What Pro-Lifers Could Learn from King Solomon
By Carol Tobias, NRL PAC Director
Pro-lifers want candidates to take a strong pro-life position, but it doesn't help the cause of unborn babies when a candidate tries to make himself appear to be "more pro-life" than another pro-life candidate by attacking the other candidate's legitimate pro-life credentials, or distorting the other candidate's record on abortion.
Granted, in the short run that may rally some pro-lifers to his cause. But in the end, it hurts--often deeply--the pro-life movement and, more importantly, the millions of babies we are trying to save.
Of course, distorting an opponent's record is a common way for some candidates to play politics. But it's our job as pro-lifers to demand a higher level of campaigning on pro-life issues.
Consider this scenario:
Candidate A and Candidate B are both pro-life, although Candidate B has a better chance of winning his party's nomination and the general election. Candidate A distorts Candidate B's position on abortion in an attempt to undercut Candidate B's support within the pro-life community.
Candidate A may also challenge Candidate B to make public statements that the media can use to make Candidate B look extreme to the general public. Candidate B nonetheless wins his party's primary and faces a pro-abortion opponent in the general election.
However, because Candidate A has succeeded in convincing some in the pro-life community that Candidate B is not "pro-life enough," they refuse to support Candidate B. As is often the case, the contest is close, and because pro-life Candidate B has lost the support of some pro-lifers, the pro-abortion candidate wins the election.
This has happened in many congressional races and could take place in the presidential election.
Except for Arizona Senator John McCain, the Republican candidates have a solid pro-life position.
(While Sen. McCain has generally voted pro-life, he has stated that he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade "in the short term or even the long term." McCain has also voted repeatedly for efforts to overturn a pro-life policy of former President Bush that prohibited federal funding of certain forms of experimentation utilizing tissue taken from aborted babies.
Further, John McCain has authored "campaign finance reform" legislation that would severely restrict, and at times make impossible, the ability of pro-life groups to communicate with the public about the voting record or position on abortion of members of Congress or other candidates for federal office.)
In spite of this, in an attempt to defeat the pro-life frontrunner, Texas Governor George W. Bush, some of the other pro-life candidates are pulling the "He isn't pro-life enough" routine.
If the Movement allows itself to be self-destructive again, a pro-abortion candidate --Al Gore or Bill Bradley--could easily be our next President.
Why bring this up right now? There is no question that pro-life Texas Gov. George W. Bush is the leading Republican candidate for President and that he has a real chance at becoming the next President of the United States. (See polling data, below.)
However, because of the actions and statements of some presidential candidates and their supporters, NRL PAC gets letters and calls and e-mails from people wondering if Gov. Bush is "really pro-life."
To that question, we can and do answer unequivocally "YES." If you really want to know where Bush stands on abortion, go to the source. Look at what Gov. Bush is saying:
"I'm going to set a goal that says the unborn ought to be protected in law and welcomed to life. That ought to be a national goal. ...And the first step is to have a president who values life. Part of ushering in the responsibility era, of which I talk a lot about, is for folks to understand the preciousness of life. It's not only life of the unborn, it is life for the elderly, it is life for the young.
"What I will do is promote life as president of the United States.
"I support a constitutional amendment with the exceptions of life, incest, and rape."
(Interview with Tim Russert, NBC's Meet the Press, 11/21/99)
"I think the platform ought to be pro-life. It's the basis of the Republican Party.
"...[P]eople have got to understand that abortion is not a contraceptive."
(Larry King Live, CNN, 12/16/99)
"There are a lot of Americans who don't view the abortion issue as a matter of life. I do. That's one reason why I'm a pro-life person."
(Associated Press, 3/8/99)
"I do not like abortions. I will do everything in my power to restrict abortion."
(Dallas Morning News, 10/22/94)
Without a doubt, supporters of abortion consider George W. Bush to be their most dangerous enemy. NARAL President Kate Michelman stated, "As governor of Texas, he signed nine anti-choice provisions in 1999 alone, more than any other governor in the country. In all, Governor Bush has signed 18 provisions aimed at restricting reproductive choice for the women of Texas." NARAL has already aired several TV commercials hammering Bush and says it expects to run more throughout the campaign.
When NARAL labeled Gov. Bush the most "anti-choice" governor in America, columnist Bob Novak asked Bush to respond, to which he said, "I rest their case. I'm pro-life."
While discussing Bush's abortion stance, Patricia Ireland, president of the National Organization of Women (NOW), stated, " When he says he's not going to have a litmus test, he also says they are also going to have to be people who interpret the Constitution strictly. ...That is code, you know, for people who believe that strictly interpreted, the Constitution does not provide a constitutional right to abortion."
(Hardball, CNBC, 6/17/99)
Pro-abortion leaders clearly understand what is at stake. They have their eyes on the goal: winning the election next fall. Unfortunately, some pro-life candidates prefer to train their fire on a pro-life frontrunner rather than Bradley or Gore. If we let candidates get away with this, it's a sure way for pro- lifers to lose the White House again in 2000.
In this context it may help to look at the Old Testament story of King Solomon. You recall he was asked to decide between two women who were arguing over which of them was the mother of a child.
Solomon declared that the baby should be cut in two, with half being given to each woman. The first woman, the child's real mother, was willing to give up the child so that he would live. The second woman was willing to let the baby die rather than give up her claim to him. Solomon declared that the second woman was not the true mother and should not be given the baby.
In the 2000 presidential race, there are candidates who have to give thoughtful pro-lifers pause: Are they really willing to let children die if they can't be the nominee?
It would be foolhardy to ignore the fact that the Republican presidential nomination is shaping up to be a contest between Gov. George W. Bush and Senator John McCain.
We would encourage all pro-lifers to stop the spread of material that distorts the pro-life credentials of Gov. Bush. We also encourage other pro-life candidates to do the same.
Keep your eye on the goal--saving the lives of unborn children. That won't happen with Al Gore or Bill Bradley in the White House.
Harris Poll Results onGOP Presidential Primary
Editor's note. The following are the results of a Harris Poll conducted Dec. 13 through Dec. 19 as reported in the Hotline. Harris surveyed 10,044 adults. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 2%.
GOP Primary (Among GOPers and Independents)
George W. Bush--ALL-42% -- GOP-53% -- Independent-28%
John McCain--ALL-18% -- GOP-16% -- Independent-21%
Steve Forbes--ALL-7% -- GOP-5% -- Independent-10%
Alan Keyes--ALL-6% -- GOP-8% -- Independent-4%
Gary Bauer--ALL-1% -- GOP-2% -- Independent-1%
Orrin Hatch--ALL-3% -- GOP-4% -- Independent-1%