The pro-life movement has enjoyed significant but very gradual success over the last 40 years — success that has become more real in the last nine years since the Gonzales v. Carhart decision on the Supreme Court.
And this is not just about the incremental legislative gains that pro-lifers have secured in defending nascent human life, but also the charitable network they have built over time of quality crisis pregnancy centers in hundreds of U.S. cities. The best of these centers — because not all of them are of equal quality — help provide for the medical and material needs of young mothers. Democrats’ efforts to shut them down or abridge their First Amendment rights in various jurisdictions serve as a reminder that their commitment to the already-born is often subordinate to their commitment to abortion. This point needs to be made more often when they argue, falsely, that pro-life advocates stop caring about babies when they’re born.
Meanwhile, what to make of President Trump’s warm reception of the March for Life this year? It’s funny, in a way, because he’s the last person I would have expected this from.
Trump’s big victory among both Catholic and Evangelical voters in the general election came as something of a surprise to me, given his evident softness with these groups (and basically with church attendees in general) during the primaries. Now he at least seems to understand that this is a group whose support he needs — bigly. And perhaps he’s also acting under the influence of his running mate, Mike Pence, who has walked the pro-life walk throughout his political career. And who knows? Maybe he has deeper, more heartfelt motives than that.
Perhaps I’m spoiling the party here, but it’s worth remembering that Trump’s pro-life bona fides as a candidate were not very impressive. I’m not just referring to his prior support of abortion — which does not separate him from Ronald Reagan, even — but also his deeply unpersuasive explanation of how he changed on the issue. It was one of the least convincing I have ever heard from a politician:
One was a couple that I know very, very well. And you had a strong pro-life and you had a strong pro-choice, and they argued over — the mother was pregnant — they argued over the child.
One — I won’t get into the specifics — but one wanted to abort and the other said we can’t do that, we’re not going to do that. Anyway, they had the baby — it was a long time ago — and the baby is such a magnificent person, who I know, a magnificent person.
And the person that was actually pro-choice is now pro-life because of it, and it had an effect on me.
The story is so vague, and the election-year conversion so sudden and so convenient, that it’s hard not to entertain doubts. What is the time frame during which this baby “grew up,” and at exactly what point did Trump realize how magnificent he or she had turned out to be?
Mitt Romney’s abortion conversion story, which engendered skepticism at the time he first told it, seems credible by comparison.
Maybe someday Trump will reveal more about this story that makes it more credible. For the moment, pro-lifers are rightly watching and waiting to see how well his White House advances their cause. A few good executive orders, perhaps a bill or two he’ll have a chance to sign, and few solid Supreme Court nominations, and he might even win not just their votes, but also their trust.
