Chris Lyons in 2018 ME Senate race

On Abortion: Life is precious; abortion only if maternal life at risk

Q: You oppose abortion as a woman's right--how do you reconcile that with libertarian ideals of self-government?

A: A usual retort to my opposition to abortion is I am a male wanting to control women. Farthest thing from the truth. We are equals regardless of our differences. My contention is life is precious.

Q: So you believe that abortion takes a life?

A: There is a thing called the 'morning after pill' which prevents conception. Is not the prevention of conception more reasonable than the termination of a life? It further seems reasonable to me that the 'morning after pill' would be far more desirable than any form of personal invasiveness of an abortion. Thus, the next question is, is the 'morning after pill' readily available anywhere at very low cost? The answer is yes. This was not the case 20 + years ago but is most assuredly the case now. Therefore, the only reason that abortion would be an acceptable form is if the mother's life is endangered.

Source: Follow-up OnTheIssues interview: 2018 Maine Senate candidate Mar 10, 2018

On Civil Rights: Education will achieve affirmative action, not law

Q: You oppose affirmative action in job hiring?

A: This basic principle sums this question up readily; nobody is more than or less than another for whatever reason except their actions towards others. Whether public or private organizations, they would lose if they dismiss the 'best' person for the job whether they are a woman or a minority or a male or a Caucasian. Discrimination is discrimination without exception. History has proven at least two realities on this topic; it was without question wrong to institutionally keep women and minorities 'below' the law. Disgraceful. The second is history has proven why it was wrong. Woman and minorities have more than proved themselves more than capable.

Q: So what should the law be?

A: It is education and its exposure of these manifest wrongs that have almost eliminated any ignorant bias towards one gender or racial group, not law. The best person for the job regardless of anything. Law will never change this. Education will.

Source: Follow-up OnTheIssues interview: 2018 Maine Senate candidate Mar 10, 2018

On Civil Rights: Government should have no say on same-sex marriage

Q: You support same-sex marriage, not on gay-rights grounds, but because you feel that government should stay out of the marriage business?

A: As with must hot button topics, they are used and manipulated by the two big parties to win the next election. I think it is far more proactive to ask, what authority does the federal government or state government has to decide what marriage is? Seems to me, marriage, was historically, a religious mandate. Therefore, under the concept of the separation between state and religion, marriage should be defined as a voluntary action by two people within the scope of that religion and the contract between two people, voluntarily, as a civil union is acceptable to the state whether marriage or a civil union. In a sense, this is also a gay question and how would I react to 'gay' as an elected representative of the people? The answer is easy. I won't. One way or the other.

Source: Follow-up OnTheIssues interview: 2018 Maine Senate candidate Mar 10, 2018

On Health Care: Insurance companies benefit from ObamaCare; people don't

I was against Obamacare before enacted by the force of government and I am still in opposition to it after the enforcement by the force of government. The 4 main mandates Obamacare was suppose to address failed miserably

It did not reduce the cost of healthcare
It did not reduce the cost of health insurance
It did not provide the best medical care for all at a reasonable and affordable cost
The cost of prescriptions have skyrocketed.

Failure. Also, and I think it is pertinent to note, the health insurance companies very much benefited financial with this legislation. Their stocks soared 25% after enactment and their profit margins grew 100% year on year; but was health care more readily available, better, less expensive? In sum, it was corporate welfare at an extreme. As a citizen, I am embarrassed I even have to think about this. Source: Follow-up OnTheIssues interview: 2018 Maine Senate candidate Mar 10, 2018

On Principles & Values: Personal belief in God is fine; government action is not

Q: What about government-supported displays of God in the public sphere?

A: All of us have the 'right' to believe in God or not. Simple as that. The state (federal, state, county, district or municipality) is not to show bias one way or the other. It is not wrong for people to voice their belief in God and it is not wrong for people to voice their opposition against the idea of God. What is wrong is either side attempting or successfully using the force of government to do one or the other.

Source: Follow-up OnTheIssues interview: 2018 Maine Senate candidate Mar 10, 2018