Who Is Pro-Life Rita?
In the 2002 election for governor of Pennsylvania, we faced what has become the norm across the country – an election with no pro-life candidate in the major parties. Yes, one was less pro-abortion than the other – if you go by what they say. But the “pro-life” candidate, in particular, said very little. For some time now, the life issue has been a non-issue for the major parties. Unfortunately some “pro-life” organizations always declare one candidate, usually the Republican, to be “pro-life” when they really mean that he is the “lesser of two evils”. It is good to know the lesser of two evils in an election, but to mislabel one as “pro-life” is a great disservice, especially to the average pro-lifer who receives this information and votes thinking he is contributing to the end of baby killing.
Is it moral to vote for the lesser of two evils? Various churchmen tell us so. But the 100% Pro-Life PAC was founded because from our observation of the record for the past several decades, it is almost a total failure. The average pro-lifer probably does not know this. They dutifully take the little candidate cards to the polls and vote for the “pro-life” candidates on them. In my state many, if not most, get elected. But nothing changes. Here in Pennsylvania we regularly have both houses of the legislature controlled by the Republican Party and the governor a Republican and never a word on the Life issue. Silence.
Some of our friends actually think that the “good guys” play down the Life issue in order to get elected and that they will magically become vocally pro-life after the election. Don't hold your breath.
Please note that the people in the 100% Pro-Life PAC are not politically naïve neophytes. Check our advisory board for a start. Most of us went through the “lesser of two evils” stage a long time ago. As we have said before, we do not hate the “lesser of two evils” folks. We know they are sincere pro-lifers, like ourselves. Our argument is that it doesn't work. We do not claim the moral high ground. We have just learned from bitter experience.
Politics is not the short cut to stopping the baby killing many seem to think it is. Moral conversion, usually through education or experience and the grace of God, is. If the voters do not isolate the issue and force the politicians to address it, they never will. By accepting the lesser of two evils route for so long, all we have succeeded in doing is making abortion a non-issue.
That is where Rita comes in. When Mark Crutcher's idea was first presented at our meeting, there were mixed reactions - that is putting it mildly! But the more we discussed it, the more sense it made. The major parties refuse to address the Life issue, so how do we shock them into dealing with it? Why not propose a candidate whose issue is more important than the candidate? Focus on the issue itself. Force it to be addressed in the campaign. Like the very nature of voting, in any political action, it has to be from the bottom up, from an organized group of voters to the politicians. Oh yes, it has to be simple and obvious.
So let's start with four simple things you can do now! 1. Bumper stickers with Pro-Life Rita for Governor, or any other office, in letters big enough to be read from a following car (with website: prolifepac.com). 2. Letters to the editor explaining the Pro-Life Rita campaign (don't forget the web site!). 3. Business card size cards with the same information to put in all of your mail and to pass out at any opportunity. 4. Envelope stickers that can be made on any computer to put on all mail, bills included, with the same info. Remember: Do not forget the web site. The person seeing the sticker or card will not likely approach you and they will need a source for more information.
Now, what will likely happen if enough people do the above (and maybe other things like lawn signs)? We are hoping that life becomes a real issue addressed by the major parties. That would be great. Then we wouldn't need those voters' guides to tell us who is pro-life. The candidates would be forced to tell us themselves!
But realistically, that may not happen. The two major candidates may cut a deal, some of us cynically think that this has been done for years, to hold pat and not address the issue. If that happens our “lesser of two evils” friends will have to make their choice. However, we would strongly suggest that you write in “Pro-Life Rita” on the voting machine on Election Day. Isn't that wasting your vote? Maybe. Remember we think, with good reason, that voting for the lesser of two evils is more than wasting your vote. Whatever you do on Election Day is up to you. If you want Life to be an issue in future elections, why would you not campaign for Pro-Life Rita? Most elections are pretty close nowadays. Could the “Rita” vote throw the election to the “worse of two evils”? Maybe. From a recent mailing we got a reply stating that more babies would be killed as a result of our campaign when the “really bad guy” got elected. The tone of this letter really hurt. It made it clear that these deaths would be our moral responsibility. There was no return address. We could easily respond that the tens of millions of deaths were the moral responsibility of those who chose the “lesser of two evils”. But we would never do that. A sincere pro-lifer has enough dilemmas to deal with.
Our PAC regularly identifies candidates who are 100% pro-life. And occasionally we endorse some of them. Sometimes these candidates are members of third parties. They rarely win, but they are always very clear on the Life issue. Are these courageous people and those who vote for them responsible for babies being killed when the “worse of two evils” is elected? Who is responsible for the babies killed when the “lesser of two evils” is elected and nothing changes?
Sometimes it seems as if too many of us are better Republicans or Democrats than pro-lifers. We give some lip service to the issue and then vote the party and not the issue. The politicians depend on that. And in our experience, they are rarely wrong. Years ago the then most profoundly pro-life member of the Pennsylvania state house told us to “hold our noses” and vote for an equally profound pro-abortion candidate for US Senate. These two were both Republicans. Needless to say the pro-lifer is long gone from the legislature and the senator continues to cast his pro-death votes even until today. Most of you can come up with examples of your own disappointment with “pro-life” candidates who have regularly compromised on the Life issue after the election. Hurts, doesn't it? Especially when you know you voted for him or campaigned for him.
One of our advisors, thinking out loud, said that many of us are willing to compromise because the Life issue is really remote from us. We see the statistics, but the babies are silent before and after their murder. We would like to think he is wrong. But if we tolerate the silence of the parties and their candidates, he may be right.
We lament the silence of the dead and are disgusted by the silence of the living!
Pro-Life Rita!
Read more...click below
Read even more...click below