You have to be more than "pro-life" to get my vote because...
..."pro-life" since the 1972 US Supreme Court decision to legalize abortion, has often been a label adopted by war-mongering hawks who are actually anything but.
..."family values" often appeals to "I don't know any homosexuals, and I don't understand what they say what they need, but I do know that I'm agin' 'em."
I'll tell this about myself. In the not inconsiderable number of years that have passed since that 1972 Supreme Court decision, one of the controversial positions on which I've never wavered concerns the humanity of organisms still in the maternal womb. What are they if not human? They're human and they deserve respect and compassion! That's what I've always believed, and I don't see myself changing my views on that.
And if they are human, why would a politician who is otherwise "pro-life" make political decisions to deny that human a safe place to live outside the womb as well as inside it? to relegate him to a life of poverty where the alternative to unemployment or jobs that do not pay a living wage is often enlistment in the military? And how many military engagements (where the US allegiances are oftentimes fuzzily defined at best) can be legitimately classified as "pro-life?" to deny shelter (in his own country, if not in ours) to residents of lands where US foreign policy has disrupted the social order?