Aug. 9, 2016
Blogger Rachel Held Evans is disingenuous when she states that you can vote for Hillary Clinton and still be “pro-life.” This is simply not true. While we don’t know exactly what we’re getting with Donald Trump, we surely know what we’re getting with Hillary Clinton. It should not only raise red flags but also sound loud sirens that both Planned Parenthood and NARAL are heavily endorsing Clinton. Back in January Planned Parenthood announced that it was endorsing Clinton and dropping at least $20 million this election cycle, saying:
“We’re proud to endorse Hillary Clinton for President of the United States. No other candidate in our nation’s history has demonstrated such a strong commitment to women or such a clear record on behalf of women’s health and rights.”
Planned Parenthood has shown time and time again that its interests as an organization are primarily financial. The abortion industry makes a huge profit from selling abortions and baby body parts, while receiving over $500 million in taxpayer funding annually. Planned Parenthood and Hillary Clinton are two peas in a pod.
The Democratic platform itself lines right up with Clinton in codifying her progressively aggressive abortion stance: both have now embraced repealing the Hyde Amendment and forcing taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. The Republican platform, on the other hand, is pro-life, solid, and conservative. There is a night and day difference between these two.
Held Evans also claims that outlawing abortion won’t necessarily reduce abortions. That’s incorrect, based on inflated and ideologically-driven data provided by the abortion lobby. Further, studies have shown that access to contraceptives may actually increase teen pregnancy. Abstinence education, on the other hand, actually works. More abstinence means fewer unplanned pregnancies and fewer abortions.
Being pro-life is being pro-women and their children, before birth and after. You can’t be pro-life if you support the intentional killing of innocent human life, in the womb or outside it. Voting for someone who does support the intentional killing of vulnerable, unborn humans is as anti-life as it gets. Hillary’s words speak for themselves on where she stands on abortion: “I believe we need to protect access to safe and legal abortion, not just in principle, but in practice.”
In a democratic society we have the unique privilege of voting in accordance with our beliefs and values. By supporting pro-abortion candidates, we not only compromise our values, but also support the killing of unborn baby humans.
Sure, there are other values that are pro-human dignity that we should want in our candidates. But let’s keep in mind that the most fundamental of these rights is the right to life. We cannot exercise other rights without first being able to exercise our right to life and to ensure that every single person’s right to life is protected and defended, not only by our Congress and our laws, but by our next president. A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for abortion. If she is elected president, she is going to do everything in her power to push the most radical pro-abortion agenda that the U.S. has ever seen, most notably by her nomination of pro-abortion Supreme Court justices and support for Planned Parenthood and the abortion lobby’s destructive agendas. The lives of millions of unborn babies are at stake. Don’t be duped.