About a month ago, an opinion article was published titled “Republican party: Not as pro-life as we think.” Ignoring abortion, I had many issues with this piece.

First, the author complained about the escalating use of drone strikes in recent years. Well, ignoring that the president during those “recent years” was actually a Democrat, another pro-life aspect of the Republican Party is the sensible pro-American military life aspect.

If it means no American casualties, strike away. We did it with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and historians agree we prevented possibly over a million Allied deaths.

Next was a remark about refusing refugee entry and how there was no evidence of refugees hurting us.

What about Ohio State? And why ignore the numerous instances of refugees attempting to provide material support to terrorist organizations?

I think Jesus understands if we are hesitant to take in someone we can’t check so far as to even get a proper age, such as with the Ohio State attacker.

Then there was the claim that removing the Affordable Care Act would kill around 35,000 people. That study, done by the very liberal Urban Institute, looked at Massachusetts when it enacted a healthcare law similar to the ACA, not the ACA itself. Governor of Massachusetts at this time? Mitt Romney, a Republican. Whoops?

The writer also assumes that Republicans have some psychotic love for giving people the chair. A look at the reasons behind a federal execution shows only three offenses (large-scale drug trafficking, espionage and treason) that do not require directly killing someone.

I consider death a proper punishment for fatally raping a minor or shooting up a church. If that makes me a bad guy, so be it.

Maybe the author is right. Perhaps Republicans should frame their positions not as pro-life, but as pro-common sense.

Matthew Dean is a criminal justice major from Possumneck.