Posted on 05/02/2012 7:40:14 AM PDT by xzins
A recently released book on Mitt Romney clearly supports the importance of voting pro life. And how especially important it will be to elect real pro-life heroes in the U.S House and Senate.
Unfortunately, the case of Mitt Romney is typical of too many politicians.
It shows that you and I must never stop putting heat on all the politicians to support sweeping pro-life protections, because all too often their positions seem to change when, either as a candidate, or as an office holder, he or she believes that the prevailing wind has shifted.
Now I believe wholeheartedly in St. Paul’s “Road to Damascus” conversion, but I am not so sure we can really put much stock into “Road to the Presidency” conversions.
Just how many times should a candidate be allowed to change his position — and which conversion is real?
Especially on something so black and white as abortion.
Now, true pro-lifers like you and me can understand the conversion from pro-abortion to pro-life, but how do we explain the reverse? Yet that recent Mitt Romney book claims he decided to do just that during his ’94 bid to win the Massachusetts Senate.
After one pollster opined that a pro-life position would be a political liability for a statewide race in Massachusetts, Mitt decided to cast off his Church’s “burdensome pro-life position” and embrace wholeheartedly the Roe v. Wade position that legalized abortion-on-demand for the full nine months of pregnancy.
To seal the deal with the abortion lobby of Massachusetts he even sent Planned Parenthood a donation!
Then, during a debate with Ted Kennedy for Senate, Mitt Romney actually looked right into the camera and said, with full conviction, “I believe that Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years, that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice.”
Well . . . apparently Mitt had a pro-life change for the better 10 years later.
He credits a November 2004 meeting with a Harvard stem-cell researcher, while he was still Governor, as the moment that the scales fell from his eyes and he “realized” that the unborn needed his protection.
Yet, just how deep the change he had is still questionable.
Just months after his 2004 change of heart, he appointed a lifetime pro-abortion advocate to the Massachusetts bench.
Then, in 2005, after flopping around for a while on the issue of the so called “abortion pill” he flipped again, and finally came down on the wrong side — not only legalizing but expanding state subsidies to pay for even more abortions pills.
But I suppose the most worrisome insight into his true pro-life convictions occurred in 2006.
Mitt Romney, following his success in forcing RomneyCare on all Bay Staters, expanded abortion services in his bill, and required that the MassHealth Payment Policy Board always have one member appointed by Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts.
He shrugs off that part when questioned about the plan he set in motion.
God bless him if he really has converted. Every pro-lifer will have to decide that for themselves.
But it seems that for many politicians the timing always coincides with their run for political office.
That’s why it’s so vital we keep the pressure on Mr. Romney to support a full pro-life agenda, including the Life at Conception Act, all the way until November 6 and beyond.
Since so many candidates blow back and forth with the wind — right now — while the candidates are looking for votes — is the best time to make sure that the wind is blowing in our direction.
And given Mr. Romney’s tendency to sway with the political winds, it’s even more important that you, and other National Pro-Life Alliance members, insist that candidates you support for the U.S. House and Senate pledge to support and cosponsor the Life at Conception Act.
By supporting the Life at Conception Act as a candidate litmus test, we can improve the positions and the pro-life resolve of all the candidates.
Sincerely,
Martin E. Fox, President National Pro-Life Alliance.
ABORTION STOPS A BEATING HEART!
‘ABO’
Does that include Jeb Bush?
Show me where the state government gets to define when life begins?
For that matter, what does it have to do with Mitt being the author of $50 abortions?
He is. Case closed.
“Show me where the state government gets to define when life begins?”
Under the clause in your state Constitution authorizing a definition of murder.
Well that’s why they supported mitt and voted for him - they say he’s the one to defeat him. That’s his job now - he/others made sure no one else had the chance. So he’s on his own pitiful self w/o media support except bought off Fox and Drudge.
You are too late, that should have been six months ago, so we could all gather around a conservative and not a liberal. Wrong site for you to be looking for godless liberal votes.
Most of the well-known national “conservative” organizations have been taking money from Romney and his allies for years now.
They’re bought and paid for liars for Mitt.
Contrary to their prevarications, to this day Romney’s positions and policies deny the God-given nature of rights. He thinks certain classes of human beings can have their most important rights stripped away by a democratic vote.
He’s a pro-choice democrat, by definition.
Two pro-life groups endorse Romney
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/apr/12/two-pro-life-groups-endorse-romney/
GOP presidential front-runner Mitt Romney got back-to-back endorsements from prominent pro-life groups Thursday, signaling that anti-abortion forces will overlook his previous pro-choice positions in their shared desire to defeat President Obama in the general election.
The Susan B. Anthony List threw its support behind Mr. Romney in a morning news release and National Right-to-Life, the nation’s oldest and largest pro-life organization, followed suit with a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington.
In making the announcement, Anthony List leaders said that Mr. Obama has proven to be an extremist on the abortion issue during his first term in office and highlighted how Mr. Romney has vowed to defund Planned Parenthood, appoint only constitutionalist judges to the federal bench and bar nongovernment organizations that perform or promote abortions from receiving federal funding.
I just saw a picture of my newest grandchild today, it will be 9 weeks on Sunday, 1” long, could make out the head and limbs, the father was just staring at the monitor, the mother was crying with joy. It breaks my heart to think of anyone condoning the “killing” of this precious human being for whatever reason they may give. Romney wants to win a presidential election, that’s all he’s ever wanted. I want someone that cares about our country and all our people, living and yet to be born.
Violations against life do not determine the definition of life. They only determine when an intervention can be brought into the judicial system.
Likewise, a healthcare law does not determine what health is. It only determines when intervention can be paid for.
And one significant group disagrees with them, apparently.
If Romney were so “pro-life”, then don’t you think all groups would have easily seen that?
The truth is in the record, and the record is reprised in the letter that is this article.
Romney has gone back and forth depending on the time of day. He is certifiably unreliable regarding life, and when he had a chance to govern, he governed as a pro-abortionist. The $50 abortion is his handiwork.
I have heard, but I have not yet verified, that Romney had provided significant contributions to each of those organizations that endorsed him. If I find that a link to it, I’ll post it.
If every single FReeper cast his/her vote for Romney, it'll register not even a blip on the screen. Romney has no chance in November, and the GOP-e never envisioned victory anyway. Its sights are trained on holding the House and maybe getting close in the Senate. The Presidential race has been sacrificed on the altar of small gains.
Virgil Goode, Constitution Party, is that candidate. Goode cares about the living and yet to be born EVERY day, not just when his political calendar allows (a la Romney).
Rather than not voting, consider supporting Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party -- he's a candidate whose opposition to abortion hasn't waivered.
Congratulatiuons !!!
Thats wonderful...
I got misty as I read about your wee one,,,
How great to be about to “monitor” the development of that precious life..
:)
Mitt’s stance on abortion is a wide stance.
Thank you! Was told my son couldn’t stop staring at the monitor and his wife started to cry. Life is so incredibly precious and brings so much joy to so many.
You misspoke there pall, and in the process also inferred a logical misnomer.
Your right life begins at conception from a scientific point of view, but the different between killing and murder is a moral judgement that has always been made in terms of law by the State.
As for healthcare and your misspoken words, I’m sure your well aware that the Government is not the only thing capable of buying services(Intervention) that might be regarded as “for your health”.
Indeed government is among the most irresponsible buyers in that respect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
