David Perry for NC House, District 19 Find Us On Facebook Follow Us On Twitter Follow Us On Instagram
Perry 2018
David Perry for NC House
Volunteer Donate With PayPal
Proud Member of the Libertarian Party New Hanover County Libertarian Party
New Hanover County Libertarian Party of North Carolina
North Carolina Libertarian Party
National

Gun Rights

Abortion

The most fundamental individual freedom we possess is the right to live. No person or group has the right to extinguish our life unnecessarily. As our human society has evolved, we have recognized that there sometimes is a legitimate justification for this, such as self-defense, defense of another, or as a punishment for the purposeful murder of another, etc. Life is precious. So these justifications should be the rare exception, and not the rule.

What I Believe

Unborn and newly born children are the most vulnerable humans on earth. They have done no wrong, are completely innocent, but are incapable of defending themselves. Yet, our society, in it's zest for a lifestyle of freedom that carries no responsibility, has legalized the murder of 40-50 million of these innocent children PER YEAR! In my opinion, abortion on-demand is the most abhorrent practice in human history.

Even though I am a Christian, when I talk about abortion as a matter of public policy, I leave my faith out of it. Some pro-life advocates like to make religous arguments, and quote scriptures to demonstrate the evils of abortion. Since we live in a society that values freedom of religion, I belive these arguments are misplaced. There are a vast array of scientific and logical arguments available to the advocate of life. There is no need to bring matters of faith into an argument being debated in the public sphere.

Nearly all Americans believe, like our Founding Fathers did, that government has a responsibility to protect our unalienable right to life. Nearly all Americans believe that someone who intentionally murders another human being (outside of the mother's womb) deserves to be apprehended by our government and severely punished. The only point of contention is whether or not an unborn child constitutes a human life, worthy of protection by our government. I can point to a great deal of scientific and rational evidence that suggests that unborn children should be worthy of this protection. At conception, a new human life is indeed born. The DNA is human. The DNA is unique to the individual unborn child (except in cases of identical siblings). Human embryos and fetuses are not just collections of cells. They are living organisms that are growing and developing.

Nevertheless, I can't prove this assertion. However, the pro-choice advocate can't prove their assertion to the contrary either. The reason for this is simple. It is an ethical question, and not one that can be solved by scientific inquiry. However, I feel that it's in the best interest of humanity to take a "Pascal's Wager" approach to this question. If we treat unborn children as fully human and defend their lives, what will ultimately be lost if it turns out they were never "truly human" afterall? Nothing, or at least not much. However, if unborn children are "truly human", but we fail to recognize unborn children as human beings and fail to protect their lives, then humanity will have to endure the collective guilt of killing billions of innocent human beings. It is simply a wiser course of action to take a broad view of what constitutes human life.

I do believe in a couple of justifications for abortion in rare cases. If the health and life of the expectant mother is in serious jeopardy, I have no problem legally allowing for abortion in these dire, but rare, circumstances. Some will argue that the child is still innocent, and that the right thing to do is for the mother to sacrifice her life for the child's. Those are indeed noble sentiments. However, equally noble sentiments of pacifism also come from groups like the Amish, who will always turn the other cheek instead of defending themselves. However, I don't believe it's the responsibility of government to enforce this type of noble self-sacrifice. Finally, I would make exceptions for abortions in cases of actual (not statutory) rape. The overwhelming majority of abortions in this country are performed on mothers who consentually chose to have sexual relations. However, instead of taking responsibility for the consequences of that choice, these mothers shirk their responsibility. However, in the case of rape, the mother has NOT made a willing choice to engage in sexual relations. They now must bear the burden of a pregnancy that they are in no way responsible for. On a personal level, I would encourage a raped woman to go ahead and have their child. Children are a great joy, once you get over the intiial shock of it all. A raped woman may indeed find consolation in their newborn child. That said, I would not force this option on a woman who was raped.

What Will I Do About It?

Unfortunately, not much. This is a federal issue. Since the US Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in 1973, women have had a federally recognized right to abortion on-demand. Even though I believe this case was wrongly decided, there is very little I can do to change this from the North Carolina General Assembly. Unless the US Supreme Court changes it's mind, or a pro-life amendment to the United States Constitution is ratified, abortion on-demand will remain the law of the land.

If I were running for President of the United States, I could apoint new justices to the US Supreme Court who are pro-life. If I were running for United State Senate, I would have a vote in the confirmation of any new justices of the US Supreme Court. If I were running for the US House of Representatives, I might be able to vote on the impeachment of a US Supreme Court Justice. In fact, if I belonged to the US Congress (in either house) I could at least vote to propose a pro-life amendment to the US Constitution.

As it is, once I am elected to the NC General Assembly, there will be little I can do to combat abortion. If a pro-life amendment to the US Constiution is actually proposed, it would need to be ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures. In that case, I would get to vote for it. However, no such amendment has been, or is likely to be, proposed soon. The only thing I will promise, is that I will NOT use taxpayer money to fund abortions, or to fund organizations like Planned Parenthood who provide these abortions. Women may have a recognized right to abortion on-demand, but they don't have the right to force taxpayers to pay for it. Sick and twisted organizations, like Planned Parenthood, who fund their operations through the murder of unborn children, do not have the right to be helped in their endeavours by taxpayer money.

Some states have tried to regulate abortion away by imposing harsh regulations against abortion providers. I will NOT be party to this sort of nonsense. Only regulations that directly and substantially protect out life, liberty, and property should ever be enacted. I will not compromise my principles. There is a right way to go about this and a wrong way. I encourage everyone to contact their federal representatives, and eliminate on-demand abortion the right way - through a pro-life amendment to the US Constitution.

Paid for by the Committee to Elect David A. Perry

© 2018 - Committee to Elect David A. Perry
235 Silver Sloop Way, Carolina Beach, NC 28428

Direct Legal Inquiries to: Christopher M. Nance, Treasurer
512 Martin Street, Carthage, NC 28327