Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) has demonstrated serious political skill in articulating his presidential ticket’s abortion stance.
When answering on abortion policy during the vice presidential debate, Vance navigated the question expertly. He noted that what the Republican Party really needs to do is to earn trust by being “pro-family in the fullest sense of the word,” protecting innocent lives while supporting women and families in various policy areas. He said also that “Donald Trump has been very clear” that the most sensible way to handle abortion regulation is to leave it up to votes at the state level.
It was clear that Vance did not capitulate to pro-abortion demands despite polling pressure and a fickle running mate. Still, advocates such as LiveAction founder Lila Rose have denounced what, for them, amounts to abortion support from Vance:
It is one thing to be disappointed in Vance choosing to play ball with the political system — conservatives can disagree on method. It is another thing entirely to say that he is “now defending abortion.” The claim is untrue, not to mention devoid of political tact.
Vance has been careful to toe the line without betraying his faith. Word choice is a powerful tool, and Vance wields it. On abortion, he has articulated specifically former President Donald Trump’s vision for policy. If he disagrees with where Trump’s heart lies on the matter, all Vance has had to do is defend federalism. Given the reversal of Roe v. Wade, the power is already in the hands of the states — Vance does not have to push to protect a nonexistent federal ban in order to maintain a pro-life position. There is reasonable work he can do with the existing structure for the time being.
Even to details as minute as saying “fertility treatments” over “in vitro fertilization” Vance has been attentive. “I want us to support fertility treatments,” he said in the debate. For Catholics and for abortion advocates listening for keywords, the distinction is crucial. There are fertility treatments sanctioned by the Catholic Church, which Vance surely had in mind.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
It is suboptimal for Vance to have to be so selective on a truth he believes, but that is the political reality. It is likewise unrealistic to place a full moral imperative on the national ban: Politics is a false hope.
The strongest way to save babies’ lives, for right now, is to limit the number who are killed as a result of Vice President Kamala Harris’s unlimited abortion policy. Rose can vote for a truly pro-life candidate, but there is just about no chance of him winning. The issue does not lie with her convictions but with her unfounded smearing of Vance.
This article was originally published at www.washingtonexaminer.com
