The Pro-Life Case for McCain

Gerald Bradley, a law professor at my alma mater, has an article out today giving the pro-life case for a McCain presidency:

Of the remaining pro-life Republicans, none can match McCain’s record of opposing abortion. He has served in Congress for 24 years, and cast a lot of votes on abortion legislation during that time. His record is not merely exemplary — it is perfect. McCain’s votes on abortion really could not be better. A campaign advertisement in South Carolina says of John McCain: “Pro-life. Not just recently. Always. Never wavering.” The ad is true.

It is no criticism of any other pro-life candidate to say that McCain’s track record makes him the best of a small number of good choices. Mike Huckabee is a good man and solidly pro-life. I personally do not doubt the sincerity or depth of Mitt Romney’s present commitment to the unborn. But experience matters. Being battle-hardened in defense of life is a real plus. Twenty-four years of service at the national level — almost all of them in the Senate — make a big difference when we are talking about the next President, compared to candidates who have been small-state governors. There is no need to speculate or to rely upon promises or take matters on faith when it comes to McCain and abortion.

One of the major knocks against McCain on the pro-life front has been his support for some forms of embryo-destroying stem cell research. Here is how Prof. Bradley addresses these concerns:

In face-to-face conversation with McCain I said not only that such research was wrong, but that it would never be limited to “spares.” I said that big biotech needed a far larger supply of research subjects than “spares” could provide. McCain asked to continue that conversation, to hear more. Now he realizes that there is no need to exploit “spare” embryos, in light of recent successes with adult cells. And so he has been telling South Carolinians over the last few days.

I hadn’t heard that McCain had changed his position on this, but if what Bradley says is true, this would seem to remove one of the major stumbling blocks of the McCain campaign.

Prof. Bradley also argues for McCain-as-pro-lifer based on his unwavering opposition to torture:

Though death is a risk with perhaps few contemporary “harsh interrogation” techniques, all torture raises questions about the meaning of human dignity and the immunity of all persons against unjustified physical attack. In other words, torture is a life issue, too. Though not nearly so important as abortion, it is nonetheless important in its own way. A candidate’s stand on torture is revealing of his (or her) whole approach to moral questions. Of the remaining Republican candidates, only McCain (so far as I know) has plainly said that all torture is wrong, and that Americans simply should not do it. I agree with him.

I still have some significant concerns about the prospect of a McCain presidency. While McCain’s voting record on abortion is stellar, he has an awful relationship with National Right to Life, which could impede the ability of pro-lifers to move their agenda if he is president. And of course I disagree with him on some non-life related issues. But Prof. Bradley’s article probably does the best job anyone could making the pro-life case for McCain.