Pro-life Remains a Core Conservative Principle

The statement “Life begins at conception” is more than a religious sentiment or a spiritual insinuation, but an accomplished, biological fact. When the ovum and the sperm join, a new life is formed, not just the potential, which will emerge in nine month’s times The fact that life begins at conception received its due respect from none other than Washington Post columnist George Will, a self-avowed agnostic. No religious sentiment informed his view on abortion and the right to life. Life is a right and value which is worth fighting for. Unfortunately, the abortion issue received undue, yet significant press during the 2012 election, following inarticulate “pro-life” statements.

While defining his views on abortion, Missouri’s Republican US Senate candidate Todd Akin mentioned “legitimate rape” in contrast to statutory rape, or the instances in which a woman will falsely claim rape. He could have simply argued: “a baby’s a baby no matter how conceived,” yet he insisted on defending his views at length. Then there was the US Senate candidate from Indiana, Richard Mourdock, who shared that a baby conceived by rape (not the rape itself) was “God’s will”. Media spin-doctors distorted these statements beyond recognition, yet the fact that the two candidate spent more time expounding their views than exposing the views of the other candidates expanded their problems.

Such inexact statements created more problems than needed. Their knee-jerk presumption of playing defense created much of their problems. Whatever one’s views on abortion, a candidate should state his stance and move on. On a more conciliatory note, Akin’s loss also stemmed from President Candidate Mitt Romney’s media induced cowardice in demanding that Akin drop out of the race. As for Mr. Mourdock, his partisan insistence on cutting spending, without branching into more positive issues, very likely turned off Hoosiers who want their representatives to govern. Moreover, Romney’s lukewarm record and rhetoric turned off millions of voters throughout the country, and thus he helped cause the loss of many winnable Senate races (North Dakota, Montana, as well as Indiana and Massachusetts)



Considering the wider effects of Romney’s rampant and public recriminations, abortion and the “pro-life” stance in and of themselves did not cost the Republican Party key wins in 2012. Instead of nursing wounds from the previous year, conservative operatives should expose the extremism of the Democratic Party on the abortion issue. In their 2012 Political convention, the Democratic Party opted to remove the language “safe, legal, and rare” from their platform on abortion. Today, one can summarize the Democratic stance on the issue as “abortion any time on the tax-payers’ dime.” Plus the party’s views on spending and tax increases, in which dime-stores small businesses are struggling under immense regulatory burdens, tax-payers may be left without any dime to their name



At any rate, abortion is a serious intersecting life and individual liberty, both of which conservatives can capitalize on. Professor Sanford Kadish, a distinguished constitutional scholar from Boalt Hall School of Law in UC Berkeley, firmly established that life is the paramount right, without which a human being cannot enjoy other rights, including liberty and the pursuit of happiness, (or the more conservative, Lockean locution “property.” Life begins at conception, and this right cannot be duly ignored, yet conservative elements in the country are having a difficult time asserting this value, or they manifest a reticence to adapt to the prevailing culture in local constituencies, as if defending the unborn, or granting human beings every opportunity to live is something shameful, something which must defended in and of itself.

Conservative candidates can learn from no better a proponent of life than Dr. Ron Paul (R-Texas), who made the case for life on “The View”, with the very liberal co-hosts who have detracted nearly every value prized and promoted by conservative and family-oriented voters. From the threat of legal sanction which hangs over obstetricians, to the repugnance toward abortion which virally liberal Joy Behar admitted, the sanctity of life received due respect on “The View”. Former Presidential candidate Herman Cain broached the abortion of issue by asserting his resistance to exceptions in the cases of rape and incest. Strange yet encouraging, no media backlash followed against the former “Godfather’s Pizza” CEO, unlike the firestorm that drowned out Todd Akin’s campaign.



Without compromising core principles, by acknowledging the sanctity of life while also allowing exceptions in the case of life’s unconscionable tragedies, the Republican Party can expand its brand. For those candidates who still discourage abortion even in the cases of rape or incest, they can still run their respective campaigns without harming the stance or substance of other candidates or the national party. As a means of co-opting the issue out of the Democratic Party, whose extreme platform has alienated members of the same party, the Republicans can adopt former President Bill Clinton’s “safe, legal, and rare” formulation, exposing the rising marginalization within the Democratic Party while brandishing the brand of “pro-life” and “pro-liberty” in the United States. Life begins at conception. When this truth is properly articulated, conservatives, Republicans, and even disaffected Democrats establish new resolve to protect life.