Byron Curtis is professor emeritus of biblical studies at Geneva College in Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania. In an op-ed today at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette he makes a pro-life case for Kamala Harris.
A taste:
I’m a 46-year member of the Republican Party, nearly all my adult life. My father and my grandfather — Republicans. Family legend has it that way back in the 1850s, in the dangerous days of the anti-slavery movement, my great-grandfather was a founding member of the party created to oppose slavery in the United States. That’s the Republican Party.
It’s a week before Election Day, and I am ashamed to be a Republican…
A neighbor’s front-yard sign says, Vote for Life. Last night my Republicans for Harris/​Walz sign was stolen, but I agree with my neighbor’s sign: Vote for Life. Next Tuesday I shall vote for life. And I shall do so in the only practical way available to a law-abiding American citizen.
I’ll vote for the candidate who shall maintain the law and order of this Republic, the only candidate who has committed to the peaceful transfer of power, the deeply flawed, pro-legal abortion candidate who vows to maintain the constitutional order of the United States.
A dear friend asks, “What about the babies?” Someone else may ask, “Doesn’t a Harris vote endorse massive infant death?” I answer: Abortion law is now for the states to decide. In 2022 the Supreme Court ended the national pro-death tyranny that had mislead so many women — especially so many women of the urban poor — to end the lives of their unborn children. Now Roe v. Wade is dead. Now the issue is left to the states. What about the babies? Now we must fight for their lives there, in the states.
If she wins, Kamala Harris vows to sign into law a federal right to “reproductive freedom.” That “freedom” is the new code-word for policy that in its broad reach embraces elective abortion.
In this endeavor, she will likely fail, for to enact it she shall need majorities in both the Senate and House of Representatives. If she should gain that unlikely double majority, the resulting law would face instant litigation from conservative-majority states, be thrown to the Supreme Court, and very likely lose.
To avert that loss, Ms. Harris may intend to expand the nine-judge Supreme Court well beyond that number and nominate pro-legal-abortion judges to fill the new vacancies. That endeavor likewise seems doomed.
Thus the success of her most important pro-legal abortion policies is remote. On the other side, Mr. Trump has promised to oppose a federal anti-abortion law. Hence, despite the heated rhetoric in Presidential politics, abortion is not 2024’s key issue.
It’s ironic: Kamala Harris is the deeply flawed candidate who shall keep pro-life politics (and all sorts of other politics) possible. Why? Because she shall keep the Republic. She shall keep it by keeping her oath of office, the Presidential oath “to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Read the entire piece here.