Rick Santorum released a statement today about his pro-life views and record as a former senator and congressman from Pennsylvania as hundreds of thousands of pro-life advocates joined today’s March for Life.
Santorum also tagged pro-abortion President Barack Obama for his abortion advocacy. But he also needled his three Republican presidential opponents on specific criticisms Santorum has claiming they have less than perfect pro-life records.
With regard to Ron Paul, Santorum appears to accurately note that Paul has opposed federal legislation limiting abortion because he believes abortion should be a state matter. With regards to Romney, Santorum ignores that a state Supreme Court decision two decades before Romney became governor was responsible for taxpayer funding of abortions in Massachusetts. On Gingrich, Santorum repeats a common criticism that appears to go against his virtually perfect pro-life voting record in Congress.
The full statement, originally published in the Wall St. Journal appears below:
Monday marks the first full day of the 40th year of Roe v. Wade, but together we can make it the decade when Roe is overturned. With a president committed to defending life and appointing originalist judges, we will turn the tide for life and human dignity.
I believe that all life is precious. I know life begins at conception. I know that every person, every child conceived in the womb, has a right to life. I know that life is a right endowed by our Creator, that it is inalienable, laid down in the Declaration of Independence, and should be guaranteed under the Constitution. The right to life is the first right. Without its protection, no other rights matter.
This anniversary is both a day of sadness for the more than 40 million babies who have been killed since Roe v. Wade and a day of hope as more and more Americans embrace a culture of life and as more and more young people march in Washington and around the country in support of life.
The 14th Amendment states explicitly: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The Constitution is clear. The meaning is inconvenient.
I have learned lessons about the value of all life from my children. I grieve for the children lost and for the mothers who have been deceived by a society selling selfishness. I am thankful for the faithful workers around the country who serve at pro-life pregnancy centers providing women honest information and additional choices.
I fought in the U.S. Senate against the tragedy of partial-birth abortion. This debate energized momentum for the culture of life in America. I sat in the Supreme Court during the first oral arguments on the constitutionality of the law designed to stop the heinous practice. It wasn’t until President George W. Bush nominated conservative justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito, whose confirmations I helped lead, that the Supreme Court changed its position and upheld the law.
We don’t judge hearts but we do judge records. President Obama’s record of support for abortion is radical and extreme. He stood alone not to defend life but to oppose the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in the Illinois State Senate. He opposed ending the horrific procedure of partial-birth abortion. He supported federal funds for abortion through ObamaCare and told Catholic Charities that there was no room in the inn if they wanted to help women abused by sex traffickers and be pro-life at the same time.
My opponents whisper that they are pro-life, but I fight the battle in the trenches and will continue to do so until every innocent human life in this country is protected. I’ve dedicated my life as a husband, father and leader to this cause.
Ron Paul embraces the 10th Amendment but ignores the 14th Amendment when he refuses to support federal protections for the unborn. The Constitution protects not only property rights but people, too. What is liberty without the right to life? The federal courts and the federal government are the last resort for protecting this foundational right.
Mitt Romney’s passion for life was apparently overwhelmed by Democrats when he put Planned Parenthood on the advisory board for RomneyCare and did not fight government-funded abortions while governor of Massachusetts. He was, it seems, too intimidated to support judges who understood the plain meaning of the Constitution on the right to life.
Newt Gingrich has pushed social issues to the back bench. In a pledge to America that the Congress tried to put together in 2010, my phone was ringing off the hook from people who said he went in and told them to keep social issues out of the pledge for the 2010 elections. Do we want a president who talks on both sides or one who is unafraid to put social issues in the forefront where they belong?
Whenever I am confronted with an immoral law that is unjust or harmful to society, I believe I have an obligation to work toward changing it to comport with what is moral. I agree with the Founders that there is a natural law that can be known through the exercise of reason against which the positive or civil law must be measured and, if needed, amended. For decades certain human beings were wrongly treated as property and denied liberty in America because they were not considered persons under the Constitution.
I am disappointed that President Obama, who rightfully fights for civil rights, refuses to recognize the civil rights of the unborn in his country. I am disappointed that the other three Republican candidates in this race for president simply check the box. The unborn need leaders who will stand for life; so does the soul of America.
