VIRGINIANS FORM FAMILY VALUES PAC

Virginians promoting family values create political action committee for November state elections.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Waldo Jaquith
President, Virginia Family Values PAC
waldo@jaquith.org

Charlottesville, VA, January 9, 2005 – Virginians from across the commonwealth today announced the formation of a non-partisan political action committee to strengthen family values and families’ political influence in Richmond and in the November elections.

The PAC, Virginia Family Values, will focus on the statewide elections and targeted House of Delegates races, raising money to support pro-family candidates.

Virginia Family Values has named four of the candidates that they’ll be targeting for removal from office for their anti-family votes: Delegate Bob Marshall (13), Delegate Dave Albo (42), Delegate Dick Black (32), and Delegate Bob McDonnell (84). All four candidates have consistently voted against family and parental rights, and have introduced bills that would increase the size of government while decreasing family freedoms and privacy.

“The family is the foundation of our society,” explained PAC founder Waldo Jaquith. “Every time that these legislators have been given the choice between family values and bigger government, they’ve chosen wrong. They’re way out of touch with Virginia values, and we intend to show them the door.”

More information about Virginia Family Values is available on their website, at vafamilyvalues.org.

# # #

15 thoughts on “VIRGINIANS FORM FAMILY VALUES PAC”

  1. Woohoo! It is about time that the objectives of an organization touting the term “family values” actually reflected the values of most Americans instead of those of a small minority of extremists. (Extremists who time and time again are shown to be secretly engaging in truly perverted activities all the while that they spout their holier than thou rhetoric on the pulpit. Sickening.) Thank you for taking this on!

  2. In the world of politics, the phrase “Family Values” I’ll admit has become the slogan for us on the right. However I find it kind of sneaky that Democrats would hijack the phrase and use it against Republicans. I could see myself doing the same thing in a reversal of roles, so I can’t personally slam you. But that doesn’t mean that it isn’t political trickery. It is. But I do have a couple of questions. How does limiting sexual activity such as “anal and oral sex” hurt a family? Wouldn’t sexual fidelity strengthen families? I feel kind of stupid for asking the next question, but why hasn’t your group targeted liberals who suck the brains out of an unborn infants head? It is true, afterall, that a later-staged fetus could be birthed prematurely with the use of medication.

  3. How does limiting sexual activity such as “anal and oral sex” hurt a family? Wouldn’t sexual fidelity strengthen families?

    Of course. We fully support sexual fidelity. I fail to see the conflict here.

    why hasn’t your group targeted liberals who suck the brains out of an unborn infants head?

    Why haven’t we targeted terrorists, people who kill dogs, or gun-rights groups?

    Because it has nothing to do with our PAC.

  4. But that doesn’t mean that it isn’t political trickery. It is. But I do have a couple of questions. How does limiting sexual activity such as “anal and oral sex” hurt a family? Wouldn’t sexual fidelity strengthen families?

    You accuse Democrats of political trickery (which is a valid argument, even though you’re wrong in this case), and then IMMEDIATELY engaging in political trickery yourself. You juxtapose oral/anal sex with fidelity when in fact there is no connection between the two. Then you connect oral/anal (indirectly) to hurting families. What you’re really saying is that Democrats want to hurt families and tough-love father-Bush knows how to protect families. But you have to twist the words to do so, because it just isn’t true.

    Having Bob Marshall camped out in my bedroom hurts my family.

    Shameless plug: Visit the PC Dems website and donate money!

  5. Naw, Dan, Brandon’s a real Republican, unlike these yahoo anti-sex guys. Real Republicans inevitably come around to support Virginia Family Values’ goals. It’s only these weird new nanny-state, we-own-you-body-and-soul Republicans who think that government has any business in our bedrooms. And they’re not getting any action, anyhow, so what’s it to them? :)

  6. Maybe we’re on a different track here. Let me rephrase my question. How does anal and oral sex help families? How does the use of contraceptives teach our children anything about values. I’m not a right wing extremists when it comes to the sex issue, in fact, it’d be nice if the government would stay out of the peoples bedrooms, but on one hand you’re promoting family values by name, and on the other hand you’re promoting the activities of the alternative lifestyle. I don’t see how targeting these Republicans for a Democratic replacement will do this state any good.

  7. How does anal and oral sex help families?

    You’re asking the wrong question. America doesn’t ban all behavior by default, and allow people only to engage in specific behaviors. On the contrary, we provide the greatest possible freedoms, restricting people’s behavior only when there is cause to do so.

    My question is this: how does anal sex and oral sex harm families?

    How does the use of contraceptives teach our children anything about values.

    Teach? Children? Nothing, I guess. I’m not sure why it matters. Who said anything about teaching children?

    you’re promoting the activities of the alternative lifestyle

    Alternative lifestyle? Who said anything about an alternative lifestyle? What’s alternative about condoms? Or oral sex? That’s as mainstream as Virginia life gets, Brandon!

    I don’t see how targeting these Republicans for a Democratic replacement will do this state any good.

    Democratic replacement? Who said anything about Democratic replacement? This is a non-partisan PAC — we’ll give money to any candidate who runs against these guys. I’d rather see them taken out in a primary challenge and get a real Republican in office — it’s more likely to be successful than a challenge in the general election.

    You’re inferring a lot that is neither being stated or implied. There is nothing about this PAC that a genuine small-government Republican shouldn’t get behind fully.

  8. You’re right on your first point Waldo, laws are created to restrict our freedom. As I stated before, I don’t think government should have any say about what Americans do behind closed doors. But there is a need to figure out why these laws were ratified in the first place. What series of events sparked the bill? So I guess until I inform myself about the history of Virginia’s sodomy laws, I honestly cannot give you my most accurate opinion.

    Though I can’t say one way or the other as to how I would handle this issue, I do have my values. Excuse me if they sound a little Falwellian. I do believe that sex in and of itself is a sacred act created for the sole purpose of breeding. My peers perceive the act as a form of entertainment to be engaged in whenever, whereever and with whoever. And while I don’t think the government should restrict the behavior, I also don’t think that it is representative of ‘family values’ and I bet that you’d agree.

    But what I perceive your intent to be, is to knock those who overwhelmingly support family values, out of office. I know your PAC is proclaimed as non-partisan, but why are you only targeting Republicans? Can you not find a conservative Democrat in all of Virginia who disagrees with your idea of ‘family values’?

    If you can show me that your intent is not a partisan one, I’d be the first person to jump on board. But let me ask you one more question.

    How does striking the books of sodomy laws and ending the promotion of abstinence assist in the promotion of family values?

    What I see is an expansion of personal liberty, but not to the point where it actually promotes your goal.

  9. I do believe that sex in and of itself is a sacred act created for the sole purpose of breeding.

    It’s important that you understand that your belief that sex should only be engaged in “for the sole purpose of breeding” puts you in a vanishingly tiny percentage of the American population. It’s fine for you to have sex only for the purpose of breeding, but to argue that (not that you have) we should enforce that legally is both way out of step with Virginia values, but unreasonable governing.

    I know your PAC is proclaimed as non-partisan, but why are you only targeting Republicans? Can you not find a conservative Democrat in all of Virginia who disagrees with your idea of ‘family values’?

    Nope. I’m not aware of a single bill proposed by a Democrat in the past few years that would qualify in any way. But if you can find one, please, let me know.

    How does striking the books of sodomy laws and ending the promotion of abstinence assist in the promotion of family values?

    Privacy and freedom are family values. Providing husbands and wives the freedom to engage in whatever sort of sexual behavior that they see fit with one another in the privacy of their own bedroom — that’s a value of my family. That’s a value of every family that I know. Based on all of the research that I’ve ever seen, the overwhelming majority of Americans and Virginias support such freedoms, if their decision to engage in such behavior is an indicator, as surely it must be.

    Who wants to promote abstinence between married couples? I’ve never heard of such a thing. That’s crazy.

  10. Your last paragraph said it best “Privacy and freedom are family values”. First off you are stretching this phrase way beyond its limits. If privacy and freedom are family values, why can’t owning a automatic weapon be thrown in there as well. I think Jon put this matter at its best. It’s one of those owning the political language things.

    I think we’ve beaten this subject to death. Let’s move on.

  11. The idea that abortion is a family value but birth control isn’t is completely arbitrary. I’d love to find out what line you believe separates the two. To cut down on the number of abortions, we must have birth control be openly, easily available, and there’s absolutely no arguing that point.

    If the right of a couple to define the size of their family through the use of birth control isn’t a family value, I honestly cannot imagine what in the world would qualify as a “family value.”

Comments are closed.