Are Pro Life Elected Officials as Committed as Pro Aborts?

Are Pro Life Elected Officials as Committed as Pro Aborts? August 1, 2015
Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by TipsTimesAdmin https://www.flickr.com/photos/tipstimesadmin/
Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by TipsTimesAdmin https://www.flickr.com/photos/tipstimesadmin/

This is an interesting discussion about defunding Planned Parenthood.

I want to make a point about one thing that Tod Starnes says. The Rs have not really been “in control since 2013” as he says. They’ve been dealing with a split government in which the Executive is in the hands of the Ds.

That said, he is correct in saying that they’ve pushed hard for corporatists agendas, such as doing way with the retirement for our men and women in arms, while they’ve used pro life as a rabble rousing vote-getter and have not really been serious about doing anything to save babies’ lives. Ditto for the sanctity of marriage and religious freedom.

The Rs were in control of the government during the first decade of this century, when they held both houses of Congress and the White House. They did not defund Planned Parenthood then, and they could have, if they had wanted to.

I believe that Mr Starnes makes a valid point when he says that elected supporters of Planned Parenthood are much more committed to their cause than elected pro life supporters are to our cause.

"I didn't state that very well, sorry. Nothing wrong with the link, I just couldn't ..."

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."
"You don't remember Lyndon Johnson doing any such thing because he didn't do any such ..."

Dr Christine Ford in Hiding Because ..."
"I haven't had the opportunity to read the FBI investigation. I'm not in the habit ..."

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."
"Was there something wrong with the link?"

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment

13 responses to “Are Pro Life Elected Officials as Committed as Pro Aborts?”

  1. Ah, Rebecca. I didn’t even have to read your blog. I knew the answer to the question in the title the moment I was done reading it. The answer: NOPE. Not even close.

  2. Some probably are. Most just want to get elected.
    This all started with Teddy Kennedy, Charles Curran and the rest, meeting at Hyannisport. They figured out how “catholic” politicians could still support abortion. People like Joe Biden still say, “well, I’m personally opposed, but…”

  3. Most “pro-life” politicians are more interested in fighting culture wars and demonizing feminists than they are in actually ending abortion. They do not support policies that would make abortion rarer. And they have not bothered to educate themselves about the issue. Proof of this is: they don’t know what penalties should attach if they get their way and abortion is outlawed. A very basic question and they’ve given no thought to it.

    • I’ve given a lot of thought to it:
      1. The punishment for the woman for seeking an abortion (we need the law to be solid enough to actually prevent an abortion from occurring in most cases) should be a guaranteed income of $15,000 a year for the next 15 years, pre-natal care, and individualized social service help to eliminate parenting problems. The father should be identified (by national DNA database, with every male child registered right along with selective service) and be held responsible for at least partially helping to maintain that level of income. If health issues with the child are involved, society has a duty under the ADA to help provide for that child’s needs- no matter how disabled they are.
      2. The punishment for the individual doctor for abortion should be loss of medical licence and potential for malpractice wrongful death lawsuits brought by the father or the mother of the child killed. Second count should be complete liquidation of the clinic where the doctor worked, with the money going to the welfare pool for the mothers mentioned in 1. Third count should go back to any investors or donors involved in the doctor’s clinic- confiscating their assets and liquidating their businesses as well.

      We often think of abortion as murder- but we fail to think of it as big business. Attack the capitalism, and nobody will risk the abortion.

  4. Question…what can any of us non-rich, non-influential, non-politically savvy, ordinary people who hold the rest of the world together do? I’m 18, a nursing student, running the little seasonal pool in the summer, don’t have a car, and can barely afford college. I cannot think of a single thing I can do that actually makes a difference. Activism doesn’t seem to do anything, trying to be a social media activist is screaming into a void. I don’t have money, I’m subtle like a sledgehammer, and the very last thing I ever want to do is go into politics. Is there really anything I can do about evils like this?

  5. The photograph is in very poor taste. I’m surprised you couldn’t find a better way to get your point across.

    • I agree. I don’t much like the photo, either. But it’s a mess, finding a photo of abortion that I can use without copyright concerns that depicts much of anything on this topic. it often takes longer to find a photo than it did to write the post. In this case, I just gave up and used this one. Apologies.

  6. Pro-life politicians are for ending abortion the way pro-choice politicians are for reducing poverty. It’s a nice talking point, but if it was actually accomplished nobody would have any reason to vote for them.

  7. I think it depends on the level of government. At the state level the pro-lifers are really getting things done as far as the courts allow. At the federal level they’re too busy fattening their cronies’ purses to care about anything else except re – election.

  8. The electroate was more pro-abortion in the first decade of this century. From what I remember they tried to pass a number of pro-life bills and either struck down in the courts or did not have enough to pass. The Democrats are almost 100% pro-abortion; the Republicans are about 75-80% pro-life. Just because they had the majority doesn’t mean they had enough to pass a bill. And the courts kept getting in the way of what they could pass. Some of this criticism is unfair.

    Starnes is right on commitment, but you have to look at how Republicans repeatedly get killed (Todd Aikins for example) on the social issues. They have to proceed with caution. It’s only the last few years where the country is behind limiting abortion rights. And I suspect out right banning of all abortion is still a long haul, even if the SCOTUS over ruled Roe.

    • I honestly don’t think it’s unfair at all. First, if they were as committed as they say — and that’s my main gripe here, that the Rs use the issue to get votes and then do nothing — political arguments such as the public was less pro life in the first decade than it is now would mean nothing to them. I mean that Manny. If they really believed that their silence and do-nothingism was helping kill children, the politics would and should mean nothing. Our people are far less committed than the pro aborts. It’s sad, but true.

      Second, they certainly did have the power. There was and is no reason to pass a stand-alone bill. All that is necessary is to change how the monies are appropriated. They had the majorities in both houses and the presidency. That was more than enough power. What was lacking was the will.

      • The legislative history of banning partial birth abortion:
        1995 Passed Rep Congress, vetoed by Clinton
        1997 Passed Rep Congress, vetoed by Clinton
        2003 passed Rep Congress, signed by Bush, ruled unconstitutional in couts, but ultimately in 2007, four years later, ruled constitutional by SCOTUS, 5-4 all conservatives upheld, all Lib denied.

        That’s just partial birth abortion which is outright infanticide. If it was that hard to get PBA banned, what do you think was possible on regular abortion? Also go and compare what Republicans have done on a state level in the last fifteen years. No, I think it’s unfair for anyone to criticize Republicans on this issue, especially when the public has been on the Liberal side on this and other social issues.

        • You’re right, of course. The Ds started out pro life in the 70s and then got taken over by the pro aborts. The Rs started out pro choice and then got taken over by the pro lifers.

          The Rs have passed virtually all the really important pro life legislation that has been passed in the past 10 years. (Myself excepted. I’ve passed a ton of it here in Oklahoma. If Oklahoma was the nation, you’d have to give at least one pro life D high marks for passing significant pro life legislation.) That said, we cannot end abortion, much less return to a sane view on marriage or euthanasia, with only half the people. We must get the Ds in line, too.

          Also, and this is what gets you and I yakking at one another, is the simple fact that the leadership of the Rs, specifically, the money people who run both parties, are closely aligned with the pro aborts. This has a lot to do with the fact that they are from circles which have nothing to do with the rest of the American people and that is only one of the things that is bad about them running the parties and through them the country.

          That leads to things that I have actually witnessed, which is pro life Rs deep-sixing pro life bills, especially in certain areas, at the behest of “business” interests.

          I know I get angrier with the Rs on this than I do the Ds over killing pro life bills. But the reason why is that I expect the Ds to do this. The Rs, on the other hand, get elected on their pro life stand.

          I know — not guessing Manny, know — that the Rs are pro life tigers when they see a political advantage to it, which is to say when they can use it as an issue against the Ds. I also know — not guessing, know — that their primary focus is not pro life or family but economic issues and transferring the tax base into corporate hands. The Rs are totally corporatist. The Ds are mainly corporatist. Not pretty or hopeful for we the people, either way.

          I don’t blame anyone for choosing to be an R over a D because of life issues. I understand it completely. I just want all pro life people to stop excusing their parties. When the Rs lie and kill pro life bills, they need to be held accountable. We’ve got to do that. Must do it, even if it hurts. Do. Not. Buy. Their. Driveling. Excuses.

          By the same token, we need to figure out a way to reclaim the Ds. I guess I’m a Harry Truman Democrat or some such extinct critter. 🙂 I know we can’t go back, but we need to change the direction forward. We’ve got to reclaim both parties, Manny. We must.

          Yes, the Rs have done more — by powers of 10 — for life than the Ds. But they will never end abortion by themselves. In fact, they are highly motivated not to end it, since the abortion fight benefits them so much.

          And certainly they could have defunded PP in the early part of this century had they wanted to do so.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.