A few weeks ago, I sent an e-mail to my list, encouraging Pennsylvania pro-lifers to support Republican Rick Santorum in his rebid for the U.S. Senate against Democrat Bob Casey.
Both are pro-life, but because Santorum and the White House supported pro-abortion incumbent Arlen Specter in the 2004 Republican primary against pro-lifer Pat Toomey, pro-lifers consider him a traitor. Specter won 51-49 percent. Pro-lifers blame Santorum and Bush for the edge.
This was typical of negative responses I received regarding my e-mail:
Let Rick Santorum be the example to all the other Republican politicians that we will not allow them to play games with the lives of our unborn children, and if they do, they will be gone.
I wish Santorum had not supported Specter. But would turning from Santorum help or hurt the pro-life cause?
I submit it would hurt, badly. Here's why....
Read my column today, "Quit De Wining about the Santorum Spectercle," on WorldNetDaily.com.
You're ABSOLUTELY right, that electing Casey would hurt the pro-life cause. Not to mention the other important conservative causes it would hurt. Casey has historically been pro-life, but there's no reason not to believe that he would turn his back on that stand if it will politically behoove him in the future.
Rick Santorum is as pro-life as they come, and that belief permeates into every decision that he makes as a United States Senator.