Robby Slaughter

Disagree

500 character limit is not enough to answer these questions! Broadly: prohibition is not an effective technique for addressing social issues. We have to promote a healthy culture and that will change the abortion rates.

Strongly Agree

Yes, as should all prescription drugs.

We cannot regulate intent. This is why medical professionals must provide counsel to anyone considering an abortion, and determine jointly with the patient the course of action that is best for the health of all involved.

The Federal government should provide definitions for states and local authorities to use to standardize interpretations.

Freedom is the distance between church and state. Whenever the government is encroaching into religious matters or a church leader is talking about something the government is doing, that's a problem. Government shouldn't be doing anything even close to religion or vice versa. This also means that religion and politics should refrain from mutual influence. A preacher should not advocate for a candidate from the pulpit nor a politician direct funds or influence toward a religious group.

Strongly Disagree

Of course not. If a person is cursing in your restaurant, you can ask them to leave. The standard of law today is that you cannot refuse service to someone *on the basis* of their membership in a protected class. The discussion we're not having is what is society required to accept? Or: which classes should be protected? This is essential.

C, but mainly because we don't have the trust of our partners across the world to work together and share the burdens.

Strongly Agree

Of course. As the United States military industrial complex also poses serious military, cyber security, intellectual property, and global economic threats to the Chinese.

Absolutely. The US is the mediating force in Israel. Without our relationship of trade, support, and military aid, hardliners in the Israeli government would ramp up military efforts dramatically. Countless more would die.

The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness says it's: - A strong economy, which has resulted in many more options for young people. - - A smaller eligible population. - Generation Z, the generation born from 1997 to 2012, generally has a low trust in institutions. - Generation Z has decreasingly followed traditional life and career paths. - Young people have fewer family members who served, which decreases the propensity to serve. Seems reasonable.

If it's George Washington in the Revolutionary War, for one. We seem to forget that vaccines have a long history in America. If the preponderance of expert opinion supports it, I think it's worth considering.

Somewhere between C and B, but this not a great way to frame the question. We have the best healthcare system in the world for the few Americans that can afford it. We have a mediocre, expensive, and often inaccessible healthcare system for almost everyone else. Also, we're the most unhealthy of any industrialized nation. And, we subsidize about half of the cost of the world's public health and medical innovations. The problem is bigger than the healthcare system.

Reduced taxes, and especially reduced complexity of taxes and all government services. Efficiency in government translates to prosperity for all.

Disagree

Debt cancellation isn't workable, but this isn't why. We're sort of *all* responsible for student debt, because we voted for the people who created the student debt crisis. We voted in the 89th Congress that kicked it off, and we've voted in representatives who have largely made it worse. And this is also the nature of all government services. Sometimes the really expensive bridge project benefits you personally more than most people. First responders only save a few lives a year. So it goes.

Yes

Sure, but that doesn't mean all such criteria are good. The problem is human: if we don't have criteria, we tend to make biased decisions. That's why people use checklists. We want to make choices with intention.

Strongly Agree

No matter what the cause or who you blame, the number of crossings has increased dramatically. But Congress has failed to invest accordingly and change the laws as needed.

People who have completed a process defined by Congress and implemented by the US State Department that includes all the appropriate checks and timelines to protect the United States. I think this question is too big to answer in 500 words.

Neutral

This is a loaded question. Everyone wants to have choices. The question is which choices should be taxpayer-supported. We have decided that this is true for police and firefighters. It's true for road crews and city council members. And it's true for teachers. If you want to have your own private security in addition to police or instead of, that's your choice. But I'm not so sure the rest of us should pay for it.

Disagree

That's not what the DOE does. Local states and communities already control education. So I can't support eliminating an agency on a false premise.

Disagree

Redirect implies a reduction. Police departments are already spending more money on community programs. They are hiring social workers and bringing in trained comfort dogs. They spend more on public safety day and attend community picnics. The answer is both: more support for policing and community programs.

Unfortunately, restrictions on gun ownership aren't likely to have much of an impact on public safety. When it comes to accidents, we know that homes with gun safes that do not keep weapons loaded have fewer accidents. But a law isn't going to make more people buy gun safes. And for intentional uses of guns in crimes, most of those guns are stolen (or borrowed without permission) from their legal owner. What might help would be restrictions on gun purchases. Licensing, training, range time.

Disagree

I think the number of justices is fine, but we need ethics rules for the Supreme Court.

Moderate

I don't think these labels mean very much any more. Which one is the "hands off my body" end of the spectrum? Which one is trying to control what your children think? Which of them gets a lot of their money from banks and corporations? I don't think this scale means much any more.

It's the preamble. "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."

No.

No.

Disagree

Lifelong pair bonding is a cultural practice. It happens in all kinds of cultures that have had no exposure to Christianity. Half of all *atheists* in America are married. It's a bit archaic for government to be involved in marriage at all.

Agree

500 words is not enough space. This is a heavily biased question. But yes, but we have to define what each of those words mean. Children often get ear piercings as young as age eight. Some find this abhorrent. If we are going to govern all people, we have to hear all views. And the preponderance of views from experts in child development are consistent with what most people understand.

Neutral

Less than 0.5% of the adult population identifies as transgender. Most of that population does not seek irreversible gender transition services. I'm open to being convinced on this issue, but we need to agree that the topic has been overblown.

I was raised Catholic and went to church every Sunday. I was married in the church in 2009. My faith as a Christian is personal and private. I attend different services in the community on occasion to try and understand the paths of others. I believe in people.

Disagree

Sure, but did we forget about every kid who ever wanted to buy booze or go to a 21+ club? Fake IDs are not a significant barrier to fraud.

Disagree

It's a bad system, to be sure, but getting rid of it would be worse. Today presidential candidates focus on swing states. Without the Electoral College they would focus on swing metropolitan areas.

Disagree

That's not what CRT says. I think when we mischaracterize someone's view it hurts everyone.

Disagree

The phrase "biological male" and "biological female" are not definitive terms. Throughout nature, sex characteristics are a complex spectrum, not merely two options. This is the view of virtually all of the scientific and medical community. We have got to find a way through this and it's not going to happen without talking.

Agree

Probably, but I get that most of us don't trust the scientific establishment. They were right about the hole in the ozone layer, which has been reversed through regulation. And, the experts were right about acid rain, which international accords have effectively fixed. But we don't trust the establishment any longer, so when they say we need to act, we don't believe them.

There is nothing quite as reliable as the sun. Every ten seconds, the Sun hits the earth with enough energy to power the US for a year. But, solar power may have the least promise of any emerging technology, vs. say small modular reactors (SMRs).