The Senate Race and the Right to Choose
by Ari Armstrong, October 27, 2004
I got a call from a friendly female supporting Ken Salazar for U.S. Senate. I took the call on October 26 just after 5 pm. The conversation went something like the following.
Caller: I'm calling for Citizens for a Strong Senate. Are you aware of the candidates' positions on the right to choose?
Ari: The right to choose what?
Caller: Ken Salazar supports a woman's right to choose. Pete Coors opposes a woman's right to choose, even in cases of rape or incest. Ken Salazar also supports stem-cell research.
Ari: Do you know what Ken Salazar's position is on the right to choose a tool for self-defense?
Caller: No I don't.
Ari: He often opposes that right. Coors supports it. Do you know what Ken Salazar's position is on the right to choose how to direct one's income?
Caller: No I don't.
Ari: Ken Salazar very often opposes that right to choose. Coors more often -- not always but more often -- supports that individual right to choose. Are you aware of that?
Caller: No I'm not.
Ari: Maybe that would be a good question for your bosses. Are you doing this because you believe in it or because you're getting paid to do it?
Caller: Because I'm getting paid.
Ari: Ken Salazar supports one right to choose, but he opposes many other rights to choose. Perhaps this would be something for Citizens for a Strong Senate to consider.
I'm voting for Pete Coors for U.S. Senate, even though he opposes the right to choose an abortion and the right to choose one's medicine. (Coors opposes medical marijuana.) On net, Coors supports the right to choose more often than Salazar does. Salazar supports the right to choose an abortion, but he also opposes the right to choose one's medicine. He opposes the right of two independent parties to choose a wage. He opposes the right of people to choose health services on a free market. He opposes the right of people to choose how to prepare for retirement.
Actually, Salazar's attack ads are what clarified my vote for Coors. Coors believes it's morally okay to rationally pursue one's own interests in business. He favors many economic freedoms that Salazar opposes. The fact that Salazar beats up Coors for his virtues, and only occasionally for his flaws, demonstrates to me that Salazar has no business setting national policy.
Later the same evening, Pro-Choice Colorado called to tell me Sue Windels, the Democratic candidate for State Senate District 19, is also allegedly "pro-choice." I explained to the caller that Windels is anti-choice on almost every subject. She opposes a woman's right to choose the tools of self-defense, among many other things. The caller, who holds a concealed carry permit, sympathized with my point.
Windels's opponent, Jessica Corry, on the other hand, is strongly pro-choice on matters of income, property, and self-defense, which is why I'm going to vote for her. On the issue of abortion, Corry tries to straddle the fence: "The decision about abortion legalization should be made by the people, not by the courts. Given that Roe v. Wade is currently the law of the land, however, I will actively support efforts to minimize the number of women and men facing unplanned pregnancies. I also support the regulation of abortion clinics to ensure safety for women, and Colorado's current laws, including the rights of parents to be notified when their minor children are considering having an abortion." Thus Windels has tagged Corry as "anti-choice," and that a huge reason Corry is likely to lose this election.