Apparently you missed why a pro life candidate might decide not to sign this specific pledge:
“I support right-to-life issues unequivocally and I adamantly support the first three aspects of the Susan B. Anthony pledge involving appointing pro-life judges, choosing pro-life cabinet members, and ending taxpayer-funded abortions,” Cain said in a statement. “However, the fourth requirement demands that I ‘advance’ the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. As president, I would sign it, but Congress must advance the legislation.”
“I have been a consistent and unwavering champion of pro life issues,” Cain added. “In no way does this singular instance of clarification denote an abandonment of the pro-life movement, but instead, is a testament to my respect for the balance of power and the role of the presidency.”
That is a noble and respectable reason for Cain not to sign the pledge.
I did miss that. Thank you for posting that.
I understand Herman’s point, though I wouldn’t say a president is without power to advance legislation. He can advance it by jawboning it, lobbying for it, and by signing it should it ever come to him from congress.
If that’s his only objection, then I think the pledge’s supporters should amend the pledge by stating clearly what they mean by a president “advancing legislation”. And then let’s see if Herman refuses then.