Candidate Survey Response:

THE NATURE OF PRO-LIFE ISSUES
1. Direct threats to human life include first of all abortion, which takes the lives of well over a million US children annually; embryonic stem cell harvesting; euthanasia; and cloning.  Additional threats to human life include poverty, capital punishment, racism, war, nuclear arms proliferation and exploitation.  Since each and every human being is unique and important, one's personhood or worth should not be arbitrarily determined by another's choice.  No one exists solely as a means to someone else's happiness.  The choices we make, as individuals and as a society, must be weighed in light of their impact on human life and dignity.  Do you acknowledge both the breadth of pro life issues, and the primacy of some of those issues, namely abortion, embryonic stem cell harvesting, euthanasia, and cloning?
 

I believe that in any and every instance where there is any doubt concerning the viability or the probability of a human life, then that doubt demands protection of that life as surely as it demands we protect the accused in our court of law. This is especially true when considering the innocent life of the unborn.

ABORTION
2. Do you believe that a unique human life begins at conception? 

I believe that science does not know and faith says that it does. I believe that to err on the side of caution is the moral thing to do. To borrow a phrase from the vegans who say "if it has a face they wont eat it". I say, When "they have a face you shouldn't abort them."
 

3. The 14th Amendment states "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade, 1973, stated that "if this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment." The Court regrettably concluded though that "we need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer." Do you believe that  the State has a compelling interest in protecting human life beginning at conception?

I believe the state has a compelling interest to be consistent in the application of rights to all. Until and unless the state can establish that a unborn is NOT human, then the state has  responsibility to protect it as it would any other human life.

4. Is taking the life of a pre-born child through abortion ever morally permissible?  Check all that apply:

EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS AND CLONING
5. Do you oppose state funding for embryonic stem cell research or cloning?

Yes. I believe that no real benefit has been found from embryonic stem cells. The money from private interests has exhausted the possibilities and moved on to other stem cell research which has proven to be more promising.
 

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN ABORTION
6. Peer reviewed studies have shown that parental involvement laws reduce the occurrence of risky sex in teens, and more than 30 states currently have some form of them.  Either the teen refrains from engaging in sex or is more careful before having sex.  These laws help teen mothers and fathers get the support and guidance they need from parents in this important decision.  Not having them risks parental estrangement or alienation from the child when in the greatest need and denies the dignity of the family.  Minors already must have parental approval for even the most minor types of medical procedures or medications and should also for the complex procedure of abortion.   Without parental involvement, a minor impregnated by an adult often times is pressured into having an abortion so as to conceal the fact that the adult is guilty of statutory rape.  Will you promote/support parental involvement laws (with judicial override) for minors when seeking an abortion?

I believe that abortion performed on minors without parental knowledge should be prohibited. I also believe that anyone who performs an abortion on a minor who was impregnated by an adult is effectively an accomplice to the rape unless they report it to the police for a full investigation. 
   

MEDICAL CONSCIENCE CLAUSES
7. "The trend toward accepting the termination of some human lives as a normal part of medicine is accelerating ... Courts, policymakers, media leaders - even the elites of organized medicine - increasingly assert that patient rights and respect for patients’ choices should trump the consciences of medical professionals.  Indeed, the time may soon arrive when doctors, nurses, and pharmacists will be compelled to take, or be complicit in the taking of, human life, regardless of their strong religious or moral objections thereto." (Westlie J. Smith, 2009).  Should doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other medical professionals be granted the right to refuse participation in the provision of medical services that violate the person's moral, ethical or religious beliefs?

I believe that no medical practitioner should be compelled to perform any procedure that they find morally, ethically or religiously objectionable.
 

PHYSICIAN ASSISTED SUICIDE
8. Washington State Initiative 1000 which was passed in 2008, legalized Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS) by allowing doctors to prescribe lethal doses of barbiturates to certain patients.  The objection to this sanctioning of suicide is that some vulnerable persons, such as those who are feeble, depressed, mentally ill, or handicapped, will likely experience coercion to end their lives.  For them a right to die, already protected in the Natural Death Act, (RCW 70.122), may become a duty to die.  The American Medical Association (policy H-140.952) as well as the Washington State Medical Association (2007 Resolution A-7) oppose PAS.  The AMA states that "physician assisted suicide is fundamentally inconsistent with the physician's professional role."  The initiative uses vague language that enable doctors "acting in good faith" to assist mentally ill or depressed patients to commit suicide, while protecting doctors from civil and criminal lawsuits.  Health care insurers can cut costs by providing prescriptions for suicide.  Will society's sanction of suicide have unintended consequences?  Sponsor and former governor Booth Gardner says that this is only a “first step” in legalizing assisted suicide for anyone who wants it.  When society fails to protect vulnerable people in their troubles, but instead offers them the violence of suicide, has not society abandoned them?  Do you oppose the availability of physician assisted suicide in Washington State?