when we start thinking others are not worth living and decide as a society to kill them.

Strongly Disagree

None

Be honest about the threat. Certain international actors have made their intent clear. We should take them at their word and treat them accordingly. That includes some nations that the US currently calls "allies".

Strongly Disagree

C. We need to have something for those through no fault of their own are unable to provide for themselves. I prefer if charities and churches could do so, but we no longer have that tradition in this country. That being said, both Medicaid and Medicare need to be reformed and waste and fraud need to be removed and punished severely. In addition, I'm not sure why we don't just have one program for all who can't take care of themselves. Having two seems wasteful in that it requires two bureaucracies.

Never. Give people the information and if they become ill due to exposure in their job then the employer should not be responsible for the person's illness. We have a right to bodily autonomy, but we also have the responsibility for what happens should decide to take a measured risk.

Abolish the Alabama Grocery tax. Remove any gas tax automatic raises and illuminate subsidies to business. Government should not take tax payer money and give it to favored business or individuals. Finally, eliminate the current income tax code and simplify it to a simple percentage for everyone. We will save billions on preparation time and money alone.

Limit the government to what is in the constitution. Eliminate business subsidies. Ensure all government jobs are held to the same standard someone would be in the private sector. Eliminate all government unions. No union should be able to represent both the workers and management, which is essentially what a public sector union is. The money comes from taxpayers and there is no incentive to save overhead like administrative positions, or people who have essentially just been doing the minimum to get to their retirement. We also need to take a very hard look at public sector retirement pensions and funds.

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree

Someone who has family in the US to sponsor them or someone who has a marketable skill that is needed in our economy. No one should be allowed to transition through another country to enter the US without proper vetting. True asylum claims should seek asylum in the first safe country they enter in accordance with international law. They should not be allowed to pass through just to show up at the US border and demand entry.

Strongly Agree

Disagree

Bad policy should not protect anyone from the consequences of their decisions. In the military we had a duty to disobey an illegal order, there was no qualified immunity even in a war zone. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a police officer to know right from wrong even if "the policy" says an action is allowed.

Neutral

I think we should better fund Mental Health in the US. But I'm not sure this is the best way to do so. Police have a job to do and we should ensure they have the ability to do it. Does every small town need a SWAT team? No, we should address the militarization of the police and get back to community policing so that we don't need armored personnel carriers in police departments.

If you are a convicted felon and haven't completed parole then you shouldn't have a gun. Otherwise an individual has a right to self defense and by extension fire arm ownership.

Strongly Disagree

One should not be able to sue the manufacturer because someone maliciously misused a product.

To ensure Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Simply put. The first purpose of government is to protect those who cannot protect themselves, second is to provide a framework of liberty for all those who are within its jurisdiction and finally to provide an environment where every individual has the ability to try and succeed in whatever endeavor they think will provide them contentment. Government cannot ensure outcomes, only opportunity.

Lean Conservative

I am a libertarian, I do not believe I have the right to tell you what to do with your life as a general rule and so want a very limited government. I also believe that one has to live with the consequences of their actions, thus I live my life in a conservative manner given that I don't expect someone to rescue me from any of my own bad decisions.

n/a

No

I feel it's important for people to have a choice. I think the two parties that we have in power today limit the choices that the citizen has and gives people a very poor choice. Not all things are left or right. Often they are big government vs personal responsibility, or ask for permission vs leave me alone. I think both major parties to often think they have a right to determine winners and losers and think government should grant permission. I prefer to get government out of most individuals business as long as the individual isn't harming anyone else. My legislative priorities are simply less government intrusion in daily decisions, thus less overhead and therefore less taxes and more individual freedom to determine your own path in life.

Agree

Strongly Disagree

I am against "specially protected classes" of humans in total. All people should be treated with respect and dignity. We can't force people to be decent with the law, only through honest dialogue and education.

Neutral

Government should not be involved in Marriage at all. It is a religious institution and should be returned to the various religions. A civil contract is all that is needed within the government framework for property rights.

Strongly Disagree

The law in the US is absolutely neutral when it comes to race. There are still racist individuals in the world, but everyone in the US has the same opportunities under the written law.

I believe in God and think all living creatures should be treated with respect and dignity.

Strongly Disagree

We need photo ID to do just about anything in the US. Voting is one of our most important things we do, it shouldn't be treated with less respect than entering a bar or registering a vehicle.

Eliminate early voting. Absentee voting should only occur within reasonable parameters such as military orders or obvious inability to physically get to the polls such as physical impairment.

No. The stirring of racial divisions by those with something to gain is a danger. But the US has institutionalized equality through-out its legal system. There is a miniscule number of true racists in the US, but most people know this and treat them with derision and shun them as they deserve. Having travelled the world on active duty in the US military I've seen racism on a dangerous scale. The US is one of the least racist countries to ever exist.

Strongly Disagree

A. We should protect the environment, however giving the power to the EPA that it has is very dangerous in a free society and contributes to job loss and corruption. Companies should be responsible for any environmental damage, but in today's world they have the cover of the EPA to go to a point and say that is what the law allows.

Strongly Agree