Pro-Life Movement Not Interested in Truce on Abortion, Not Now, Not Ever

State   |   Steven Ertelt   |   Jun 10, 2010   |   9:00AM   |   WASHINGTON, DC

Pro-Life Movement Not Interested in Truce on Abortion, Not Now, Not Ever

by Kristan Hawkins
June 10, 2010 Note: Kristan Hawkins is executive director of Students for Life of America. The pro-life organization has helped lead the fight against the nomination of pro-abortion activist Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court and headed Stop the Abortion Mandate, to oppose the pro-abortion health care bill.

When it involves life, one can make no a truce. There is no room for gray area, no time to play dead, and no time to stick out head in the sand. When you realize that 1.3 million babies are aborted every year, Governor Mitch Daniels’ words show a level of cowardice that is not expected from a presidential hopeful.

The Indiana Governor stated yesterday in an interview with Andy Ferguson of The Weekly Standard that as president “would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues. We’re going to just have to agree to get along for a little while” until the current economic crisis is resolved.

Further, when asked if he would reinstate Reagan’s Mexico Policy to ban international tax-funded abortions, Governor Daniels remarked, “I don’t know.” These statements illustrate that the Governor is willing to sacrifice human life in order to appease abortion supporters. It signals to all pro-lifers that he wants us to stop fighting for the rights of the unborn and to start waving our white flags of defeat.

Governor Daniels, the truth is sometimes not popular. Neither is taking the high road. Those thinkers and doers who historically have stood in support of justice knew this.

To call a truce sounds more like the words of pro-choice President Obama during his address at Notre Dame last May. It does not sound like the voice of a candidate who recognizes and cherishes the right to life. However, even President Obama didn’t go as far as to call a truce, he only called for an open discussion on the topic in an effort to find “common ground.”

A truce cannot be called until the unborn are safe, and our government ceases to endorse the brutal destruction of the unborn in the womb. If you want a truce, you must be willing to end taxpayer subsidies for Planned Parenthood. And if you want a legitimate truce, then abortions need to end as the unborn are the ones caught in the crosshairs.

Governor Daniels, you are correct when you say that we face a “genuine national emergency.” Our age group – the 18-25 year-olds, have had 1/3 of our generation aborted. 1/3 of our peers, our friends, our siblings, and our cousins are dead. It is now our children’s generation – our peers who are aborting their own children at the rate of 1.3 million per year. That, Governor Daniels, is a national emergency.

When a nation looses its moral compass and gives tacit approval to legalized abortion, abandoning the focus on protecting innocent human life, that nation, our nation, has more serious issues than the current financial crisis.

Furthermore, asking the American people to “stand down for a little while, while we try to save the republic” is absurd. In order to properly support an economy, there must be a high enough birthrate to drive an economy. If there is not a sufficient birthrate, there can be no economic growth. With our ever-expanding social security and healthcare obligations, one can argue that abortion is a reason why we currently lack enough revenue to support these social welfare programs.

We live in a time, for the first time in history, where we have more post-childbearing persons than we do pre-childbearing persons – a trend, which will all-too-soon prove to be less than adequate in supporting a healthy economy. A greater population leads to a greater consumption, which in turn drives up the GNP and GDP. And if we had a larger workforce, immigration would be less of an issue; there would be there would be less demand for undocumented migrant workers because Americans could fill the jobs.

As for being unsure whether or not to reinstate the “Mexico City Policy” in order to focus on economic efforts, I think it’s safe to say that if the President of the United States is unable to both issue a pro-life Executive Order to protect the most innocent among us and work toward growing and maintaining a healthy economy at the same time; he or she has no right in serving as our Commander-in-Chief.

After all, Thomas Jefferson said, “The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.” Governor Daniels, perhaps a history lesson from American students could prove beneficial.


Sign Up for Free Pro-Life News From

Daily Pro-Life News Report Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here. Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.