JL Mealer (R) – 2018 Candidate Survey Responses

Candidate: JL Mealer

Party: Republican

District: 7

Seat Sought: State Senate

In the 2018 secular candidate survey, candidates we asked to measure their support for each of the following statements on a scale of 1-10; 1 meaning “Strongly Disagree” and 10 meaning “Strongly Agree”.

Below are the candidate’s responses exactly as written by the candidate. (No corrections were made for spelling or punctuation.)

***

Responses

1) Public tax dollars should not be used to fund private religious education, either directly through tax credit scholarships or indirectly through Empowerment Scholarship Accounts.

Response: 1- Strongly Disagree

Comments:

While this sounds like a theocratic ideal, it is not. Churches of all types take in children and homeless people while also raising funds for these same groups. To further an education which is not based on what has become a perverted “left leaning” agenda, we can at least hope the faith based schools will go around these ‘government is the master’ type of issues.

This is not mixing church and state, but instead giving people a wider range of education option for their children, which they have by right and according to the Arizona Constitution.

2) Government should not endorse or legitimize religious medical practice including faith-based healing, religious vaccination exemptions, or by allowing physical abuse of children for religious reasons.

Response: 9

Comments:

I agree with this, however, when the government hides behind tort law protections when they mandate vaccinations rather than making themselves liable for an inoculation gone bad, they completely destroy the “vaccines are safe” claim they make. All tort protections utilized by the government or medical staffs in conjunction with the forced vaccinations must be removed… This way, they will make sure that little Johnny and Little Lucy are not pumped full of toxins and instead get the correct, safe vaccinations.

3) Terminally ill, mentally capable persons with a prognosis of 6 months or less to live should have the right to obtain a prescription for that brings about a peaceful death.

Response: 7

Comments:

All adults with full use of their faculties has the complete right to choose whether they live or die, HOWEVER, the government must not and should not ever supply the means to end one’s life whether through AHCCCS or the local VA. Terminally ill persons who are in full use of their faculties should be allowed to garner a prescription to end their suffering, although there are other means to end one’s life, having someone else do it for you seems an easier way to make that ill-fated choice. Family members should never be able to make that choice for someone else at any time.

4) Public schools should not teach “creationism” or “intelligent design” as viable alternatives to scientific theories on the origin of life.

Response: 1- Strongly Disagree

Scientific Theories are not proof of anything, they are merely theories.
One can say Creation is also a theory as well, but it is faith and believing in a that historical ‘theory’ so, it too is based upon faith.
Where do we get theories from? There is no set method for creating philosophical theories or mathematical theories. There is one for creating scientific theories, however. This is called the Deductive Nomological Theory of Science, with Falsificationism. The underlying idea of the method is:
We develop a hypothesis that there are certain natural laws or certain effects of natural laws. These hypotheses must be falsifiable: they must entail predictions which are in principle testable and could be false.
We predict observations we can make if the hypothesis is true.
We check to see if these predictions come true; if they do, we know that hypothesis may be true and may continue to believe or use that hypothesis; if the predictions prove false, we reject the hypothesis.
We continue to try to falsify the view (that is, we continue to make and test predictions).

Albert Einstein: “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

In my opinion, they should be taught hand in hand and one actually proves the other with a leap of faith either way.

5) Religious institutions should not be exempt from the requirements and restrictions of tax policy that is imposed on all non-profit and charitable organizations.

Response: 1- Strongly Disagree

Comments:

First ten words of the Bill of Rights; “Congress Shall Make No Law Respecting An Establishment of Religion…”

Regardless of what any politician or law maker feels, your proposal would be grossly against the Law and even entertaining such a plan would go against the Oath of Office of any lawmaker to defend the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Law of the state.

You’re grasping for straws here guys….

6) If a government meeting is opened with a prayer, it should be open and inclusive for representatives of all religious beliefs, including unpopular minority religions and people with no official beliefs or creed.

Response: 10- Strongly Agree

Comments:

Agreed. 100%. All parties whether religious or not should be able to make a non violent, or should be able to make a non-intentionally-offensive statement for the group to hear.

7) A statewide non-discrimination law is needed to protect all Arizonans from employment and housing discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Response: 10- Strongly Agree

Comments:

We have that law, it just needs to be enforced! The 14th Amendment clearly states that we are to have equal treatment under the law.
I would actually push for a law that mandates all of the state’s public and incorporated businesses (except those that are private businesses and not incorporated) adhere to a complete nondiscrimination law, across the board, no matter who the potential clientele may be unless that clientele is an obvious threat to the establishment and/or customers of the establishment.
We must make certain that everyone has equal rights and that NO ONE HAS MORE RIGHTS THAN OTHERS, so all hiring quotas, education related quotas and such must be removed. This would mean that NO LABELS are made and that all labels are removed and the new statement would be simply,
“The state of Arizona and all businesses within the state of Arizona shall provide full 14th Amendment protections to equal treatment under the law and under their own business standards and give no preferential treatment and no special favors to any one or any party that they do not offer to all customers and potential customers. If the a potential customer is deemed a legitimate threat to employees, to other customers and patrons or to the establishment itself, they may refuse the right to service that threatening customer until such threat is over.” Blah, blah, blah, legal notes follow….

8) A woman has a right to know if her health provider will refuse certain services, treatments, prescriptions, or withhold scientific information and options based on the provider’s sincerely held religious beliefs.

Response: 10- Strongly Agree

Comments:

Health providers could/should have a simply statement within their establishment stating whether or not they withhold certain services, treatments or prescriptions and whether they withhold scientific date based upon the personal belief of the medical care provider.

9) Comprehensive and age-appropriate sex education is a matter of public health and should be offered in public schools with parents having the right to opt-out.

Response: 9

Yes, to a degree and NOT comprehensive. Sex Ed should be strictly based upon reproductive issues and not based upon sexual desires masturbation concepts or anal ‘fun’. Age appropriate hits about the time of puberty, not pre-school or grades 1-5.

***I never had Sex Ed and up until about 12 when I saw a naked woman in a dirty magazine, did I realize their bodies were THAT MUCH different from my own. Glad I found out then, because I was married about 30 years later, I would have had a rude awakening

10) Public employees deserve a workplace free from religious proselytizing and pressure by agency heads or other persons in authority.

Response: 10- Strongly Agree

Comments:

No employer (except a church) should forces their religious beliefs upon their employees or others who interact with the business.

11) No one’s right to government services or public accommodations should ever depend on passing the scrutiny of someone else’s religious belief.

Response: 10- Strongly Agree

Comments:

The fact that this happens is absurd and the good ole boy, can’t get a job in certain communities ‘unless you are a member of such and such’ needs to be made illegal as well.

12) “God Enriches” is neither the accurate historical usage of “Ditat Deus” nor our official state motto.

Response: 1- Strongly Disagree

Comments:

Your statement makes no sense… However, “Ditat Deus” as Latin for God Enriches was most likely a very important phrase when the early pioneers crossed the Valley of Sun and were in dire need of water and stumbled across a stream. I suppose one could say “Water Enriches” or “Aquae Copia”, but when the early pioneers were in need of food, they probably did not cry out, “Corn on the cob Enriches” or “copia frumenti MANNUS” and only nut on either side of your argument would make this a huge issue.
This is the State motto. Plain and simple.
Perhaps changing it to “Evolutional theory enriches” or “evolutional doctrina auget”???
Maybe we should change the well designed “STOP” sign to “Slow Down Until You’re Not moving” sign next…

ACCURATE FACT: Ditat Deus served as the motto of the Arizona Territory from 1863 to 1912 and has served as the motto of the State of Arizona since 1912. It is displayed on the current Great Seal of Arizona.

Canddiate’s addendum to comments on question 12 received via email after return of questionnaire read as follows:

All in all, I believe that whether posting God Enriches or Ditat Deus without clarifying that Ditat Deus was in fact originally written in Latin is of little concern, because in school related studies made on the subject and on Arizona history, the motto is always explained clearly. Personally, I like my overview of it better only because it might add a bit of humor to an otherwise boring subject. Although I loved history, most children find it boring. This issue reminds me of my grade school Wallace and Ladmo Show days when a group of Christians began claiming that a character from the show known as ‘The Wizard’ was “Satanic witchery” leading to the corruption of children’s minds. Personally, I don’t know anyone who became either mentally ill or emotionally broken because of The Wizard and the outcome of ‘no issues whatsoever’ would most likely come from an Atheist child falling prey to a sign stating “God Enriches”on the wall of some ‘evil church’ concept. A church is a place where we are supposed to be able to find solace. It’s not as if the Motto was “Serve Satan” or “Ave Satanas” whereby one would be pushed to journey towards a place inherently viewed as evil incarnate full of pain and suffering. These are my views on the subject and they do not come from a religious standpoint, just one of common sense with my own taste of irony and humor.

 

www.secularaz.org

Create your website at WordPress.com
Get started
%d bloggers like this: