Pro-Life Reaction to Scott Brown Defeating Martha Coakley

LifeNews.com ^ | January 20, 2010 | Steven Ertelt

[julieee]

Pro-Life Reaction to Scott Brown Defeating Martha Coakley

Washington, DC -- Scott Brown defeated pro-abortion activist Martha Coakley Tuesday night in a special election for a U.S. Senate seat that became a national expression of disappointment with the pro-abortion health care bill. Leading pro-life advocates applauded the vote because of its impact on the legislation.

http://www.LifeNews.com/state4742.html

[icwhatudo]

“Carefully noting that Brown is not pro-life on abortion — though he supports numerous limits on abortion and opposes the pro-abortion health care bill — pro-life advocates said the vote was still tremendously helpful.”

A fair assessment.

[No_More_Harkin]

Yah - this is no big victory for the pro-life movement (btw, seems to be a dead issue anyway) except for the fact that perhaps funding for abortion can be removed from the Health Care Reform debacle.

[Emmett McCarthy]

Yes, there is the funding for abortion in the health fiasco which is hopefully dead now with Brown’s vote. The only other effect he can have on the matter is his vote on Supreme Court nominees would be my guess. He may - and I really don’t know - be of a mind not to consider support for Roe as a “litmus test”. That’s far better than anything else that we’ve seen come out of Massachusetts so far, isn’t it?

[Buckeye McFrog]

Yes, there is the funding for abortion in the health fiasco which is hopefully dead now with Brown’s vote.

That is unless the House can be brow-beaten into accepting the Senate bill with it’s very loose abortion language. Time for the Pro Life Movement and Catholic Bishops to start dialing up House members. NO rubber-stamp of the Senate healthcare bill!

[Brytani]

Many Freepers portrayed Brown as a full supporter of abortion, when he record clearly said otherwise.

Brown’s beliefs mirror what we find in polling across this country - no partial birth abortion, no tax payer funding for abortion in the US or overseas, parental notification, showing women their sonograms prior to an abortion and requiring a 24hr wait period for her to decide AFTER seeing her babies development - he introduced legislation to do just that in MA. Brown concedes abortions will take place and therefore should be safe and legal.

While I personally go further than Brown and want all abortion illegal, I realize his position is a solid position shared by most Americans.

I’m glad to see Father Pavone speak in support of Brown and that groups working to end abortion realize Brown is an asset towards their ultimate goal and have accepted him.

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

Ping

There are reasons that even pro-lifers can be satisfied with the outcome.

[Emmett McCarthy]

Yes, that is a good thing to suggest. I suspect that House members who didn’t see it before see now that “it ain’t gonna fly”. How long before ObaMao seeks refuge in the Kenyan Embassy?

[DoughtyOne]

I read a statement of his off his web site last week. He clearly states there that he believes we must drastically reduce the number of abortions that take place in this nation.

That is precisely the way I address the issue to people who buy the idea women should have choice.

You don’t change minds by saying you want abortion outlawed. Saying you believe we need to find a way to reduce the number of fetuses that are destroyed is a statement everyone can agree with, and actually support.

IMO, that’s how you more people in your direction.