I pledge never to vote for, support, or endorse any candidate for
public office who embraces a pro-abortion (pro-choice) public policy
Pro-Life Pledge may contradict the views of those who would opt for
“incremental gains” in the pro-life political struggle.
There have been 25 years of incremental gains offset by
incremental losses - the strategy doesn’t work.
The state of our nation is prophesied in Rev:9:21 “Neither did
they repent of their murders or their sorcery, their fornication or
the Pro-Life Pledge is a bold act of faith.
We must have faith in the long term outcome, which is in God’s
hands, even if the short term result of our vote (or non vote) seems
small or futile. The Pledge
says that compromise is unacceptable when it involves human life.
For example, when you take the Pledge you promise not to vote for
those who say they are pro-life but insist upon an exception in the case of rape, incest or
life of the mother. Such
candidates have, in effect, publicly declared that abortion is not
murder in those cases. They
have capitulated to the pro-abortion opposition, thereby encouraging the
opposition to create their own variety of exceptions.
Also, when you take the Pledge you reject voting for the
“lesser of two evils”. The
latter can be a devastating compromise because it teaches the nation
that there are varieties of “pro-life” that are acceptable and that
abortion is negotiable.
Pro-Life Pledge leads us to vote for life in God’s uncompromising way.
Jesus said; “He who is not with me is against me.”
The term “pro-choice” is a euphemistic lie.
The baby has no choice. Babies
need us to defend them. Every
Christian has an obligation to participate in their defense.
The only true and effective defense is the rule of law - a law
that would prohibit all abortions.
We must vote only for people committed to passing such a law.
Yes, this is single-issue voting.
Abortion is the pre-eminent moral-political issue of our time!
We urge you to take the Pro-Life Pledge!
Note: In cases where a candidate
maintains a vaguely expressed exception for rape, incest or life of the mother,
great discernment is required and the final decision on whether to offer
support cannot easily be generalized. A truly pro-life position
has no such exceptions. However, in comparing such a candidate to
alternatives that may be worse, consideration must be given to whether
the candidate will promote a fully pro-life position but tolerate a
negotiated compromise or whether the candidate avidly promotes and is
commited to the exceptions from the outset. It is our opinion that
the former situation is quite often acceptable, perhaps grudgingly,
depending on the degree of the candidate's commitment to life, because
it represents good, possibly mixed with evil, but the latter situation
is not acceptable for reasons stated above.