I have publicly opposed both Donald Trump’s and Kamala Harris’ positions on abortion over the last few months. Over the past few days, media, allies and friends have asked me who I will be voting for on November 5th. I will be voting for Donald Trump. This essay explains the thought process behind my public opposition to the candidates’ positions, the difference between their positions, and my vote.
For many, including myself, the single most important issue to consider when deciding who to vote for is the candidate’s position on fundamental human rights, and in particular, the right to life. Human life is sacred and every human possesses the right to life, starting in the womb. Abortion, the intentional destruction of a preborn child, is the leading cause of death in America, killing nearly 3,000 children daily. When both of the two main political parties actively espouse anti-life policies, what’s a pro-life voter to do?
Let’s start with Harris’ positions, and why I believe no pro-life voter should vote for her.
As Attorney General of California, she selectively prosecuted pro-life journalists who exposed Planned Parenthood selling baby body parts, a federal crime. (At the time, Harris was accepting money from Planned Parenthood for her then-Senate campaign.) Harris also used her power as AG to attempt to force pro-life pregnancy nonprofits in California to post abortion advertisements in their clinics. Harris has said she would pass federal legislation codifying Roe, which would legalize abortion on demand without restriction and supersede all life-saving pro-life laws at the state level.
Harris opposes conscience exceptions for healthcare professionals, meaning she supports forcing healthcare professionals and hospitals, including those of faith, to commit abortions or lose their ability to practice medicine. Along with opposing all abortion restrictions, Harris supports taxpayer-funded abortion. Disturbingly, Harris has made unfettered support for abortion a central tenet of her campaign; she is also the first candidate for president to tour an abortion clinic as a publicity stunt. Harris’ campaign has also spread massive amounts of disinformation about abortion, claiming that miscarriage treatments are banned in pro-life states (they are not) and blaming abortion-related deaths on pro-life laws. The recurring message in nearly every interview and speech Harris gives centers on her unflinching support for abortion. If fascism is the alignment of all power to the state, Kamala Harris is a model abortion fascist.
Harris’ campaign is the most pro-abortion campaign in American history. She not only stands against the rights of preborn children, but she actively works to thwart the rights of pro-life Americans, including conservatives and Christians, to advocate for those children.
What about the Republican side?
For over forty years, the Republican party platform included the right to life. But in an apparent effort to court swing voters and “moderates,” President Trump’s allies gutted the Republican party platform of its pro-life and pro-marriage principles. What his campaign has chosen instead is a path that prioritizes supposed political convenience over fundamental rights.
Several weeks ago, J.D. Vance said that he and Trump support access to abortion pills, which account for 60% of all abortions. Nearly 2,000 children a day are killed by abortion pills, and one out of every 25 women who use abortion pills will end up in the hospital with complications caused by them. They are dangerous for women, and deadly for the children they kill.
Trump has also announced support for taxpayer-funded IVF. In addition to being incredibly expensive (anywhere from $30,000 to $60,000 per live birth), IVF is incredibly risky for women, and for every IVF-created human embryo that survives to the point he or she can be implanted, many of his or her embryonic siblings are callously discarded for perceived “imperfections”. Of the human embryos that do survive this culling, millions end up indefinitely frozen, suspended in a cruel limbo, waiting to either become convenient enough to be given the chance to live and grow, or to die like their many siblings. IVF commodifies children, turning them into property to be created, used, or destroyed at will.
Trump and Vance have expressed support for abortion exceptions for rape and incest, and oppose a national abortion ban. They say that abortion should be an issue left to the states, but then at the state level Trump has criticized and undermined pro-life state laws, such as Florida’s heartbeat law.
Trump and Vance may believe these positions are politically more expedient. But there is no middle ground when it comes to life. Every child, no matter how he or she is conceived, has a right to be given a chance at life. Every abortion intends to end the life of a child. Either there is a right to life, or there isn’t. Abortion is not a “states’ rights issue.” Abortion is a human rights issue, and it is already unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment, which declares that no state shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The goal of the pro-life movement is that every person, from fertilization until natural death, has their right to life protected by law and embraced by culture.
To his permanent credit, Trump historically appointed three of the Supreme Court justices who helped overturn Roe v. Wade, the poorly decided Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion on demand nationally. The overturn of Roe was a tremendous milestone for the pro-life movement, but overruling Roe is only meaningful if laws are passed that protect preborn children at all stages of development. For Trump to oppose many of these pro-life laws, when it was his judicial appointments that paved the way for them, is a tragedy and a wasted opportunity.
I have repeatedly voiced opposition to the recent changes in the Republican platform and in the positions taken by Trump and Vance, urging them to change course. Two months ago, after JD Vance first announced on a national television program that he and Trump supported access to abortion pills and that Trump would veto a national abortion ban, I publicly stated “if you don’t stand for pro-life principles, you don’t get pro-life votes.” I had the opportunity to meet privately with President Trump. He was generous with his time, and we spoke for two hours on my disagreements with him on abortion.
Some progress was made: When enough pro-life allies expressed outrage and threatened to withhold their vote, Trump reversed his position on Amendment 4, which would legalize abortion through all nine months in his home state of Florida, and expressed his opposition to it.
Kamala Harris’ policies and record on abortion are objectively worse than Trump’s. If Trump doesn’t win on November 5th, it will be Kamala Harris who will assume the presidency. The prospect of what Kamala Harris may do in the next four years as President is worse than what Trump has said he would do on life, and could be worse than the negative influence that Trump may have long-term on the Republican party if he wins this election. For all those who vote for Trump in order to stave off the evils that a Harris administration may bring, I believe it is crucial that we continue to speak boldly against any anti-life policies that Trump may advance.
I am deeply concerned for the future of the Republican Party, which looks increasingly like the Democrat party on life and marriage. When both parties go increasingly left, where does that leave the millions of Americans who stand for life and marriage?
I have repeatedly said that Trump’s new positions on abortion and IVF have discouraged pro-life voters. From the thousands of comments and messages I have seen and received in the last two months, and in view of the data about the significant number of Christians who may stay home, I still think that is true. There will be many voters who choose the less pro-abortion candidate, and vote for Donald Trump over Kamala Harris, but there will also be voters who have been so discouraged by Trump’s positions that they may decide to sit this election out.
I urge the Republicans to think big picture about this and restore life to their platform and advocacy. If they don’t, the Republican Party will not be able to depend on social conservatives and Christians for their votes in the future. Enthusiasm will fade and voter turn out will suffer even more than it does today. I urge the Democrat Party to change, as well, and to firmly reject the pro-abortion influence that has a stranglehold on its future.
For voters in 10 states this election, there are also abortion amendments on their state ballots. As we celebrate the fall of the Roe regime, we must now turn our attention to protecting life in the states as well. It is crucial for voters to reject these abortion amendments. Missouri — vote NO on Amendment 3, which would legalize abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. Florida — vote NO on Amendment 4, which would legalize abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. Live Action Victory, a new 501c4 that I lead, has a full voting guide for state initiatives. I encourage everyone to read this guide and to vote to protect childrens’ lives.
We must continue our fight to secure the respect for human life in both political parties, and across our culture. The protection of our children cannot be negotiable—America’s future depends on leaders who protect its most vulnerable.
Lila Rose is Founder & President of Live Action Victory