To the editor: James Sexton (“Pro-life leader explains support for Nolan,” July 29) seems to think that there is only one way for conscientious pro-life people to vote in the upcoming primary election. But is that really true?
The most important issue that has ever faced pro-lifers in Vermont is on the ballot in November – whether to enshrine unlimited, unregulated abortion in our Vermont constitution. If Article 22 passes, not only will it prevent the Legislature from ever protecting even a single unborn child from abortion, it will open the door to forcing doctors and nurses to participate in abortions or lose their licenses, minors being able to make all sorts of “reproductive” decisions without parental knowledge and consent, and crisis pregnancy centers being put out of business if they won’t make abortion referrals.
So the question becomes, what is the best strategy to defeat this amendment in November? There are many pro-life people who believe that Christina Nolan winning the Senate primary will provide a better chance to defeat Prop 5/Article 22 in November. Why? Because her candidacy would focus attention on late-term abortion, and make it clear that pro-choice people can and do oppose Prop 5/Article 22. That is where the public discussion needs to be focused in the coming months. It is going to take the votes of both pro-life and pro-choice people to defeat this constitutional amendment.
A senate candidate who cheered the overturn of Roe v. Wade, saying the issue should be decided by the states, who then flipped and said he would support legislation at the federal level to outlaw abortion, cannot keep the focus where it needs to be if Prop 5/Article 22 is to be defeated. A candidate who says he has a “no exceptions” position on abortion (not even for the life of the mother?) will reinforce the talking points of the abortion lobby, and make it more difficult to attract the votes needed to defeat Prop 5/Article 22. I’m sure the abortion lobby would be thrilled to see Christina Nolan defeated in the primary.
This, of course, is not the first time in the history of the movement that sincere pro-life people have disagreed about the best strategy to pursue to achieve our pro-life goals. Perhaps in his limited experience with the pro-life movement, Mr. Sexton has not encountered such disagreements before. Instead of recognizing that sometimes pro-life people come to different conclusions about the best course of action, Mr. Sexton has chosen to publicly denigrate and vilify those who do not agree with him. That is not the way to advance the pro-life cause and defeat Prop 5/Article 22 in November.
-While I am a member of the Board of Directors of the Vermont Right to Life Committee, the opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the organization. Sharon Toborg, Barre