Abortion is the single most important issue facing our nation today. On average, more than 3,000 people are killed every day through this crime. Abortion is the leading cause of death in our country being responsible for more than 1/4 of total annual deaths in the US. Since 1973, an average of 1 million children per year have been brutally murdered through abortions.
With this in mind, we decided to investigate the candidates for Alabama’s Senate seat to see where they stand on the issue of abortion. Here are the results of that investigation:
- Does not mention abortion on his campaign website – Bad
- Nearly 10,000 Alabamians are killed by abortionists every single year, and Luther Strange doesn’t even mention it on his website.
- Endorsed by National Right to Life – Bad
- National Right to Life has a history of endorsing incumbents with a mediocre or even a bad record on abortion against challengers who have an excellent record fighting in defense of prenatal children.
- Introduced the” Sanctity of Human Life Act” – Very Good
- If this bill were to be passed, it would make abortion illegal throughout the United States. This is the kind of bill that our politicians should be supporting, and we fully support Luther Strange’s efforts to pass it. We are surprised and outraged that it does not have any cosponsors, and we publicly call upon all of our senators to join with Luther Strange to pass this bill.
- Cosponsored the “Conscience Protection Act of 2017” – Good
- This bill protects health care providers from being forced to perform abortions. We are very glad that Sen. Strange has chosen to cosponsor this bill.
- Signed a letter requesting the application of the Mexico City Policy to all grants to foreign nongovernmental organizations – Bad
- While we applaud Luther Strange’s efforts to prevent US funds from being spent on foreign abortions, we must unfortunately report that this letter not only requests that abortions be allowed for cases of rape and incest but also requests that US funds be made available to pay people to kill children conceived in rape or incest.
- Cosponsored the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2017” – Bad
- This bill contains a provision for the federal government to pay people to kill children who were conceived in rape or incest.
- Strange claims that this bill “respects the rights of the most vulnerable among us.”
- It is a logical contradiction for Strange to say in one bill that all prenatal children are persons under the protection of the Constitution and then to say in another bill that the federal government should pay to kill children conceived in rape or incest. If life begins at fertilization “at which time every human being shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood,” then killing a child conceived in rape or incest is murder.
Both before and during his campaign for the Senate, Judge Moore has repeatedly said that his policy on abortion is encapsulated in the opinion that he wrote in the case Hicks v. Alabama in 2014. We read Moore’s opinion in Hicks, and found these excerpts:
- “States Have an Affirmative Duty to Protect Unborn Human Life Under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” – Very Good
- “The judicially created “right” to abortion identified in Roe has no basis in the text or even the spirit of the Constitution and is therefore an illegitimate opinion of mere men and not law.” – Very Good
- “Roe and its progeny therefore have no applicability in any case, in any context, and, like the German laws nullified at Nuremberg, should be jettisoned from federal and state jurisprudence.” – Very Good
- “The Equal Protection Clause expressly applies to “any person” within a state’s jurisdiction. By contrast, the Privileges and Immunities Clause applies to “citizens,” namely, “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States ….” U.S. Const. amend XIV, § 1 (emphasis added). This definitional distinction necessarily implies that personhood–-and therefore the protection of the Equal Protection Clause–-is not dependent, as is citizenship, upon being born or naturalized.” – Very Good
- “Unborn children are a class of persons entitled to equal protection of the laws.” – Very Good
- “A plain reading of the Equal Protection Clause, therefore, indicates that states have an affirmative constitutional duty to protect unborn persons within their jurisdiction to the same degree as born persons.” – Very Good
- “Any state’s discriminatory failure to provide legal protection equally to born and unborn persons under, for instance, its statutes prohibiting homicide, assault, or chemical endangerment violates, therefore, the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution.” – Very Good
Both candidates have made some very good stands on the issue of abortion. Roy Moore’s opinion in Hicks v. Alabama is one of the strongest defenses of prenatal children in Alabama’s history, and the “Sanctity of Human Life Act” that Luther Strange introduced in the Senate is a powerful piece of legislation that would abolish abortion throughout the United States. Unfortunately, Senator Strange has also cosponsored some bills that undermine his efforts to protect prenatal children.
Regardless of who wins in the runoff on September 26, we hope that both candidates will use their political capital to defend all prenatal children including those conceived in rape or incest.