Unbelievable: Pro-life groups endorsing pro-choice, pro-homosexual politicians

Major "pro-life" groups shamelessly caving in.

POSTED: November 5, 2012

Last week the voters across Massachusetts received a mailing from the National Right to Life Committee endorsing Scott Brown for US Senate. For weeks Massachusetts residents have been bombarded with TV ads like this one from Scott Brown telling everyone who will listen that he is "pro-choice." He supports Roe v Wade. He supports funding for Planned Parenthood.

The group has admitted to the Boston Globe that they are aware of Brown's pro-choice position. But he's not as bad as his opponent, they said.

And it gets worse.

Yesterday Massachusetts Citizens for Life (MCFL) sent out an email blast announcing their endorsements of both Scott Brown for US Senate and Richard Tisei for Congress.

Like Brown, in almost every interview Tisei is upfront about his pro-choice position on abortion. Just last week, Tisei told the local Lynn Item, "I'm pro-choice. I have a 25-year record on women's health that no one can argue with."

But besides that, Tisei was a co-sponsor of the "buffer zone" bill around abortion clinics.

As we've documented, Tisei's larger anti-family record is horrific. As an "open" homosexual, he has vowed to push "gay marriage" in Congress. Tisei brags that he was responsible for blocking the marriage amendment in the Massachusetts Legislature, denying people the right to vote on the issue. He co-sponsored the "transgender rights" bill. He supports funding the odious "Commission for GLBT Youth" that goes into public schools.

MCFL has claimed that NARAL and Planned Parenthood do not endorse Tisei "this year." That may be true, but it's very confusing given his aggressive pro-choice record and public statements. Unfortunately, their lists of endorsements from past years (which we used as basis for our voter guide) are no longer posted.

MCFL and similar groups, on the other hand, often dishonestly omit direct questions about a candidate's pro-abortion positions on their voter guides and candidate questionnaires, confusing their readers. Instead they talk about "public funding," "notification laws," and individual bills, which at best only temporarily slow down the problem of abortion in America and at worst allow it to continue with government sanctions.

It's one thing for individuals to quietly decide to vote for one candidate over another (although we are personally pretty strict about that regarding abortion).

But there is no excuse for a pro-life organization to formally endorse a pro-choice candidate. Period. By doing that, you guarantee that we will have more, not fewer, candidates for office who cave in to the pro-abortion lobby, because there is no price to be paid for it from our side.

These so-called "pro-life" groups can no longer be taken seriously. They are a disgrace to the hardworking people who struggle for the unborn.