|
Edited on Tue Oct-26-04 04:31 PM by BQueen
From what I could glean from the .pdf, he may consider himself a Libertarian.
View On Abortion:
***My own view is that America has made a grave error in allowing the current state of affairs to come to pass. Out of the tens of millions of abortions performed, mostly unnecessarily, how many great lives have we eliminated? Among them were there individuals of rofound future significance to humanity, along the lines
of Abraham Lincoln, Albert Einstein, Martin Luther King, Mozart, or Mother Theresa? We may never know.
From a scientific standpoint a distinct human life, however small and fragile, begins at conception. As affected by genetic, nutritional, and environmental factors, a significant ratio of these lives are lost in the nine months of pregnancy by miscarriages spontaneous abortions) without specific inducement or intent, and are generally regarded as occasions of sadness and loss of divine potential, however limited. From a constitutional and philosophical standpoint the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (self-development) should take priority on this issue, while recognizing other secondary but still legitimate constitutional concepts, including the right to privacy and due process. The state and federal governments should act to protect all human lives in all states and conditions unless compelling due process needs would take precedence. The government should minimize its involvement in private, intimate, and sexual matters, but in the case of developing life the inviolate protection of life should take precedence over privacy. Therefore in its proper and normal regulation of medical procedures and ethics, a state or federal entity has the right and responsibility to seek the protection of these lives unless extraordinarily extenuating circumstances presented themselves, such as extreme medical risk to the mother which cannot be alleviated by Ceasarian delivery, documented rape, or documented incest as sources of conception. In these cases, if presented to a responsible, professional, and appealable medical board, a request for an expertly performed abortion in the safest possible circumstances could be appropriate and approved.****
Views on Gun Control:
***I oppose gun registration with one exception: "Concealed Carry" laws. I support them providing the right to carry a concealed weapon is granted via permit and registration (registering the owner, not any specific firearm) and requires proper training from a certified instructor. Studies have repeatedly shown that where "Concealed Carry" is lawful, crime does not rise, but instead is more effectively controlled, as law abiding citizens are more likely to be able to protect themselves and their families when they find themselves encountering criminal activity and potential violence.
Any attempts at widespread gun registration should be opposed as a safeguard against the potential rise of domestic tyranny, and the day when enemies, whether foreign or domestic, might come to disarm America. We discount the potential for such a turn of events at our peril. Tens of millions of people around the world have been slaughtered by their own or other governments in the last century alone. Let such a situation never even become remotely possible in our land!
Patrick Henry stated, "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel."***
Separation of Church and State:
***The First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…." These two phrases, commonly referred to as the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause, have served as catalysts for incredible controversy over the years, and continue to today. What was the intent of the framers? In general they were religious men of Christian background, and their Judeo-Christian heritage is clearly discernible in America’s founding documents and other writings. For confirmation, one need but read the Declaration of Independence, which states, "All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain inalienable rights…." The intent of the framers in the language of the Constitution was and is simple to understand. There was to be no state sponsored imposition of any individual specific theology upon Americans, no repeat in America of King Henry VIII’s erastian establishment of the Church of England with himself as its head and the widespread governmental persecutions that followed.
Government is prohibited from interfering in the free expression of religion. Americans would be free to worship as they saw fit. James Madison, who authored the Constitution, joined with the first ongress to pass a law paying chaplains for the House and the Senate with public monies. The Founding Fathers, in our founding documents, as well as in their other writings, left no ambiguity about their reliance upon their Judeo-Christian heritage in the formation and maintenance of a just society. The founders’ use of religious principle, and their repeated specific references to God, leave no doubt as to their basic belief systems or intent.
I will not here digress and enumerate the endless and egregious disregard for the framers’ intent that has been tolerated in America.We have all heard the stories about judicial decisions declaring the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional, preventing kids from voluntarily praying in school, eliminating manger scenes from public property at Christmas, removing signs with the Ten Commandments from courthouses, removing the word God from our own Ohio statehouse façade, etc., etc. Some in the American Civil Liberties Union, some radical atheists, aberrant judges (including Supreme Court Justices), and various groups with anti-Christian or generally anti-religious political agendas have combined over the years to incrementally work towards the elimination of any religious faith as an influence upon societal revolution, and we let it happen. We elected the people with the radical sociological and political agendas that got these radical judges appointed to the bench. They have turned the First Amendment totally upside down and tried to make it mean just the opposite of its intent.
Essentially, the solutions are to be found in the hearts of American citizens, and only subsequently in the courts. As we have only ourselves to blame for the continued erosion of our national heritage, and perhaps the loss of the Creator’s blessings and protections ....***
Scary enough?
Source: "RENAISSANCE AND MANIFEST DESTINY
PLATFORM STATEMENT
MARK P. BROWN
DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE
U.S. CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN
OHIO 15TH DISTRICT" .pdf file downloaded from www.markbrownforcongress.com on June 4, 2004 - no longer accessible
(edit for typo and formatting)
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
