ARTL's 2010 Candidate Survey

Dear Pro-life Organization,

Please modify especially the underlined areas of this candidate survey to apply it to your group and the jurisdiction where you fight. A goal of ARTL's Candidate Survey is to eliminate the "wiggle room" that is so common in candidate surveys. Countless pro-abortion politicians have been "rated" as pro-life by the pro-life industry. The following seven questions are designed to bring an end to the time when pro-lifers are commonly deceived into voting for "pro-choice" politicians by our own organizations.

-American RTL

 

__________________ Right To Life Candidate Survey


Please consider your responses to the questions below and then mail your answers back to us at _______________________________ or e-mail the completed form to_______________. Both, during the primary and during the general election campaign, we will mail and email voter guides out to registered pro-lifers and post the results of our candidate questionnaires online at ________________________. We would like to hear from you before your constituents vote in the Primary / Caucus and the Convention / Assembly, so they will benefit from our Pro-life Voters' Guide – this could be to your advantage, as much as to theirs!

Your opponents will also be responding, so please reply as soon as possible with your acceptance or rejection of these pro-life principles. We hope you will agree and answer "Yes" to each of the following fundamental moral questions. Thanks!

Candidate Name: __________________________; Party: ___________

Office Sought: ____________________________

1.  Will you advocate that the government recognize and uphold the God-given, inalienable Right to Life for unborn children?

2.  Do you agree that abortion is always wrong and should be prohibited, even when the baby's father is a criminal (i.e. a rapist)? [See life-of-the mother note below.]

3.  A WorldNetDaily headline says: 'Personhood' movement explodes in 32 states. This modern movement started with Colorado's 2008 Amendment 48 and its 2010 Amendment 62. Will you support continued legal and political efforts to acknowledge that the word "person" includes every human being from beginning of the biological development of that human being?

4.  Will you oppose all public funding for all abortion providers including for Planned Parenthood, the largest and richest organization in the abortion industry?

5.  It is not immoral to let an irreversibly dying person die. But will you oppose euthanasia in it's various forms, including doctor-assisted suicide, and will you oppose acceptance of starvation by denial of food and water?

6.  While adult stem cell research is delivering real-world cures and boundless hope, it would be wrong to intentionally kill a single child even to save the whole world. Will you oppose any funding or legislation for practices that would intentionally destroy the tiniest living humans in embryonic stem cell research?

7.  Legislation that says, "Abortion shall be prohibited except..." or which requires a woman to meet some condition like parental consent or viewing an ultrasound before having her child killed, in effect re-affirms the approval of the State for such abortions. Will you refuse to support any legislation, even so-called "pro-life regulations" that, after certain conditions are met allow an abortion to continue?

We oppose every law that regulates the killing of unborn children because, regardless of the intention, such laws:

  • make abortion seem more palatable to the public and politicians, and so they

  • merely prune the abortion weed and strengthen its root, while they

  • signify that the practice is occasionally acceptable, as with any regulation,

  • violate God's command, Do not murder by re-authorizing abortion, and

  • on the surface undermine the very concept of the right to life, and

  • are like the PBA ban which took 15 years yet recognizes no rights, and

  • confuse even 'pro-lifers' into defending various 'exceptions' as good, and

  • call upon judges to uphold laws that regulate killing the innocent, and

  • turn conservative judges increasingly against the Right To Life of the unborn, and

  • give cover to pro-choice leaders who support some regulations, and they

  • could authorize millions of abortions after Roe is overturned, for they

  • will keep abortion legal if abortion is ever 'returned to the states,' for they

  • reduce the God-given right to life to a 2nd-tier negotiable matter, for they

  • are mere variations on Roe v. Wade itself which regulated abortion, and

  • can never ever stop the murder of unborn children because they

  • end with the meaning, "and then you can kill the baby."

 

We are glad to work with you on wording for pro-life legislation, and we have a nationwide network of pro-life organizations, attorneys, and public officials to draw upon. We will, however, oppose legislation and all candidates who would authorize or regulate the intentional killing of the innocent. So we invite you to call us at ______________ and arrange to come by and meet our officers to discuss strategy for ending decriminalized abortion. Feel free also to just stop by and say hello!


___________________

President
___________________

 

Please Note: When the mother's life is seriously threatened by a pregnancy, of course it is morally justified to deliver the baby but not if the intention is to kill the baby. When the life of the mother is at serious risk by her pregnancy, the goal must be to save the life of the mother and the baby if at all possible. It is just as wrong to kill the mother to save the baby, as it is to kill the baby to save the mother. There is never a medical emergency that could justify a physician who stops caring for a pregnant mom long enough to kill her child. "Legalizing" abortion, defined as the intentional killing of the unborn child, for the life of the mother, leads to repugnant acts like emergency removal of late-term babies from the womb, stopping midway into the procedure to kill the baby. If the baby dies, it is a tragedy; if the baby is intentionally killed, it is murder. If necessary to save the mom's life, the unborn baby could be delivered with the determination to care for both, and if possible, to save both the baby and mother!

[See these actual examples of published survey results and later analysis from a state survey based on the above questions.]