End the Feud!

Dear fellow Republicans of Iowa House District 35, When I went door-to-door collecting the signatures on a petition, needed for me run for the Iowa House, I noticed that a few of my neighbors are fellow conservatives, but the majority are progressives. I found that their biggest issue is "reproductive rights" and that ours is "gun rights." If elected, I promise to support the right to keep and bear arms, as outlined in the second amendment of the Constitution. After all, I took the oath to uphold the Constitution when I served in the Army, and I will take that same oath again if elected.

But I believe that for us to have a chance to win in November, our nominee is going to have to promise the people of district 35 that if elected, we will oppose any restriction or ban on abortion that our Republican colleagues from other districts are likely to propose in 2025 and 2026. I'm in a position to make that promise, because I'm the first American ever to run for legislative office on a BIPARTISAN pro-life policy, meaning that it is also pro-choice. It's called the Right to Choose Life Act, and it has nothing to do with restricting or banning abortion.

Rather, the RTCL Act is about giving every pregnant female an option that she currently doesn't have, the option to certify the creditorship of her offspring, so that forcing her to abort would no longer get the postnatal support debt forgiven. That would disincentivize forced abortion and it's the first step towards ending both types of abortion, forced and elective. It's also the first step towards ending both types of reproductive coercion, forced abortion and forced pregnancy (which happens in states that are under an abortion ban).

Therefore, the bipartisan RTCL Act is the first step towards ending the nationwide feud over abortion. Hence my campaign slogan, "End the Feud!" As for other issues, I promise to do what I've done with the two sides of the abortion issue. I will listen to both sides and look for common ground to bring both sides together on, so that we all work together to do what's best for Iowa. If I can do that for the two sides of the most divisive issue, that of abortion, then I believe I can do that for the two sides of any other issue.

I'd like to be an example that other legislators can follow, in order to reunite our divided state and nation. I'm running against another good conservative in the Republican primary. So, please consider the things that she says too. Then, vote in the June 4 primary for the conservative that you think gives us the best chance to gain the support of some of our progressive neighbors in November.

Thank you and may God bless you,
Daniel Schmude
Candidate for Iowa State House in District 35
Email: DanielSchmude@gmail.com

Hi, I'm Daniel Schmude and I'm a Mayflower descendant who is running for the Iowa House in District 35. My campaign is historic, because I'm the first American ever to run for legislative office on an abortion policy that is BOTH pro-choice AND pro-life. It's called the Right to Choose Life Act, and it would give every pregnant female an option which, if exercised, would disincentivize forced abortion.

Even though forced abortion is illegal, the crime happens often (as studies confirm); and that's because it's incentivized and it's easy to get away with. Disincentivizing the crime is the only way to stop it, and that's what the RTCL Act would do. To learn more, please click the red, white, and blue buttons below. The red button explains why the RTCL Act is necessary. The white button explains how the RTCL Act would stop forced abortion, and the blue button (which should be of special interest to Christians) explains what else the RTCL Act would stop.

There is also a link to a petition that you can sign in support of the RTCL Act. If you like the idea, please sign the petition. Otherwise, please let me know what you don't like about it.

According to the U.S. Declaration of Independence, all of us are endowed with certain unalienable rights and the purpose of government is to secure those rights. Therefore, if an unalienable right is not being adequately protected and there is something that government can do to adequately protect it, then government is obliged to do so. Such is the case with a woman's right to choose life when pregnant. Forced abortion is the violation of her RTCL. I submit the following pieces of evidence to prove that forced abortion happens and that it is therefore necessary to protect the RTCL if it is possible (which it is).

1. It can be dangerous to report a crime when the criminal's guilt cannot be proven. Such is the case with forced abortion. Therefore, just because it is never reported doesn't mean it never happens.

2. There is a significant financial motive behind forced abortion, and it is the fact that no child support will have to be paid if the abortion happens.

3. That same financial motive is also behind the double homicide of a pregnant woman.

4. A 2023 study has found that in 70% of abortions, there was at least some element of coercion.

5. A 2022 study has found that homicide is a leading cause of death for pregnant women.

6. A study of news reports about the murder of pregnant women, reveals that a disproportionate number of these victims were unmarried or in the process of getting divorced, meaning that child support would have had to be paid if the victim had given birth.

7. In many of these heinous crimes, it can be found that the double homicide would not have happened if the victim had gotten an abortion or if she had protected her own RTCL, which she would be able to do under the RTCL Act. A list of such victims and their tragic stories can be found at this link: RTCL Martyrs.

In summary, forced abortion happens often, because it's easy to get away with and it's incentivized. If we can give every pregnant female a way to disincentivize forced abortion, then we have an obligation to do so.

The Right to Choose Life Act would stop forced abortion by giving every pregnant female the option of doing something that would take away the motive for forced abortion before the thought even crosses the mind of a boyfriend or parent. In other words, exercising the option would disincentivize forced abortion. Before I explain how it would work, you need to know something about debts.

We incur debts "as a result of doing something" (MacMillan Dictionary), not someone else doing something, but us doing something. So, when a man incurs a child support debt, he incurred it as a result of him doing something, not his child or the mother of his child doing something, but him doing something; and the only thing he did to incur the debt was to impregnate the mother of his child. Therefore, a man incurs a postnatal support debt the moment he impregnates a female. (She incurs a prenatal support debt if she consented to the act which caused the pregnancy.)

Now, let's look at the motive (or incentive) for forced abortion and the option that the RTCL Act would give every pregnant female.

The motive is the fact that the postnatal support debt, which is owed to her offspring, can be forgiven by making her get an abortion. Therefore, the RTCL Act would give her the option of certifying the creditorship of her offspring, so that if anyone was to kill the creditor (except for approved medical reasons), the prenatal and postnatal support debts would not be forgiven but would instead be converted into reimbursement for wrongful death, payable to the caretaker(s) of the child(ren) specified by her on the certificate of creditorship (or if none are specified, then to the caretakers of children known by the state to be underprivileged). Those found to be most responsible for the wrongful death would be most responsible for the reimbursement.

Not long ago, it would have been dangerous for a pregnant female to exercise that option, because the man who caused the pregnancy could simply deny being the father. But now it is safe, because now she can submit proof of paternity, in the form of a blood sample, as early as 7 weeks gestation, long before she begins to show. (Recent advancements in DNA paternity testing enable her to do that.)

Nevertheless, the certificate of creditorship would be purely optional, and not a requirement. Because of that, there is no reason for any female to be opposed to the RTCL Act. The only men who will be opposed to it are misogynist bullies, who want to bully their girlfriends into getting an abortion whenever they become pregnant. Please help women protect themselves from forced abortion by signing the petition at the following link:

Petition to Protect a Woman's Right to Choose Life

If you have any doubts about signing the petition, please let me know, because you might have found something that the designers of the RTCL Act failed to account for.

I'll explain why the RTCL Act, by helping women stop forced abortion, would also be helping women stop the most unholy sacrifice. This should be of special interest to beneficiaries of the most holy sacrifice. If you're a baptized Christian, then I think you'll understand what your brother in Christ is about to explain (Pro. 28:5).

A sacrifice is an act of giving up something to obtain something else for oneself or for others (Collins Dictionary). The most holy sacrifice was the act of giving up one's own life to obtain for others the forgiveness of their debts to God (John 15:13, Matthew 6:12, 26:28, 1Corinthians 15:3, Isaiah 53:1-12). Only God's Son, Jesus Christ, was qualified to make the most holy sacrifice; and he made it almost two thousand years ago.

The most unholy sacrifice is the opposite. It is the act of giving up the life of another to obtain for oneself the forgiveness of debt to the other. If a man forces his pregnant girlfriend to get an abortion, then he makes a most unholy sacrifice; because he forces her to give up the life of their offspring to obtain for himself the forgiveness of his postnatal support debt to their offspring.

Therefore, forced abortion is a most unholy sacrifice; and so, by stopping forced abortion, the RTCL Act would also be stopping the most unholy sacrifice. That's why the new evangel, which new evangelists are trying to bring to the baptized, is an invitation to participate in stopping the most unholy sacrifice. Please participate in stopping the most unholy sacrifice by signing the petition at the following link:

Petition to Protect a Woman's Right to Choose Life

I am a new evangelist, that is, a messenger who brings a new evangel to the baptized, while continuing to bring the Gospel of Christ to the unbaptized. New evangelism has nothing to do with where we worship. It's about us participating with God in stopping the most unholy sacrifice. For more information about this new evangelism, please go to RightToChoose.Life. Please contact me if you have any questions about either the new evangel or the Gospel.

  Venn Diagram- Pro-choice people oppose reproductive coercion, and pro-life people oppose reproductive termination. Since both sides oppose forced abortion, both sides will work together to stop it as soon as they know that forced abortion happens and that the RTCL Act is the way to stop it.  

If elected, the first thing I would do is to work across the aisle to co-introduce the bipartisan Right to Choose Life Act, so that Iowa can lead the nation in stopping forced abortion. After that I would use my problem-solving experience to work with other legislators to help solve other problems that Iowans face. Politically, I'm a centrist, which means that I don't care which party an idea comes from; as long as it is good for Iowa and the nation, I will support it.

I also believe that the duty of a representative is in the name itself, that is, to represent the people of the district, even when I have a different opinion. Therefore, I promise never to forget the interests of the people I would represent. If you live in district 35 (or even if you don't), I would love to hear from you with any ideas, comments, or questions that you might have. I will try to respond to every email from you, especially if it has to do with the RTCL Act.

I'm saddened at how divided our state and our country have become. But I'm hopeful that we can come together. My campaign slogan is "End the Feud," because the Right to Choose Life Act would end the nationwide feud over abortion. If we can unite the two sides on the most divisive issue (that of abortion), we can unite the two sides of any issue. Thank you and may God bless you.

Daniel Schmude
Candidate for Iowa State House in District 35
Email: DanielSchmude@gmail.com
Website: RightToChoose.Life/Daniel


About Daniel Schmude
I'm a veteran of the U.S. Army and a graduate of the Unversity of Texas, having majored in electrical engineering. Since 2012, I have lived in Beaverdale, working as a software engineer for a financial services provider. My wife and I have two children, both graduates of Iowa State University. As for my Christian faith, I am first and foremost a new evangelist, a messenger who brings a new evangel to the baptized while continuing to bring the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the unbaptized. Next to that, I was raised in the Catholic tradition; and to this day, I still attend Mass regularly.