Wow. This Republican senate candidate is saying he’s pro-life if by pro-life you mean completely ambivalent to the millions of babies being killed and completely unwilling to do anything about it.

A Republican Senate candidate said he wouldn’t vote to change abortion law if elected.

“Social issues and abortion isn’t the focus of this campaign,” said candidate Michael Baumgartner, according to “You wouldn’t see me voting to change any abortion laws at the federal level.”…

While Baumgartner said he would not move to legislate on the issue of abortion, he said his personal view is that abortion should only happen when the life of the mother is in danger.

“I would, if checking boxes in a questionnaire, say I would oppose abortion except when the life of the mother is in danger,” he said, according to But he also said he wants a “truce” on social and cultural issues in order to pass bills that are in everyone’s interest.

OK. There’s a lot here to unpack if you’re interested in logic and stuff.

He said he wants to pass bills that are in everyone’s interest. Presumably, he doesn’t think restricting abortion is in everyone’s interest.

I’m not sure I understand the difference between this position and the “personally pro-life” canard. He might as well have said, “safe, legal, and rare.”

Here’s the thing –life isn’t about checking a box. Either life must be defended vigorously or surrendered, the same as freedom. You can’t just check a box for freedom. You fight for it or surrender.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that he’s double digits behind in the polls. All he’s done is make sure that pro-lifers won’t be pro-Baumgartner. We won’t check that box.

*subhead*Apathetic towards life.*subhead*