One important fact that should not be lost site of as we consider the merit of social issues in our ongoing political debate is the central role pro-life issues had in halting the progress of the Democrat health care legislation plans:

Key pro-life lawmakers in Congress credit the pro-life movement for stalling a pro-abortion health care bill that appeared to have enough steam to make it to President Barack Obama. They say the focus on the abortion funding in the bill has caused enough dissension to health the legislation for now.

As LifeNews.com is reporting today, the status of the pro-abortion health care bill is uncertain in the wake of the Massachusetts election.

Rep. Mike Pence told CNS News that the abortion battle played a "critical role" in temporarily stopping the bill. (LifeNews)

Philip Klein, the American Spectator's Washington Correspondent (and a very active twitter journalist), writes on the (slim) prospects of Pelosi overcoming Rep. Bart Stupak's pro-life coalition:

"Even assuming Pelosi could win over House liberals by cutting a backroom deal with Reid that could pass through the Senate using reconciliation rules, she'd still have to keep keep all of the Stupak Democrats who voted for the bill last time on board without being able to do anything for them on abortion language and avoid the defection of any other moderates who were spooked by what happened in Massachusetts. For every member she loses, she would have to convince one of the 39 Democrats who felt the need to vote against the bill the first time around, to switch his or her vote to "yes." So, is it theoretically possible that Pelosi could still get 218 of her members to cave and support shoving this unpopular health care bill down our throats? Yes. But as you can see, it's highly unlikely."

Highly unlikely, in large part, due to the efforts of the pro-life movement.