When there are legitimate prolifers in a political race and it looks like they could actually win, why, in the Name of Christ, would a group get together to go out of their way to endorse a proabort?
Massachusetts Prolife Advocates say Romney is Prolife
Look, of course they have to 'say' it, because when we all look at Romneys record, it isn't 'prolife' at all. They've got to take the same positions they oppose with Obama and then claim they believe those positions to be 'prolife'.
This is political suicide.
If those positions are 'prolife' when Romney takes them, they are 'prolife' when Obama takes them.
This is the reason why prochoice candidates keep defeating prolifers.
They've taken a couple of things and given them a good spin, but here's everything you need to know about whether Romney is 'prolife'.
1. Romney said that he does not favor a federal constitutional amendment banning abortion, but instead favors each state deciding for itself whether to allow abortion or not. (Suppose Lincoln had taken that approach on the slavery issue. )
2. Gov. Romney signed into law a universal health insurance plan that (a) includes increased state-funded abortions, and (b) names Planned Parenthood in the law as an overseer. Romney never challenged any of that.
3. Romney said he would disagree with governmental intervention in the Terri Schiavo forced starvation case, adding "I think it's probably best to leave these kinds of matters in the hands of the courts."
4. Gov. Romney forced Catholic hospitals in Massachusetts to dispense the "morning after" pill.
5. Romney said he does not object to stem cell research using left over human embryos.
6. Although Romney vetoed pro-abortion legislation after his "conversion", it always appeared to be for political effect. The Legislature always overrode the vetoes. We never saw Romney exert any substantial effort to get his vetoes
sustained
Romney's current view on abortion appears to be based more on a procedural stance than a moral view and is not necessarily a pro-life view.
Instead of focusing on the moral case against abortion, Romney has repeatedly stated he wants the people to vote on this issue, which, in of in itself is not a pro-life position unless you also agree to use your position to pass pro-life legislation. But when pressed on whether he would support a constitutional amendment banning abortion, he refuses to answer this question. The National Journal (February 10, 2007) pressed him on this point:
Question:
You would favor a constitutional amendment banning abortion with exceptions for the life of the mother, rape and incest. Is that correct?
Romney:
What I've indicated is that I am pro-life, and that my hope is that the Supreme Court will give to the states over time or give to the states soon or give to the states their own ability to make their own decision with regard to their abortion law.
Question:
If a state wanted unlimited abortion?
Romney:
The state would fall into restrictions that had been imposed at the federal level, so they couldn't be more expansive in abortion than currently exists under the law, but they could become more restrictive in abortion provisions. So states like Massachusetts could stay like they are if they so desire, and states that have a different view could take that course. And it would be up to the citizens of the individual states. My view is not to impose a single federal rule on the entire nation -- a one-size-fits-all approach -- but instead allow states to make their own decisions in this regard.
On February 28, 2005 - also after his conversion - Romney said:
I am personally pro-life. However, as governor I would not change the laws of the commonwealth relating to abortion.
Anne Fox from 'Mass Citizens for Life' somehow didn't make it on the list of prolife usual suspects who endorse proaborts but, she sent out her own email endorsing the proabortion, author of obamacare and unconstitutional mandates. She's very fond of Santorum, but she wishes Romney would see his failings in prolife positions and doesn't want to fault them:
Last night a good chunk of the country joined us to watch the results of the Iowa caucuses. Of course, pro-lifers are very fond of Rick Santorum!
We in Massachusetts wish Governor Romney would recognize the failings of state-controlled health care and come up with a better way to accomplish his laudable goals but we do not fault his pro-life position.....In the last few days we have had calls at the MCFL office from operatives of other campaigns trying to get us to criticize Romney's positions on life. The governor's positions are pro-life and we feel confident that they will stay that way.
With 'prolife' operatives like this, who needs prochoice operatives?
There's a prolifer gaining momentum but we don't want him to get the nomination so let's issue a press release for the flip-floping proabort whom 75% of Repulican's won't support.
If 75% of the Republicans want anyone but Romney and the Democrats are going to vote Democrat, math and common sense should enlighten your intellect that Romney would be defeated against Obama.
Frankly, if it comes to a race where the prolifers defeat the prolifer by endorsing the proabort while the prolifers were gaining momentum -and we get stuck with Romney, my efforts are going toward getting the grassroots to sit out the election. We've got to stop feeding the beast and we are better off having everyone know Obama is a proabort. Having our own prolifers pretend Romney's position are prolife is catastrophic to our mission in the longterm.
Santorum is a real prolifer and is gaining momentum. This is the time to get behind him and put a sock in initiatives endorsing candidates whose positions are prochoice. (n.b. The hubris that Rick is against gay marriage and therefore is extreme - coming from our own voting block is blockhead. Obama is against gay marriage)
Latest news out of Iowa is saying there was a counting error and Santorum may have actually WON.
I'm praying for Santorum and I'm going to do and say all I can to support his momentum. That is what all of us should be doing until we see how the cards play out.
8 comments:
I'm with you on Santorum and since I live in NH, I'll be casting my vote for him on Tuesday - pray that I am not alone on that!
Santorum betrayed the pro-life cause several years ago in supporting pro-abort Arlen Specter over pro-life Pat Toomy. Why should he ever be trusted now?
Santorum explained his rationale for supporting Specter in 2004 as needing Specter's crucial vote for SCOTUS nominee Sam Alito and that being the lesser of two evils as Alito would lean towards pro-life votes. True or not, right or wrong, agree or disagree, there is no candidate that has a perfect record. At least now Santorum is standing up for pro-life and traditional marriage despite boos, jeers, and most likely a loss of potential votes due to his views. For me, I think that Gringrich has too much baggage and negative history in Washington that I think would prevent him from being an effective president. I feel that Santorum would be more effective and is equally as conservative. I guess that we have to trust someone!
Actually, I should say that we have to pick someone rather than trust someone.....none have earned my trust. Politicians are a special breed!
I wish Santorum would take a foreign policy lesson from Ron Paul. Repeat after me: "There is no need to bomb Iran." "There is no need further to antagonize the Arab world by moving our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem."
Stevie, I hear you on the Toomey thing. I've written about my distrust over that action before. I don't buy into the excuse.
One blemish on a consistent prolife record vs. Romney is no contest for me.
I'm with Karen. We've got a pool of imperfect candidates. We need to pick one. My choice is Newt.
If another prolifer gains steam and momentum, I'm all for it. Santorum will get the evangelicals. Between the Evangelicals and the Catholic prolife electorate, there is no question that we have the numbers to throw the bum out.
This post was mostly to point out how MCFL, Mass Family Institute and the think tank that has elected what resides in the Massachusetts State House sabotages prolife candidates.
Firs they say, they can't support them because they can't win. If they start winning, they get together to try to stop the momentum by issuing an emergency press release contorting the prochoice record of the candidate they support into a prolife pretzel.
Romney is worse than Obama, in my opinion. The wealthy good old boys in the GOP are very interested in seeing him elected. They're going to bribe the village idiots with donations.
We can't get on their political lobbying bus anymore. Their tactics are loosers for the unborn. In the long run, over a hundred years or a century, we are better off teaching them another lesson which they evidently didn't learn last time around.
Hi Charlie! Hope all is well.
I don't know what to say about that. As a woman deeply concerned about the tyranny of ethnic cleansing of the muslims, the killing of women, children, Christianity - holing ourselves up in America and looking the other way doesn't appeal to me. They are running an auschwitz.
If they get the control of the middle east, they're going to come for us.
Even Kennedy wouldn't let them set up weapons of Mass destruction and point them at us!
Happy New Year!
The GOP in MA is on life support. Their new head of MassGOP contributed $$$ to *Democrats*, including Chuck Schumer of NY?! The Tea Party in MA is led by a GOPer who wants nothing to do with social conservative issues. Don't forget, there's a debate tonight...
Post a Comment