Five GOP Candidates Sign the Pro-Life Pledge. Romney and Cain Won't

By Jennifer Hartline
6/21/2011
Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

Defending our first neighbors is where the 'rubber hits the road'

The Susan B. Anthony List 2012 Pro-life Pledge reflects the sort of conviction and authenticity we must demand from any candidate who says they are pro-life, especially one seeking the Presidency. No longer can the lives of our unborn children be considered merely a "social issue." We need candidates who will not hesitate to sign on the dotted line that nothing and no one will persuade them to postpone or abandon the fight to protect children in the womb.

The Republican candidates

Facebook Delicous MySpace

Twitter Stumble Digg

More Destinations

WASHINGTON, D.C. (Catholic Online) - In perhaps the first public test of the GOP candidates' pro-life mettle, Mitt Romney, Herman Cain, and Gary Johnson have declined to sign the Pro-Life Pledge sponsored by the Susan B. Anthony List.

SBA List put forth the following pledge and asked the presidential hopefuls to sign it:

-    Only nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court and federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, not legislating from the bench;
-    Select pro-life appointees for relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch positions, in particular the head of the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Health & Human Services, and the Department of Justice;
-    Advance pro-life legislation to permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion in all domestic and international spending programs, and defund Planned Parenthood and all other contractors and recipients of federal funds with affiliates that perform or fund abortions, and;
-    Advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.

Rick Santorum, Tim Pawlenty, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann have all signed the pledge.

The pledge reflects the level of commitment the pro-life community requires from anyone claiming to be pro-life and seeking the nation's highest office. It's simply not enough for a candidate to say he or she is pro-life; it's not enough to make statements to the press using some pro-life lingo; it's not enough to be pro-life-lite. No longer can the lives of our unborn children be categorized as a mere "social issue."

The pro-life community in America cannot be played anymore by candidates who say all the right things with just the right amount of zeal in order to win votes. We need candidates who will not hesitate to sign on the dotted line that nothing and no one will persuade them to postpone or abandon the fight to protect children in the womb. We need candidates who are not ashamed or reluctant to be known as unequivocally pro-life and are willing to take the heat that comes from the opposition.

Only those candidates who truly understand our obligation to revere and protect human life from conception to natural death will be willing to endure the hostility and slander they'll get in this pivotal 2012 election.

Is Mitt Romney such a candidate? Is Herman Cain? They both expressed concerns about the pledge and gave their reasons for not signing it. Cain said his reservation was with the 4th part of the pledge: "The fourth requirement demands that I "advance" the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. As president, I would sign it, but Congress must advance the legislation. I have been a consistent and unwavering champion of pro-life issues. In no way does this singular instance of clarification denote an abandonment of the pro-life movement, but instead, is a testament to my respect for the balance of power and the role of the presidency."

The trouble with Herman Cain is that his fidelity to Life is really an unknown. He has no voting record to back up or disprove his claim. He seems genuine and sincere, and I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt. His qualms with the pledge are, I think, hair-splitting semantics. The President can certainly lead and in that way help "advance" important legislation. Of course Congress must write and pass the bill, but the President must lead and provide vision, clarity and commitment. I'd like to think Cain understands that, so in that case, why not sign the pledge?

The trouble with Mitt Romney is Mitt Romney. His fidelity to Life can quite legitimately be questioned. He claims with conviction to be pro-life today, but he very passionately insisted that he was wholeheartedly pro-choice only a few years ago in his previous elections. So which is it? Is he playing the pro-life community in order to win some valuable votes? Or has he genuinely seen the error of his past ways and been truly converted?

Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul gave his reason for not signing the pledge: "Governor Romney pledged in the last campaign that he would be a pro-life president and of course he pledges it today. However, this well intentioned effort has some potentially unforeseen consequences and he does not feel he could in good conscience sign it."

What unforeseen consequences? Romney released his own pro-life pledge at National Review Online where he ...

1 | 2 Next Page

Rate This Article

Was this helpful to you? Very Helpful Somewhat Helpful Not Helpful at All

Would you be interested in more articles like this? Yes, I am Interested No, I am not Interested

Rate Article

1 - 10 of 10 Comments

Tim Poe
1 year ago
I don't think Americans want a president that is strongly connected to Wall Street, so my candidate is Ron Paul. But an interesting GOP presidential candidate poll is developing at http://tiny.cc/szima
ck
1 year ago
I don't want Mitt Romney for president anyway. Not sure about Cain. Need to read and hear more about him. However, it seems like the Republican party is determined to make Romney their golden boy to go up against Obama, but the funny thing is I don't hear anyone saying they want him as president. And I don't live in a bubble; I have friends with a variety of voting backgrounds. If it is Romney vs. Obama then Obama will get a second term. We don't need any more of Obama's bad policies or his open-door support of Planned Parenthood.
Rob
1 year ago
What no one wants to admit is that Romney and Cain are probably more representative of the average GOPer in office than any other candidate. Pro-life is a great punch line during the political season, but it fades quickly once they get in office. Prediction: if GOP wins they will reverse the Mexico city policy (good thing by the way) and planned parenthood will remain intact. They will be too busy going after social security, medicare and medicaid to bother with pro-life issues. If the GOP happens to wrestle control of all three bodies, then I hope we hold them to account for prolife issues, because there will be no excuse, not that there ever should be.....
vance
1 year ago
This makes it easy for me who not to vote for Romney or Cain. I'm disappointed in Cain not signing the pledge. Romney is what I suspected all along. He is a RINO, another Liberal in an elephant costume. This is why the DC Beltway Liberal Republicans and the talking heads on the Sunday commentary shows are squarely behind Romney and telling us that Pallin is bad news. I am fed up to my forehead with the RINO bunch. They need to take a walk across the aisle and stay there.
Douglas Pearson
1 year ago
Cain either is "splitting hairs" or actually cares about what he signs, says, and does. I think that fact that the worst is being presumed about this man in this regard is not in keeping with the highest standards of our Catholic Faith.

I agree with Mr. Cain that it is not the Presidents job to "advance" particular legislation and that the SBA Pledge was poorly worded and if revised to be more precise that Mr. Cain could in good conscience sign it.

I for one am refreshed by a politician that does not make promises that he can't keep. We have had too many Republicans simply play the pro-life card for all it is worth and at the end of the day we still have 3,000 abortions per day.
serge
1 year ago
Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann are the strongest pro-life advocates in the race. Both have experience in congress and both have voting records that support their positions. In addition, both have more than 2.4 children of their own which reflects consistency between their political views, record ans their personal lives.
MJGT
1 year ago
Mitt Romney, Herman Cain, and Gary Johnson are immediately off my list for consideration as presidential nominees. Mitt Romney now has two big strikes against him--healthcare and abortion. These are fundamental social, political and moral issues. They color just about every other issue. As such, they tell us a great deal about a candidate. Even if he changes his mind, it is too late for Mitt Romney. On the other hand, I am grateful for candidates like Rick Santorum, Tim Pawlenty, Newt Gingrich, and Michele Bachmann.
Bulbajer
1 year ago
Why did the SBA List include the first part of the pledge ("Only nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court and federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, not legislating from the bench")? I know that the "original intent" approach to the Constitution is popular with conservatives, but how is it relevant to the pro-life cause? I doubt that this was the reason those 3 GOPs didn't sign, but still...
Mike Crad
1 year ago
Romney won't sign because he is not pro-life.

See his pro-life profile at http://prolifeprofiles.com/romney

And see video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7y1HMZNJy0
kathy
1 year ago
Herman Cain is right! None of them should have signed that because of #4. The President can't advance legislation -- He said he'd sign the legislation that Congress sent up. This headline is misleading and unfortunate. Herman Cain is PROLIFE!

Prev1Next

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment