Posted on 05/16/2006 7:51:54 AM PDT by The_Eaglet
By John Lofton, Editor
Q: Where are you on the abortion issue?
A: I’m against abortion.
Q: Any exceptions?
A: I assume there would be - I would assume there are certain situations where there are - where abortion is necessary for life saving, something like that. But I am essentially not pro-abortion. It goes against my moral standings.
Q: Okay, what about in the case of rape?
A: (pause) I could not say that, yes, abort the fetus. I - it…
Q: Okay.
A: And I’m not saying that —.
Q: I understand.
A: I have all the answers, and everything should be my way. I mean…
Q: Well, I’m just trying to find out what you believe. So you would not be for abortion in the case of rape?
A: No, it would have to be an extreme situation and I don’t know what that situation would be, other than a life saving situation.
Q: How about incest?
A: (Sighs, pauses) I cannot give you a definitive answer on that. I would have to say that I am against abortion — all forms of abortion. I will take that stand, but it doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t give into something like incest. It’s that — I — have to study it. I have to talk to people. I would have to talk to people on both sides of this issue because that is a very, very sensitive issue. An extreme —.
Q: But, it seems to me that the status of the unborn baby, whether the unborn baby is there as a result of rape or incest, or just a married couple, is totally unchanged. That under no circumstances, if you’re against the killing of the unborn baby for married couples, then it’s the humanity and status of the child that does not change in rape or incest.
A: You’re correct, John, and that’s pushing me up against the wall, so I have to take the stand for life, not murder.
Q: Now the exceptions that you mentioned - that was, the so-called life of the mother or health of the mother —.
A: Yes, my understanding is that some women die during pregnancy and there’s a choice sometimes that a physician might have to make. I’m not a physician, so I don’t know when that circumstance would arise, but do I save this child, and let the mother die, or do I save the mother and let the child die? I don’t know how that decision is made. Does the doctor make it? Does the mother make it? Is the doctor required by law to save the mother?
Q: Shall I assume that you were against removing of the feeding tube of Terri Schiavo?
A: Yes. I felt that she deserved to live. I have, I have - yeah, that was uncalled for. I was bothered by that. I would have said keep the feeding tube in, and keep her living.
Q: How would you characterize what was done to her?
A: It could be as severe as saying she was murdered. I’m a little cautious in calling people murderers. I think that the people involved with that decision perhaps didn’t think didn’t have a - were perhaps a little bit delusional, including the judge who ruled that.
Q: Are you a Christian?
A: Yes.
Q: What kind of Christian?
A: I’m a baptized Catholic, currently at odds with the Catholic Church over the immigration issue. I feel like they’ve taken it into their own hands. I worship at a non-denominational church - Saddleback Community Church under Rick Warren.
Q: What do you think you as President could do to stop abortion?
A: Perhaps an Executive Order. Influence. Speaking in public. Making it somewhat of a priority - it’s not a priority. And I think the President has the power to do this. The President has such tremendous influence over setting national standards, morality and in custom and in attitude and conduct. And I would bet though that Congress would challenge a President who made that declaration and maybe then fight. Well, let’s fight about it. Let’s fight about it on the floor of the House. I’m going to bring the issue forward. There will be an Executive Order. There will be none under any circumstances. Now you, Congress, you fight it out for the next five years and try to overturn it and if you don’t like it un-elect me. In other words, I’m going to do this out of conscience. I’m gonna take the side of life, rather than taking the side of murder. And again, those are hard words. Abortionists, man, they flip out when you call them murderers, but they are.
Q: The truth hurts, doesn’t it? Now, how do you, Jim Gilchrist, view the Roe v. Wade decision?
A: It never should have happened.
Q: Is it law?
A: It’s a court precedent, and I don’t look at it as law, other than it’s a benchmark that the pro-abortionists use to say, hey, this is okay, I’m not doing anything wrong. Mind your own business and go away. Well, lady, this is like the seventh abortion you’ve had in the last four years! Yea, but it’s my body and Roe v. Wade says it’s legal so leave me alone. You’re kind of dealing with a mental illness mentality, and a very selfish mentality and a very irresponsible mentality and you can’t beat ‘em to death on it. It doesn’t mean that you have to tolerate them, but we do anyway, but the best way is to try to convince them and put some guilt into their conscience so maybe they can look at the issue in a different way. Roe v. Wade is nothing but a court decision. To me it’s not rule of law, but a judge looks at it another way and I guess considers it rule of law.
Q: What do you think South Dakota should do if the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down their anti-abortion law?
A: Now, my conscience says that they should ignore it, but, here I am preaching the rule of law, then if we have immigration laws, then what business does the Catholic Church have, and other religious orders have in telling their parishioners to violate that law? Where do I go here? This is, but then I could split it this way - we’re talking about life rather than someone trespassing - over our international borders. Now I think that with that argument, I could make a valid argument, that is saying this law should not be respected because what law would order a society to kill people? Yeah, I would feel comfortable with that. I would feel comfortable with that, so I would say, yeah, just ignore the law.
Q: So South Dakota should just ignore the Supreme Court?
A: Yes, I would tell them to defy any legislation or any ruling against their decision (anti-abortion law) because the argument is - look, we’re ruling for life. We’re talking about human life here. We’re not talking about an immigration issue, or burglary issue. We’re talking about human life here, and with that argument I bet you could win it!
Q: I’m told you that you are not merely a supporter, but an enthusiastic supporter of the war in Iraq.
A: I’m for democracy. I’m against tyranny - which was the case in Iraq. I am resistant in one area - I don’t want to send more troops in there. I want to train more Iraq-e troops to take over the fighting..
Q: Alright, but do you think that —.
A: Should we cut and run? No, absolutely not.
Q: No, but should we have gone there in the first place? Are you for - were you for Bush’s plan to go in in the first place and bomb Iraq?
A: Originally, I was not. I did not want to get us into this tangle. I’ve met people who live there - in the Mideast. Two who have been in Iran, in Iraq, friends - one, who I served in Viet Nam - one went there after Viet Nam - they both have the same story - it is not the kind of mess you want to start over there. But an economic boycott was not doing any good.
Q: Why is it our business to economically boycott Iraq? Why is it any of our business what kind of government there is in Iraq?
A: That apparently was the business from the White House. That White House apparently determined that because of -.
Q: Yeah, I know.
A: Saddam Hussein —.
Q: Yeah, I know. I was just trying to determine if you were for their rationale for the war. You did say that you were originally against it.
A: I was.
Q: And now that we’re in it, we have to stay - how long?
A: Stay, until the war is turned over, and that I want that war turned over to the Iraqi soldiers yesterday, and let our people be logistical supporters. In other words, they’ll be in the center, we’ll be protectors, it bothers me a great deal to see these young men and women die.
(On the Herb Steck radio talk show on November 30, 2005, Gilchrist said he was “with the President in lock-step on Iraq. I am not a cut-and-run kind of guy….because some handwringers and whiners are upset.”
On this same program, when the host notes there have been substantial cuts in Medicaid because of budget cuts, Gilchrist says such cuts are “wrong,” that Medicaid should be going only to American citizens and not illegal immigrants. He says a little later, regarding companies that employ illegal aliens, that the Border Patrol should “seize their property” and this property “should go to the law enforcement agency that makes the bust to help fund their program.”)
Q: Me too. What about the draft? Where are you on the draft?
A: Against it. I would be against the draft - I think it would create such upheaval. Now, there is a time for the draft. If we’re attacked - of course, we need a draft. In a major conflict, of course we’re going to need a draft. There is a good point about a draft. It did seem to make young men and women grow up into young men. Men grew up a lot faster and mature a lot faster. A peace-time draft, and a draft in general was a good thing for maturing a society. But if it encourages us into foreign nations, I don’t think it’s such a good idea. I think we end up killing off — what’s left over is people marching in the states under the Mexican flag, for example.
Q: When do you think America should go to war?
A: When there is an outright assault on American territory. The World Trade Center is an example. But I think the war — and I support the war and I would have encouraged going into Afghanistan as opposed to Iraq and if Afghanistan was the source of that attack I think we did the right thing by taking out Al-Qaeda.
Q: Church and state. What’s the proper relationship, in your judgment, between church and state, between God and government?
A: Separate.
Q: God and government should be separated?
A: Yes, but I think we have our moral foundation. The foundation of our country - our Constitution came from our Judeo-Christianity background, and it has a place in moral conduct, but I would draw the line where a Cardinal…
Q: No, I’m not talking about the Catholic church. I’m talking about God and government. To what extent does the Scripture talk about the civil government and about how God’s Word ought to govern the civil government?
A: Oh, it’s a good thing. That’s how we get our morality — in God we trust, the 10 Commandments. I’m all for it. In the courtroom - absolutely, and in our schools. There’s nothing wrong with that. It teaches morality - it’s a code of conduct. It’s upsetting about what they did to the judge in Alabama. You know the judge I’m talking about.
Q: Roy Moore.
A: Yeah, Roy Moore.
Q: Who did you vote for in 2004 for President?
A: I voted for Mr. Peroutka.
(In a recent address in Tampa, Florida, to the Constitution Party’s National Committee, Gilchrist, criticizing Cardinal Roger Mahoney’s pro-illegal immigrant position which includes giving sanctuary to illegal aliens, said: “My leaning is towards the heritage of this nation more than to a religion. Religion is just a part of the nation. And what Cardinal Mahoney is trying to do is replace [the American flag] and what it represents with something akin to a Mideast theocracy. There’s nothing wrong with religion. We all believe in a God (god?) or savior of some sort. What is wrong is when you use that relation to dominate a nation and I think that is what Cardinal Mahoney is attempting to do by usurping the rule of law.”
In this same address, Gilchrist said, to applause, that illegal aliens “have no connection or respect for America’s heritage. And I have no respect for them. I hope they put them all away in jail and slam the d—- door shut forever!” He added: “At stake is the very existence of the United States of America as we’ve known it.”)
Q: What do you think of Mr. Bush’s Supreme Court appointees?
A: Let’s see —.
Q: John Roberts and Samuel Alito.
A: I like them both, but I did not study them very closely. I don’t think I dislike either of them. I think they were both conservatives. There was one that stood out a little more, and I think it may have been Robert, the one who seemed to have a more moral background. The one who - not that Alito didn’t - it may have been that Roberts was the last one to be appointed, but I remember them both.
Q: A quick related question. What is the first thing that you think ought to guide a judge?
A: (Pause) The rule of law, along with his conscience. A reasonable man’s conscience — a reasonable woman’s conscience. And I may be playing with words here.
Q: What about God’s Word, Scripture?
A: Yes, but should we become a theocracy? No.
Q: What about capital punishment. Where are you on that?
A: I’m for it.
Q: What about Federal aid to Katrina victims?
A: I would prefer that it came from private donations, but with a cost that big, yeah, I would have to support it (Federal aid.) — salvaging that part of the country.
Q: Alright, what about the Federal Government’s role in education? Should it have any role?
A: No. That should be local. Only somewhat of a supervisory role. But to come down and say you can’t have - here we go - Ten Commandments. Next thing they’re going to do is outlaw the American flag in the classroom.
Q: What about foreign aid?
A: Against it except for an extreme circumstance, or if it were very, very limited. Not the kind of foreign aid we’re doing now.
Q: So some kind of foreign aid would be Constitutional?
A: Yeah, yeah, but I’m reluctant with that, John, because - once you start making exceptions it starts getting carried away - I would have to say extremely limited foreign aid - and that could be either none or very little.
Q: What about what they call free trade? You for that? Where are you on the tariff question, or the free trade?
A: I’m for getting rid of taxes, if that’s what you’re calling free trade.
Q: No, no all these international agreements.
A: Against it - I don’t see any benefit to the American middle class - American society in general over this NAFTA and CAFTA - this stuff. I see it as a negative. Long ago when they first started it it sounded like it might be a good idea - but Congress, in its typical wisdom, does not consider the public’s opinion. They just go ahead and pass things.
Q: I assume that you agree that private individual’s have a right to keep and bear arms?
A: Yeah.
Q: What about homosexual marriage?
A: NO!, no.
Q: Is homosexuality a sin?
A: I don’t know if it is so much a sin as it is a malady. And in Scripture, yes, it is a sin.
Q: Should it be outlawed? Should sodomy be outlawed?
A: (Sighing) Hmmm, you notice I’m stalling here. Why am I stalling? Why am I stalling, John?
Q: I give up. Why are you stalling?
A: Because I am unable to give a yes or no decision. If I have to say yes or no, then I would say, yes, it should be outlawed. It is unnatural. Do I want to go picking fights with homosexuals? No. But would I support any covert attempt to or support any outward attempt to adjust our Constitution to allow homosexual marriage? No, it’s got to remain between one man and one woman, not between one man and several women, not between two men, and not between one women and several men. One on one, one man and one woman.
Q: Should we get the U.S. out of the U.N. and the U.N. out of the U.S.?
A: As soon as possible.
Q: Treaties, finally. Semi-finally, are there treaties you think we ought to have with any country that requires us to go to war if that country was attacked, and if that country was attacked, what might those countries be? We have many of them by the way.
A: I’m thinking of the countries, and I’m thinking of what happened in Viet Nam and what a mess that was because of the SEATO Treaty. I’m thinking of NATO, and apparently that’s how we got involved in Kosovo, although that wasn’t a blood letting event, that was more of a foreign aid event, and some quiet policing. I would hate to see our mother country, England, I hate to call her our mother, where most of our founders came from - I would hate to see England attacked and over run and us just do nothing. I would have to have some exceptions, because I think once you take down England they’re going to come for us. In the case of a threat as in WWII with Germany, I would have to consider some sort of treaties. The absence of that threat, probably not.
Q: You’ve said that if Sen. John McCain is the GOP Presidential nominee you would think seriously about seeking the Presidential nomination of the Constitution Party.
A: Oh, that would be an easy win. I’d get all the Republicans voting for me.
Q: Does that mean that if the Republicans nominate anyone but McCain that you won’t think seriously about the Constitution Party nomination?
A: No, no, they better nominate someone who first emphasizes bringing order to the rule of law, ending the war in Iraq, preserving our Social Security system, getting the Federal Government out of education and returning it to local jurisdiction, local supervision. And a number of other things, solving the immigration, actually one of the biggest priorities would be the immigration issue.
Q: Sure.
A: To stop the invasion and then fundamental tax reform which would mean the repeal of the income tax and replace that with tariff and excise taxes and national sales tax. Can you imagine for the rest of your life never having to fuss with an income tax form again?
Q: Well, that sounds good, and more than once you’ve embraced the rule of law, and of course everybody in this country babbles all the time how they’re for the rule of law, well, where do you think law comes from, and how do you, Jim Gilchrist, decide if a given law is even law?
A: Excellent question, John, and it’s a stumbling one. I wish I was an attorney —.
Q: Oh, my gosh! Jim, Jim, Jim! I can’t let that go! No, don’t do that! How do we know which laws are valid, and which are just made up by man and — what is the origin and the first source of law?
A: I would say the Bible. And the Bible wasn’t really set laws, it was rules of conduct. It was more like what would Jesus do, sort of applications and they became laws. They became the foundation of our Constitution, of our Bill of Rights, and in addition to that, there are things that maybe aren’t in the Bible, but just simple things you do, you open the door for somebody walking in behind you in a store, I mean you don’t let it slam in their face.
It’s part religion and part common sense, and to me it’s a combination of things, but the heart of it, the root of it comes from religion, which is justice and fairness and other things. And I’m not an expert in the Bible, so that’s why this is a difficult question for me to answer, but I know we have our foundation on religion, and Christianity, and there’s nothing wrong with that, I think it has worked to our benefit and what I don’t want is people like the ACLU getting their influence into legislation - while they claim they have as much right as you or I, or anyone else to have input. But, I disagree with their premise, and their premise is really communism, which is really ignoring that commandment which says thou shalt not steal, which I feel communists are a bunch of thieves. That’s pretty much what I see - that’s kind of harsh language, but I really feel that way.
Q: No, it’s true - sad to say -
A: And so are the anarchists that follow them.
Q: And so is our government in many ways.
A: Oh, yes. It’s organized, it’s legalized, organized crime. And that’s why we have the thing called, irrevocable self-governance, that our founding fathers had been through this back in the fourteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeen hundreds and they knew what it was like to have a government telling you what your were going to do, how you were going to do it, where you are going to live, who are you going to give worship to, etc. All those horrible things that happened under the English rule, and they were going to guarantee that it wasn’t going to happen here as long as we had competent individuals to maintain it. I don’t have all the perfect answers.
Q: Let me ask you this on immigration and this is the last one. What is it, you think is the most important thing we ought to know about a person prior to letting him come into our country to become a citizen? In other words, if you had one, two, a couple of things you could say, now look, this is the kind of person, they have to believe “x” — what is the most important thing to admitting a person and allowing them to become a citizen of our country?
A: Loyalty to the United States of America, and I don’t mean bigotry.
Q: You mean to the government?
A: Loyalty to the nation - to our Constitution. Not to the government, to the Constitution, and that’s part of the assimilation process, which the immigration department seems to do a pretty good job with. All the legal immigrants I have met are more passionate in their love for America, it seems, than I am, and I am the founder of the Minuteman Project. They can literally bring you to tears they are so passionate, and it’s so wonderful to be around people who love this country so much more than you could imagine. And that’s a little bit depressing, no I’d say disappointing is that, John, they love America more than our home grown citizens love America, because they came from somewhere else, and now they’re here and they see the dramatic difference.
Q: Fine. One brief comment I might add. So that’s your number one thing, their loyalty to the Constitution. You know there’s a lot about our country I despise, Jim. I don’t know what America is anymore. I don’t know what this country stands for anymore. We have a President who says what is great about America is that you can worship God, or have no God, everybody can make up his own religion, his own right and wrong, go worship, not worship, I mean what does America stand for anymore? Mush!
A: I agree, John, and like you I feel like an “American without a country.” And you know what? We’re not alone.
Q: And you know what? And now I have to say something that is really controversial. You know that the people that really feel that they’re Americans without a country - I think that they’re Christians. They’re Christians first.
A: Yes, I agree.
Q: And that’s why I think the most important thing about an individual is: who is your God? What God do you worship? What authority are you under when no one is looking? The most important thing you can ask someone who wants to come to our country is: “Are you a Christian?”
A: So your [number one thing] would be “Are you a Christian?” Mine would be: “Do you support our Constitution?”
Q: But, there’s a problem there. When they take an oath to do that, as new citizens, who are they swearing to, Jim, if they’re not Christians who believe in the true God?
A: Then they’re swearing to the power of government. Is that what you are saying?
Q: No, I’m just saying - well, yes, in a way, implicitly, they are doing that. But I would say that an oath taken by someone who doesn’t believe in God is just a joke.
A: Oh, yeah.
Q: But, the problem there is that they took an oath to the law of the Constitution, and they swear that they are going to be loyal if they don’t believe in the true God, who are they swearing to? What good is the oath, or word of the unbeliever? Or, to put it more succinctly: Never believe an unbeliever.
A: Hmmmm.
Q: We can’t let people in this country willy-nilly, regardless of their religion and pretend that someone’s religion doesn’t matter when this is what matters most!
A: And how would we possibly restrict people, let’s say Muslims or Jews, from coming here? How would we possibly do that?
Q: Well, first of all you would have to have people who actually believe what I just said, and then the mechanics of it would be worked out the way you would work out anything. I mean if you looked at the list of questions potential citizens are asked — and there’s a whole list of them — none have anything to do with what God do you worship, what authority are you under when no one’s looking? Potential citizens are, however, asked a whole bunch of other things such as: How old are you? You have to pledge to fight — , blah, blah, blah. And that last one bothers me, just a blanket pledge to fight for the country, regardless of what kind of war we’re in.
A: I must go. I have another appointment.
Q: Thank you. You’ve been more than generous with your time.
A: Alright, John.
Q: God bless you and your family
A: You take care, you too.
Q: Thank you.
" It did seem to make young men and women grow up into young men"
If thats true, then we shouldn't have a draft.
Ouch, you think they would have cleaned up the interview a little instead of adding in all the little side comments..
Yeah, I hate it when young women grow up to be young men. I think it requires some kind of operation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.