Why pro-lifers didn’t sell their soul for Brown

Democrats, for their part, could very easily remove this sticking liability from their elections if they, as a party and as individual candidates, embraced pro-life positions. In the meantime, their oftentimes radical views on this fundamental moral issue continue to lose them support—and impassioned support—from an important constituency of American voters.

If liberal supporters of Coakley and those who fear that Obama’s agenda will be seriously imperiled by the upcoming fall elections want to take any lesson from Massachusetts, it should not be that the pro-life movement has changed, or has sold its soul. The lesson should be that pro-lifers will consistently support the candidate who pledges to do more for the unborn. And the more a candidate of either party pledges to advocate the nonpartisan issue of defending unborn human life, the more they will receive consistent pro-life support.

If anyone tells you different, chances are they voted for Coakley.

Thomas Peters authors the American Papist Blog at CatholicVoteAction.org. He also works for the American Principles Project. His e-mail is thomas@catholicvoteaction.org.