Why it's time to redefine what it means to be "pro-life"

I wasn't quite old enough to vote in the 1988 presidential election, but if I had been, I would have voted for George H.W. Bush, and a big reason would have been his "pro-life" position on abortion. As a Catholic, I spent years as an altar boy in the 1980s listening to priests at St. Callistus Church in El Sobrante speak of abortion as an assault on the sanctity of human life, and I agreed wholeheartedly.
All these decades later, I continue to follow my church's teachings on the morality of abortion, but my view of what it means to be "pro-life" has changed radically. I have never voted for a traditional Republican pro-life candidate for president, and have no intention of ever doing so. I no longer see that label as limited to the abortion debate but rather as encompassing a broad range of social justice issues that relate to the respect and defense of human life -- most notably, the gun epidemic ravaging our nation, and the refusal of so-called pro-life politicians such as Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and President Donald Trump to do anything about it.

Victims of Parkland, Florida, shooting

Even in the context of abortion, I've come to believe that the social policies embraced and promoted by pro-choice politicians in areas such as sex education, health care and anti-poverty programs have been much more effective in reducing the frequency of abortion in our society than the empty words of pro-life conservatives whose only goal is to coerce women to do what they believe to be moral. As a Christian, a husband and a father, I believe that abortion is about much more than the endless debate over Roe v. Wade, and that respecting and defending life in our scarred society and world is about much more than whether a woman retains the right to terminate her pregnancy.
It's time to stop allowing politicians to monopolize the label of pro-life over a single issue, especially when they consistently show a callous disregard for human life in the positions they take on universal health care, the plight of immigrants and refugees, the environmental threat to the livability of our planet, and the scourge of gun violence that has taken the lives of our children in Newtown, Connecticut; Parkside, Florida; and Sutherland Springs, Texas, to name but a few.

It is time for all Americans to state loudly and clearly that politicians who turn a blind eye to the fundamental human right articulated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" are not pro-life in any way, shape or form, regardless of their position on Roe v. Wade. The children of Newtown and Parkland, and so many other places, were not afforded this most basic right. No amount of thoughts and prayers can change that fact.
Bill Clinton was never labeled, by supporters or detractors, as a pro-life president. But in my mind, his pro-life record stands above any president of my lifetime. As a new breed Democrat, he boldly reshaped the debate around abortion to encompass both moral and legal considerations during his 1992 presidential campaign, expressing a view that it should be "safe, legal and rare." And indeed, after peaking during the first Bush presidency in 1990, the abortion rate in the United States fell steadily during the Clinton years, and has continued to fall since.
But that's not why I consider him pro-life. As president, Clinton undertook one of the most successful humanitarian endeavors of the 20th century, ending the Bosnian genocide through military and diplomatic measures and saving countless civilian lives, despite opposition to his efforts at home. And, he signed the 1994 assault weapons ban into law, a ban that was long overdue and that was ultimately allowed to expire by "pro-life" congressional leaders who decided to place the wishes of those who demand unfettered access to military weapons of mass destruction above the safety of our children. Not surprisingly, in the years since the ban expired, the AR-15 assault rifle has become the weapon of choice in mass shootings across the United States.
I've been pleased to see my own church, through the inspirational leadership of Pope Francis, greatly expand its focus, emphasis and advocacy for a broad array of life issues over the years, whether it be the fundamental right of all people to health care, food and safe living conditions; its solidarity with immigrants and refugees seeking lives of dignity for themselves and their families (a banner at my church reads "All immigrants Welcome Here"); or the threats of climate change to the ability of people around the world to live in safe, stable environments and benefit from God's gift of natural resources.
The pillars of social justice are broad and interconnected, and the days when a political or religious leader can narrowly define advocacy for life as being about abortion, and abortion only, need to end.
As a humble sinner, I would never presume to speak for God. But I have listened to the Gospels many times throughout my life, and I have my own feelings about what Jesus Christ would say about those who claim to stand for life, while doing nothing to stop the assault on our children, our society and our planet. What He would say about those who market themselves in elections as pro-life, while ignoring the cries of the parents of Newtown and Parkland, or the fact that no where else in the advanced world do such acts of mass terror occur with such horrific frequency, only to be met by such indifference by those who have the power to do something about it.
It's summed up pretty well by a verse I've heard in church more times than I can count over the years, and which speaks volumes in the wake of  Parkland, Florida.
 "Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."-- Matthew 25:45