(LifeSiteNews) — The pro-life movement, presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy claimed, has not done enough to help women and families in need.
“I think that the pro-life movement, and I consider myself part of that, hasn’t done enough to walk the walk, in actually standing for life and pro-life principles,” Ramaswamy said during a recent interview with the Des Moines Register and NBC News. The Iowa GOP caucus is next week.
Does he know that pro-life pregnancy resource centers (PRCs) provided almost $360 million in goods and services to pregnant women, their babies, and their families in 2022, according to a recent report? They do this in the face of ongoing physical violence and attacks from pro-abortion activists and Democratic politicians.
As recently reported by LifeSiteNews:
The data, from 2,750 centers, show PRCs held more than 16 million sessions with families in need, and 97.4% reported “positive experience/satisfaction.”
The centers provided ultrasounds, pregnancy tests, “after-abortion support,” sexually transmitted disease testing, and parenting classes, among other services.
About one-third of the free or low-cost services came in the form of pregnancy tests, to the tune of $129,389,350 for free tests. Centers also provided roughly $40 million in free diapers, $21 million in baby clothing, and $3.5 million in cribs.
The pro-life movement largely does this with the assistance of volunteers, who provide about 70 percent of the workers for PRCs.
This number includes self-reported data and does not capture the breadth of aid provided to families in need through religious and other nonprofit organizations.
Ramaswamy’s statement also may unintentionally send the wrong message that the abolition of abortion can only happen after certain social services are available or laws are changed, such as around adoption. It is close to the position of Ambassador Nikki Haley, someone whom Ramaswamy has sought to draw a distinction with during primary election debates.
.@VivekGRamaswamy, who opposes federal protections for preborn babies, says Republicans and pro-lifers need to do a better job of supporting "principles."https://t.co/9ocrPvFOoI pic.twitter.com/Ko7ftsDtAj
— Matt Lamb (@MattLamb22) January 8, 2024
It is certainly good to help those in need, but the morality of abortion is not determined by the resources available to pregnant women, babies, and their families. Rather, every abortion kills an innocent human being and violates his inherent right to life.
Ramaswamy’s comments indicate a possible misunderstanding of the pro-life movement, similar to his confusion about the law.
He also said in the Des Moines Register interview that he wanted “us to do better as Republicans to actually stand for those life principles than we have done today.”
It is a curious statement for the presidential candidate to make, since Ramaswamy has previously said he does not believe in federal protections for preborn life and believes the issue should be left up to the states, though he said he has an “open mind” on the issue.
That means that Vermont or Illinois can violate the human rights of preborn babies and allow for abortion up until the moment of birth.
In making the case for why some states should be allowed to have unlimited abortion, Ramaswamy has also cited “principles,” saying: “I think I’m the only Republican candidate in this field who has come out and said, ‘I would not support a federal abortion ban of any kind.’ On principled ground, because I am grounded in constitutional principles, and I think there’s no legal basis for the federal government to legislate.”
This is not true, as the Dobbs v. Jackson ruling never stated the federal government should stay out of the issue of abortion. Rather, Justice Samuel Alito, in the majority opinion, wrote “the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”
It is also at odds with his position on a federal ban on the surgical and chemical mutilation of children.
Ramaswamy is an entertaining candidate who knows how to use social media and short video clips to his advantage to gain a following.
He should use his media appearances to tell the truth about the pro-life movement and not inadvertently push pro-abortion talking points.