Quote

Well, I think that it's clear that the Republican Party is a pro-life party. And we do value life. And we do believe that the unborn have a right to life.

I've always been pro-life from conception to natural death. It's important for the Republican nominee to maintain what we stand for. We are the party that stands for all of life, whether it's convenient or inconvenient, whether it's perfect or imperfect.

I say Democrats should not be afraid to talk about the morality of life, of caring for children who are born. It seems the Republican obsession with being pro-life lasts about nine months. After that, it's each baby for herself.

More and more political analysts and weak-kneed politicians are advising the historically pro-life Republican Party to abandon its pro-life stance for political gain. My first response is that if you cannot trust a party on the value of defending human life, how can you trust it on issues like marginal tax rates?

I am pro-choice, but I don't consider that inconsistent at all with pro-life - there's no way that having an abortion, ever, is an easy decision, and it more often errs on the side of absolutely wrenching, not to mention physically debilitating.

I have worked for three decades as a staunch advocate of building a 'big tent' party that includes both pro-choice and pro-life Republicans.

It's a rare pro-lifer who is against the death penalty, who's against all war, who favors, you know, all the things people need to flourish and stay healthy in life. They've tied themselves to the Republican Party, which doesn't support any of that.

You can't reconcile being pro-life on abortion and pro-death on the death penalty.