Who is the Pro-Life Candidate?

I'd like to challenge the belief that Bush is actually pro-life. I know that he signed the bill to ban partial birth abortion but he has made no other efforts to protect the unborn. Do you think that perhaps the bill signing was a campaign strategy? Bush also believes that abortion should be legal in cases of rape and incest. That's not pro-life that's confused.

The other thing to consider is that if Bush was truely pro-life, would he be supportive of the war on Iraq? Abortion is wrong because it is the murder of innocent people. War is wrong because it is the murder of innocent people (unless you can conjure up a situation where the innocent weren't being killed alongside the guilty). If you think that the war is justified because of the evil of Iraq then I could argue that it would be right for Iraq to invade the US based on the evil of the genocide of it's unborn children.

I'm not advocating that you vote for Kerry either. I think that if their is no pro-life candidate then a person should spoil their ballot. I can' see any good reason to do the "lesser of two evils" sort of vote. I will not in any way support of candidate that believes that the murder of the innocent is justified.

I'd like to challenge the belief that Bush is actually pro-life. I know that he signed the bill to ban partial birth abortion but he has made no other efforts to protect the unborn.

Obviously, Bush is an incrementalist. I can't read his mind, but perhaps he understands that no radical overturning of the current situation can occur until the hearts and minds of the general public are changed.

Incrementalism doesn't sit well with a lot of people who want instant gratification and thing that unless abortion is ended their way, you might as well do nothing at all. But it was the incrementalism of William Wilberforce that ended the slave trade in England.

The other thing to consider is that if Bush was truely pro-life, would he be supportive of the war on Iraq?

At worst he may be inconsistent, but that doesn't make his views on abortion wrong.

I do think that Rose has a point about Bush although I would disagree that war, in general, is morally wrong. While he has done many things to protect the unborn for which I am grateful (in addition to his action against partial-birth abortion), there are many notable problems (inconsistencies?) with his pro-life record. Here are a few:

• Exceptions: On the campaign trail in 2000, President Bush professed to be “pro-life”, but with exceptions – he believes abortion to be justified in cases of rape and incest


• RU-486: “The GOP's surrender matches George W. Bush's weak stance. In recent weeks, Bush has caved in on refused to RU 486, the baby-killing drug manufactured in Communist China, recently approved for American use by the Clinton administration” (Pat Buchanan, Oct. 25, 2000)


• Stem Cell Research: "Though we are not surprised by the President's recent decision to fund stem cell research on pre-born children killed by abortion, we are definitely outraged," said Judie Brown of American Life League. "The Bush administration continues to prove that the value they place on innocent human life is exactly 'zero'." – Judy Brown, American Life League, July 9, 2002

Despite being the first U.S. President to release federal dollars for embryonic stem cell research, amid tremendous pressure Bush continues to resist release of funds for research on anthing other than existing strains of stem cells. He also said during the Republican convention that we must make a place for the unborn. When compared to John Kerry, Bush is much more pro-life despite his gross errors in protecting the unborn.

When time permits I plan to compose a more comprehensive post on this topic. Thanks for your comments.

As far as Bush being an incrementalist here are my thoughts:

I suspect that William Wilberforce always stood for the complete abolition of slavery. He worked within the system to make small changes where he could to bring about gradual change. What I am uncomfortable about Bush's stand is that I don't think that he has the same end goal that I have. I want to see abortion abolished in ALL forms. From the morning after pill to RU486 to partial birth abortion I want to see it all gone. Considering Bush wants an exception for rape and incest something tells me he doesn't plan to ever ban the morning after pill. If Bush's end goals were the same as mine but he was working to slowly affect change then I would stand behind him. I just don't see that that is the case.

Pro-lifers should hold both Bush and Kerry accountable for funding abortion with our tax dollars.

This is anti-life, not pro-life.

Michael Anthony Peroutka takes a consistent stand for the right to life. Please consider supporting him.