Chuck Mercer IV

Strongly Agree

In light of this very fact; more lives have been taken by abortion since 1980 than all lives that have, did, or do exist since the beginning of human recorded history, abortion is nothing more than tantamount to murder. In such a capacity, I am staunchly opposed as such providers take advantage of low income or lower educational communities, pretending to be a form of contraception or healthcare, all the while suppressing the very lives they purport to help.

If permitted, then strictly in these two categories. If the child was created in commission of a crime (such as incest or sexual battery), an extension of further deference to the parent would be permissible to terminate the pregnancy. Second, if the pregnancy would result in the fatality of either the mother or child; such as Ectopic pregnancy, then abortion is obviously permissible. Medical emergency must be considered.

Strongly Agree

Strongly Agree

This is true even in northern more liberal states, that deliberate destruction of fertilized embryos could treated as murder cases if the parent presses charges.

Strongly Agree

While in part a contradiction of typical Libertarian or Conservative positions; it is important that the independence of our state and our enforcement of legal and social rights, that the act be enforced. There is not a contradiction in this case since lack of enforcement would encourage further trouncing of our state's rights, and the rights of those yet to be born.

It should be held largely where it is. Minimal increases in light of rampant inflation may be permitted; however, the fantasy of a "Living Wage" such as $15.00/hr has already been tried, and failed in Oregon and Washington state.

Strongly Agree

Conduct comprehensive agency audits via efficiency task forces (e.g., Texas DOGE model) to cut redundant programs and bureaucracy. Reduce regulatory burdens on businesses/individuals, promoting voluntary systems for economic growth. Advance property tax relief by redirecting funds efficiently, including school choice to empower parents. Enforce single-issue legislation to avoid bloated bills, while prioritizing border security to prevent resource drains.

It means as much as practicable, the state is not to intervene in the personal or religious affairs of a church or people gathered to worship regardless of which religion this happens to concern. This excludes; however, the notion of a secular state. Our officials, states, or local institutions may be free as well to act in a manner they feel befits their manner of worship; or praise to Jesus Christ as Lord, so long as they do not attempt to declare or officiate their state as law over others.

Neutral

To clarify, individuals should not be denied service or ability to work due to a religious difference between themselves and their employer. This conflict was more more clear in the COVID years where the state and large businesses attempted to impose their will over individuals and compel them to breach vows or values so they may receive an ineffective vaccination. In THAT context, no individual or business should be denied.

B. This makes the most sense as it is unfair given the exorbitant prices of the medical industry currently; that there is no meaningful competitor to drive innovation or bring prices down. It should not be required, but a "Single-Payer Program" adapted from our existing funding methods which may freely compete against business would go a long way to ensure we do not overstep our legal bounds, but also ensure the market reacts appropriately to the health needs of the public.

Strongly Disagree

While collecting this data would be useful (as the private market already does this), it is never a good idea for the government to collect and house data on the broader public that may be leveraged by a hostile administration against the public. Regardless of party affiliation, the perpetual risk that the collection and use of that data poses cannot be ignored as it can be used as pretense to either collect more data, or deny care to targeted demographics.

Strongly Disagree

If the book written Wang Huning "America Against America" is to be believed; and the current political actions of the CCP are followed; China has little interest in America or American politics as they currently exist. The biggest threat to them, which aligns with the GOP's thinking as well, is that liberalism (not Liberal Democracy, but specifically the Western brand of Neo-Marxism) rots and degenerates any social and historical structure. The United States is stronger than the PRC in any case.

It is not. It does not benefit the average American, the Jewish community at large (per Voice of Rabbis, a great outlet here in the US), or our strategic interests in the Middle East at all. It is largely irrelevant in every single capacity. For a "foothold" in the Middle East, our base that exists in the Gulf, and our allies in Saudi Arabia already serve this purpose. Our balancing act of relations with Pakistan and India as well also fulfil any needs if we must intervene again.

Strongly Disagree

Sanctuary Cities are a form of "nullification," which goes against the very notion of constitutionality that every single state has established ever since the 1st Nullification Crisis in the 1830's. A state; or in this case a city, can not unilaterally declare (or nullify) legislative or executive acts from above them simply though declaration. Not to mention, these so-called Sanctuary Cities serve nothing more than glorified hubs of permitted criminal activity, acting only as sanctuary to evil.

Strongly Agree

Wholesale elimination of the department is the only sensible option as no meaningful replacement makes sense. Regardless of administration (Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump) the department has failed to meaningfully impact our academic achievement for any of our learners. A total reform or tailoring of its role must be considered.

Strongly Agree

Tied in with the prior question before involving Israel; no foreign nation so have a controlling state in our education. It opens the door to a foreign entity to leverage such in order to guide policy decisions.

Strongly Agree

Strongly Agree

As a volunteer for the Save James group, this has been evidenced in numerous articles and what few papers are actually permitted to scientifically research the harm such transitions or reinforcing of trans-identity does to all people in the US. The modern notion of transition therapy or "Affirming Identity" is equivalent to grooming.

Strongly Agree

Strongly Disagree

As a devout Catholic and dedicated educator, I center my spiritual beliefs on a profound faith in Jesus Christ as the foundation of truth, morality, and salvation. I hold the teachings of the Catholic Church dear, emphasizing sacramental life, charity, and the dignity of every person. My values deeply integrate patriotism, viewing love of country as a moral duty and believing patriotic education—rooted in America's founding principles, history, and virtues—is paramount for forming responsible, faithful citizens who honor God and nation.

Strongly Disagree

To cite a common running joke on Twitter, "liberals act under the racist pretense that it's too hard for poor people to get an ID, but demand we strictly photo ID anyone wanting weapons." The idea that voting should be done without identification is just a pretense to allow widespread fraud, which is an idea that has spread to Europe as evidenced recently in the Moldovan, Romanian, and French elections where left leaning parties overrode the will of the people through rampant unabashed fraud.

Strongly Disagree

Free ticket to massive and rampant inflation. That is not to say that US did not or does not owe a significant deal to our Black heritage, but the manner of reparations should not be in the form of one time payments. In the manner Trump proposed in 2020, fostering businesses, communities, an independent market, is the most surefire way to meaningfully repay that debt.

Strongly Agree

Strongly Disagree

One needs to look no farther than the number of billionaires who purchase and utilize beachfront property; or use private jets en masse to travel to and from Davos and such green events, to understand the level of inaccuracy behind that notion. That is not to imply humanity has NO role; however, that would come down to managing entire industries, not the individual. Nuclear power in that case, and allowing the nation, or states, to pursue diversified energy production is best.

Nuclear power. The entire world has learned substantially from our mistakes up to and including the 21st century. With our current digital technology and modern material science, it is far easier now and safer to construct nuclear power plants.

Very Conservative

My views used to be called fairly liberal from before 2016 in terms of how I felt (and still feel) largely people need to be as free as possible to pursue and act in their own religious and political self interest; and everyone's rights as workers and people must be defended in that capacity. The modern-left look upon that as "fascist" behavior, that I would dare defend my opponents and not regulate thought crime (as the UK is trying to do). Our rights are not negotiable, and I will stand by it.

No.

No.

The primary goal of the criminal justice system should be to deliver swift, impartial justice that protects the innocent, punishes the guilty proportionately, deters future crime, and promotes public safety. It must uphold the rule of law, respect individual rights, and prioritize victims while offering opportunities for genuine rehabilitation where appropriate—without compromising accountability or becoming a revolving door for repeat offenders.

Neutral

The government has that responsibility, but in lieu of the current Digital ID push in Europe; which then they immediately used to chill free speech, the government does NOT have the responsibility to attempt to legislate or collect additional data using the pretense of protecting children as the rationale. It is already illegal to exploit or batter children in those ways, so if the government must intervene; it must be to focus on the perpetrators and educating the public on how to protect kids.

Disagree

Sharia law should not be incorporated, in a similar manner no other religious law should or would be. This returns to the issue of nullification; where if there are contradiction this poses the risk that a religious leader would argue that their law supersedes state or federal law. With that stated, there is no serious threat that Sharia law will become the supreme law of the land. I select disagree, because;4 we have an existing and strict legal framework that answers that question already.

None. Further training and expansion of access to weapons and understanding of the right to be arms needs to be done.