October 06, 2008 12:28 pm
—
Editor’s note: Each Monday the Daily Progress will publish a question-and-answer story featuring District 11 state representative hopefuls Chuck Hopson (Democrat incumbent) and Brian Walker (Republican challenger).
By Kelly Young
kyoung@jacksonvilleprogress.com
When does the zygote achieve personhood? When should the fetus gain legal protection? conception? implantation? birth?
Hopson: The Bible teaches us that God knew us in our mother’s wombs. This is why I strongly oppose the current culture of abortion on demand.
Watson: The abortion debate should be real simple … if you believe as I do that life begins at conception, the logic that follows requires you to believe that any taking of that life after conception is murder. This is how I feel, and it is the reason I think Roe v. Wade should be overturned, and it is also the reason I’ve been endorsed by the Texas Alliance for Life and my opponent has not been endorsed by a single pro-life group since he’s been in office.
This is also the reason I’ve been endorsed by pro-family/pro-life individuals like Phyllis Schlafly and Cathie Adams of the Eagle Forum, Ronald Reagan’s Attorney General Ed Meese, and former presidential candidate Governor Mike Huckabee. I was asked recently to write an article for Governor Mike Huckabee’s website ( HYPERLINK "http://www.huckpac.com" www.huckpac.com) about my pro-life beliefs and in that article I noted “without life, we cannot have liberty or the pursuit of happiness.” I will always believe that, and I will never waiver in my pro-life convictions no matter how the political winds change.
In what cases do you feel abortion is permissible? rape? incest? danger to the health of the mother?
Watson: The so-called “exceptions” is where the debate gets the toughest, but if you believe life begins at conception then you have to believe that there is an innocent precious soul inside the mother’s body no matter what caused her to get pregnant. In other words, it’s not the innocent child’s fault that his or her existence is the result of rape or incest. As far as the question about the prudence of an abortion if the life of the mother is on the line if child birth occurs, this is where I get the most conflicted because now we are talking about two lives. However, I’ve been told that modern day technology and medicine prevents these circumstances from happening frequently, if at all. I personally would like to see abortion legally banned for the former two exceptions and the status quo preserved for the latter, and although I don’t mind saying exactly where I stand, I must tell you that once I’m state representative there is not a lot that I can do to change the status quo until the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; which is one more reason why this next Presidential election is so important. My fellow Republican John McCain has promised us that he’ll appoint only strict constructionist judges from the bench, however, my opponent’s Democrat presidential nominee Barack Obama, who claimed that Clarence Thomas is the worst modern day appointee to the bench, will appoint typical Democrat liberal judicial activists like Ginsburg and Souter if he is elected. And, we all know what we’ll get from these liberal Democrat judges.
Hopson: I believe that abortion is permissible in the case of rape, incest and when the mother’s life is in danger.
Do pregnant mothers have the right to terminate their pregnancy? If not, why not? If so, where did this right come from?
Hopson: Again, only in the case of rape, incest or when the mother's life is in danger.
Walker: The “right” that is discussed in Roe v. Wade was made up by liberal judicial activists like I mentioned in the previous question. There is no “right” for a mother to terminate her pregnancy found within the Constitution of the United States. A liberal court simply created that right. Today we call that “legislating from the bench,” and this practice has to stop.
How do you feel about advocacy groups which are fighting to overturn Roe v. Wade? What would the result be if abortion was banned?
Walker: I think they are great, and I say keep up the good work. Like I mentioned above, I’ve been endorsed by the Texas Alliance for Life because of my pro-life beliefs and my opponent hasn’t been endorsed by a single pro-life group since he’s been in office. On the contrary, there are an ample amount of liberal feminist pro-choice groups like Annie’s List that seek to fund liberal Democrat politicians like my opponent. Since Chuck made an ill attempt at clairvoyance in last week’s questions in this debate series when he predicted wrongly that eventually I “will be financially supported by the same interests who are promoting” the Trans Texas Corridor which I absolutely oppose, I can only assume since Chuck is a liberal Democrat, who pretends to be a conservative back home in the district, who has never received the endorsement of a pro-life group, he’ll probably receive funding from feminist pro-choice groups like Annie’s List.
Hopson: I believe these groups have every right to assemble and make their voices heard in a peaceful, non violent manner and I have continually voted to support this right in the legislature.
Scientist claim that embryonic stem cells have the potential to cure countless diseases, but to date, embryonic stem cells have not been found to cure any diseases. Are the possible benefits of stem cell research worth the costs?
Hopson: My mother and my father in-law were both victims of Alzheimers Disease. I would support research aimed at curing this and other diseases so other families don’t have to go through this pain. However, we don’t have to use embryonic stem cells to do this. We are making progress in research using adult stem cells.
Walker: Chuck Hopson claims at home in East Texas to be a “pretty conservative guy,” however, you can tell a lot about a politician by looking at how they really vote in the Legislature and by who they run around with. In this debate series we’ve mentioned several of Chuck’s many liberal votes that do not match up to him being a “pretty conservative guy,” but it’s also important to look at Chuck’s friends in Austin. If you go to http://www.2020pac.com you’ll find that Chuck is a member of the Texas 20 20 PAC along with other liberal Democrat legislators like Mark Homer, Juan Garcia, Jose Menendez, and David Farabee. Although they claim to be voices of independence, these are the same legislators who joined Chuck in voting to give in-state college tuition to illegal aliens, voted for the nursing home tax, voted to allow certain counties to increase the tax on gasoline, and many other liberal Democrat party lines votes. However, more importantly, you’ll find that Chuck’s friends have a lot more in common in their beliefs about the sanctity of life. Although Chuck will probably claim to be against embryonic stem cell research because he knows the good conservative folks of our district demand it, by digging deep you’ll find that Chuck’s buddies are willing to hone up to their advocacy for human cloning, genetic manipulation, and more embryonic stem cell research. I, on the other hand, will never advocate or run around with the folks in Austin who advocate for the destruction, manipulation, and exploitation of human life whether it be through abortions, embryonic stem cell research, or any other form of scientific exploitation.
If stem cells are proven to do all that scientists claim they can do, would you support the creation of embryos for the specific use of stem cell harvesting?
Walker: No.
Hopson: I don't support human cloning nor do I support the creation of embryos for cell harvesting.
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.