26 OCT 2015 Kevin F. White, Candidate for Congress OH District 8
Post in response to inquiry from Clark County Right to Life (OPINION):
First, thank you for your question requesting “my stance on life issues”. I will answer this question from two separate points-of-view. First is my personal belief as a Christian and that is simple and straightforward:
-I believe the Almighty by His sovereign hand ALONE determines when a life is created and also when a life shall end. Our efforts as followers of Christ are to care for and protect all life, period.
My second point specifically addresses the role of the federal government of the United States of America regarding life. My position is based upon the country’s founding document, the Declaration of Independence:
“…We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…” 
This founding document enumerates a federal responsibility to protect life and further prescribes the institution of government to secure this right along with liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This point is clear and therefore, while I recognize our Supreme Court in its decision “Roe v Wade” has sanctioned a woman’s right to terminate life, I firmly disagree with that interpretation and find it to be in direct conflict with the Declaration of Independence which not only precedes the authorship of the U.S. Constitution but is also a bedrock document upon which the articles of the constitution were partly inspired. I will remind the reader that our Supreme Court is not infallible and when the court errs it is incumbent for dissenting Americans to press for correction much like the “14th Amendment” did to correct the “Dred Scott Decision”, a provision which sanctioned ownership of “non-whites” as property rather than free men. This decision resulted from an errant interpretation by the court of the “Northwest Ordinance of 1787”. In conclusion and based upon the aforementioned it is the federal government’s responsibility to:
1.) Protect life including the unborn, aged and sick.
2.) Not prohibit life-saving procedures requested by a mother whose life, as well as, the life of her unborn child is at risk whereby potentially one life can be saved via a chosen medical procedure such as abortion.
3.) Not prohibit termination of an un-wanted pregnancy that results from an illegal, malicious act such as rape or incest.
4.) Not sanction the use of tax-payer monies for the purpose of terminating the life of the unborn except when deemed necessary to save the life of the mother.
5.) Not sanction the use of tax-payer monies for the purpose of terminating the life of the aged or sick.
In summary, I do believe there is a choice but not in the conventional way. If a woman consents to participating in sexual relations she then consents to preserving the life that God may create as a result of that sexual union. In the case of forced sexual unions like rape or incest whereby a woman is violated I believe the resulting pregnancy decisions rest between her, her physician and her God. In the end no matter what secular law may say we will all give an answer individually to the Almighty for the choices we make in this life.
Kevin F. White, Candidate for U.S. Congress OH Dist. 8
“Of the People, By the People & For the People”
People for Kevin F. White, Mrs. Shannon Cooper, Treasurer
1833 N. Dayton-Lakeview Rd.
New Carlisle, OH 45344
 U.S. History.org (http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/)