Paul Ryan’s Glittering Pro-Life Credentials

In the next days and weeks, the media will focus on Paul Ryan’s commitment to economic freedom and fiscal reform.  He became famous in political circles for the “Ryan budget” and for his fearlessness and effectiveness in challenging President Obama in the midst of the Obamacare debate, but those of us in the conservative movement have also know Paul Ryan as a man completely committed to the cause of life.  The Susan B. Anthony list outlines his record well:

Congressman Ryan has voted consistently for pro-life legislation, including limits on late-term abortion, regulations against transporting minors across state lines for abortion and for an end to taxpayer funding of abortion, thus earning a 100 percent voting record with the National Right to Life Committee. While in the U.S. House, Rep. Ryan has co-sponsored numerous pro-life bills including the D.C. Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA), the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, and the Protect Life Act.

But a recitation of his legislative record doesn’t do justice to his pro-life commitment.  I can remember when there was talk of a “truce” on social issues, Ryan described the depth of his pro-life convictions:

“I’m as pro-life as a person gets . . . You’re not going to have a truce. Judges are going to come up. Issues come up, they’re unavoidable, and I’m never going to not vote pro-life.”

In February, 2010, he wrote an essay for the Heritage Foundation called, “The Cause of Life Can’t be Severed from the Cause of Freedom.”  The entire essay is worth reading, but here’s a key passage:

At the core, today’s “pro-choice” liberals are deeply pessimistic. They denigrate life and offer fear of the present and the future—fear of too many choices and too many children. Rather than seeing children and human beings as a benefit, the “pro-choice” position implies that they are a burden. Despite the “pro-choice” label, liberals’ stance on this subject actually diminishes choices, lowers goals, and leads us to live with less. That includes reducing the number of human beings who can make choices.

In contrast, pro-life conservatives are natural optimists. On balance, we see human beings as assets, not liabilities. All conservatives should find it easy to agree that government must uphold every person’s right to make choices regarding their lives and that every person’s right to live must be secured before he or she can exercise that right of choice. In the state of nature—the “law of the jungle”—the determination of who “qualifies” as a human being is left to private individuals or chosen groups. In a justly organized community, however, government exists to secure the right to life and the other human rights that follow from that primary right.

Exactly so.  Today is a great day for the pro-life movement.  The GOP is “all-in” for life.

Question for the New York Times: If Gays Are Offended, Do Christians Have Rights?
Why We Should All Be Glad a Muslim Man Just Won His Religious-Liberty Case at the Supreme Court
‘When People Have the Freedom to Choose, They Choose Wrong:’ Watching The Giver
Are the NSA and IRS Scandals the Same?
  • Pingback: Paul Ryan’s Glittering Pro-Life Credentials | Evangelicals for Mitt()

  • Leticia Velasquez

    And this pro-life Catholic will vote for my first Mormon, thanks to his wonderful pro-life running mate. I would have voted for Evangelical Huckabee if given the chance, as long as a candidate shares my family values and respects my right to publicly practice my Catholic faith, he or she gets my vote!

  • Matt

    If this guy’s so pro-children, why does his budget gut the heart of low-income families? Pro-life? Gimme a break. He’s just another life-begins-at-conception-and-ends-at-birth whackjob.

  • Jesus Morales

    So excited about this pick! Looking forward to voting for Romney-Ryan in November.

  • D

    The war on drugs doesn’t decrease poverty just look at the record. Simply throwing money at the problem is not the solution. It starts with each individual actually getting off their butt and helping. Do you have any idea that Catholics voluntarily donate time and money to poor children? We are talking millions of dollars and tons of support. What world do you live in buddy?

  • D

    The wr on poverty*

  • Agkcrbs

    If you’re talking about the repeals of some previous unaffordable legislation that essentially ballooned spending at a time when spending needs to shrink, he seems to have pushed them because… whoops… they’re unaffordable. Such plans will be repealed, either legislatively, or by their own insolvency. Aside from Romney’s prioritisation of the issue, neither side has yet addressed health costs, but Ryan did give the correct answer for Medicare reform, which people like you, deluded by twisted notions of something-for-nothing and justified thievery, lack the tools to comprehend. You have a deeply disturbed and cynical concept of “life” if you tie its quality to the amount of free money promised to it by a government whose promises grow ever larger without consulting reality. But by all means, if you like false promises so much, go ahead and keep voting for them. Who knows? Maybe someday waking up to the broken system you helped create will finally fix you.

  • David M

    Great article. Thanks David!

  • Mo

    I am reading up on him because I am not too familiar with him. This is wonderful news!

  • Liz

    I didn’t know whether or not evangelicals had problems with Catholics. I hope not. It’s a great ticket, and some mutual respect and increased focus on common values with an emphasis on competence re-instates the American Way into the mainstream culture here. Great pick.

  • Cho

    Just another Neocon warmonger NWO banker puppet GOP pandering to the “pro unborn American life” “Christians. And the bloodthirsty warvangelicals fall for it everry time.

  • Pingback: Pro-Life Leaders ‘Thrilled’ with Mitt Romney’s Choice of Pro-Life Paul Ryan as Vice President | Brown Pelican Society of Louisiana()

  • Evan Maughan

    Matt – two points
    1) There is a false assumption that government spending on poverty helps the poor. Look at the data, it does not lift people out of poverty but incentivises them to stay put. The “War on Poverty” which began with the democrats launching their “Great Society”, stopped the decline of poverty – stopped it cold. Poverty was decreasing at a steady rate until government jumped in. With all the trillions – yap trillions – spent on the “War on Poverty” we are right now at the highest rate of poverty in 50 years.
    2) Spending the way the current administration is, WILL collapse the system. By this I do not just mean our credit rating will take another hit (thank you Obama), but all our social programs, discretionary spending and likely even the nation itself will fall apart. How is allowing the government to spend itself into oblivion and ruin our future and that of our children “compassionate”? Do not be stupid and think that we can continue to throw trillions of dollars away on programs which have the main goal of not helping people but creating a dependent entitlement class that will vote for those that offer them the most bennies.

  • Evan Maughan

    Some do some don’t. Evangelicals tend to be more accepting of Catholics than they are of Mormons (our blogs host being one of the exceptions). I think the main thing that evangelicals that oppose devout Catholics and Mormons need to learn is that we are not the enemy. Society and culture are going to Hell and now is not the time to battle others because they do not accept the Nicene creed or view the Virgin Mary as divine. Many of us have children and they are coming into a world where things that were once abominable are now not only tolerated by many but embraced. Our nation is sick and we need to turn back to the ideals of our divinely inspired founders or we slip into history as just another Rome, or Greece.

  • Evan Maughan

    So you are opposed to Obama for his warmongering ways.

  • Evan Maughan

    Thought this would go well with the above meme – I did change out one word of this great quote:
    “(Sin) is a monster of so frightful mien
    As to be hated needs but to be seen;
    Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,
    We first endure, then pity, then embrace.”

  • Pingback: Paul Ryan is no Randian()

  • Nina

    Wellll . . . I hope and pray that this so-called “pro-life” ticket will not take center stage. Remember Ambassador Alan Keyes? He bravely proclaimed that his first action as president, if elected, would be to overturn Roe. Not even conservatives liked him (I LOVE him!). Pro-lifers often kid themselves that Roe v. Wade will be overturned, while pro-aborts have a paranoid fear that a pro-life ticket will bring back back-alley / coat hangers / dead women, blah blah. It’s a red herring.

    However, being the realist I am, I KNOW that the Party of Death (good book by Ramesh Punuru), the Democrats, vote at the altar of abortion each and every time! Abortion for them is their sacred religion.

  • Pingback: Pro-life leaders thrilled with Mitt Romney’s choice of pro-life Paul Ryan as vice president, by Ben Johnson « adventlife()

  • Kathy from Kansas

    Letitia, I’m with you. I am a Catholic, formerly evangelical Protestant, and was concerned that having a Mormon in the presidency (therefore, as a very visible role model) might give additional legitimacy to a religion I regard as a heretical cult. But then I started thinking: God is Goodness and Truth and Love; anyone who partakes in those things, however partially, knows God in some way. I also think that ANYONE who is pro-life and pro-family is on solid rock, whatever organized religion they profess. A president must be, above all, a man of character, and when you read Romney’s personal history – and look at the way he treats those around him, particularly how devoted he is to his family – and look at his leadership style in the various positions in which he’s served – it becomes obvious he would be a good President.

  • Kathy from Kansas

    Oh, and I meant to say: When Romney picked Paul Ryan, that sealed the deal for sure! I sent my first donation to the Romney campaign, and have signed up to volunteer making phone calls from home, hoping to make my first calls starting tomorrow!

  • Hipocryte Religious Republicans throw the poor and needy into the street

    Paul Ryan will not allow an abortion for a woman that will die without one. How can you call allowing two people to die “Pro-life”? Your hipocracy disgusts me. If your 12 year old daughter gets raped by her drunk uncle and she will die if it goes full birth…you would stand there and let her die. Hate and biggotry hidden behind faith is still hate and biggotry. You only care about people BEFORE they’re born, why is that?

  • Hipocryte Religious Republicans throw the poor and needy into the street

    Don’t forget to look up his fascination with Atheist Ayn Rand, he loves her way of thinking. Google ‘Paul Ryan and Ayn Rand’…enjoy her non-biblical outlook.

  • Mary Ellen Mayo

    I will not vote for someone who will take away my SSDI/Medicare, which I finally got ten years and four separate attempts later, after nearly dying from a ruptured aorta, after multiple hospitalizations, due to a condition which is genetic and killed my grandfather at 39, an uncle in infancy, and damn near killed me at 35, so a handful of rich people can have another tax break. I paid into the system my entire working life, and you who are slavishly adoring the Romney/Ryan ticket are enthusiastically promising to cut my throat and leave me to die, which is one of the major reasons the Christian Church lost me. You’re also voting to cut veterans benefits by at least 25%, which will affect my father, who is an Agent Orange combat veteran of the VietNam War. He earned that on the battlefield at great risk, and witnessed great loss of life. If one of your aims, conservatives, is to drive people away from the christian church, you’re succeeding beyond your wildest dreams. Some love and compassion.