My favorite movie is “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” Since I first saw the movie a few years ago, I have been fascinated with the final scene. Jefferson Smith, played by Jimmy Stewart, ends his dramatic filibuster by declaring, “You fight for the lost causes harder than you fight for any of the others … for the only reason any man ever fights for them. Because of one plain, simple rule: love thy neighbor.”
That scene repeated itself in my mind as I read Donald Hodge’s latest Daily Reveille column. He questioned why the pro-life movement would consider running a third party candidate in 2008.
It might be a necessity. Rudy Giuliani, R-N.Y., is pro-abortion and supports taxpayer funding for abortions. He’s also the clear frontrunner for the Republicans, with a 7.8 percent advantage in the Sept. 14 to Oct. 10 composite poll compiled by realclearpolitics.com.
Even if someone could beat Giuliani, it’s not clear who pro-lifers would want to win. Former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., claimed a 100 percent voting record on pro-life issues in an interview with Sean Hannity this past May. He also, however, wrote on a Project Vote Smart questionnaire in 1994 that he would support legalizing abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy. Former Gov. Mitt Romney, R-Mass., has waffled on the issue. According to an Aug. 23 article in The Washington Post, Romney first said he would ban abortion through a constitutional amendment, and then two weeks later retracted that, saying he would allow the states to decide the issue. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has been solidly against abortion, but he voted in April 2007 to expand embryonic stem cell testing, according to ontheissues.org.
All three claim to be staunchly pro-life now. Changing one’s mind on an issue is possible, but the pro-life movement has waited more than 30 years to see reasonable progress on the life issue. Republicans have promised much, but all that’s been accomplished is partial birth abortion ban so loaded with loopholes that it is doubtful one life will be saved by it.
We can’t vote on promises anymore; we need results. The only Republican candidates who have been consistently pro-life are Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., and Gov. Mike Huckabee, R-Ark. Both are struggling to make it into the “first tier” of candidates. If they can’t win the nomination, we may need another party to represent the pro-life cause in 2008.
This leads us back to the question Hodge raised: Why is this issue so important to so many?
The United States has held since the Declaration of Independence that every person, regardless of age or utility, has an inherent dignity which demands respect and rights. Since our founding, we have become more consistent in this by granting suffrage to women and African-Americans. When we stray from recognizing rights by launching unjust wars or eliminating rights via the Patriot Act, we encounter significant problems.
Abortion strays from our foundation by declaring humans before birth unworthy of legal protection. Considering embryos have the complete human genetic code and will naturally become fully capable humans according to WebMD, the distinction that denies the right to life for embryos seems as unfounded as race. Yet according to the pro-abortion research group Guttmacher Institute, this leads to 1.29 million deaths a year. Democracy can’t persist in these conditions.
Pro-abortion advocates will counter that financial considerations require protection for the “right to abortion.” The Guttmacher Institute reports that 57 percent of women who have an abortion are “economically disadvantaged.” They question how one can uphold life without addressing the problems facing these women.
Their concern is valid. A proper pro-life view incorporates eliminating the root causes of abortion. We should recognize abortion itself does not remedy the societal and economic ills facing women who feel abortion is their only option. Instead, abortion callously demands they fix their “problems” by terminating their pregnancies. After an abortion, these women are still left by themselves in poverty.
A holistic approach to life, one that is inherent in a government that values human dignity, requires that we provide better support systems for women. This means better welfare, education, job training, health care, etc. The answer is assisting women and bettering society. Abortion is not part of that answer. Abortion kills one person and leaves another in the same destitution as before.
Unless we begin to care for both the mother and the child, our society will continue to erode. The pro-life movement cannot sit by while presidential candidates ignore this. Life must be defended in 2008, and if a third party is required to do it, so be it. It might seem a lost cause, but as Mr. Smith said, “Somebody’ll listen to me.”
—Contact Michael Denton at [email protected]