Posted on 07/26/2005 5:28:45 AM PDT by bitt
Three years after expressing support for ''the substance" of Roe v. Wade, Governor Mitt Romney today criticizes the landmark ruling that legalized abortion and says the states should decide separately whether to allow it.
Romney outlines his abortion position in an opinion article today in The Boston Globe, a day after he vetoed a bill that would expand access to the so-called ''morning after" pill, a high dose of hormones that women can take to prevent pregnancy up to five days after sex.
In a written response to a questionnaire for candidates in 2002, Romney told Planned Parenthood that he supported ''the substance of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade," according to the group. Today, Romney describes himself as a ''pro-life governor" who wishes ''the laws of our nation could reflect that view." Calling the country ''divided over abortion," he says states ''should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate."
''I understand that my views on laws governing abortion set me in the minority in our Commonwealth," Romney says in the op-ed article. ''I am prolife. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice, except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view."
Romney said he had vetoed the emergency contraception bill to fulfill his 2002 campaign promise not to change state abortion laws.
But supporters of the measure, pointing out that Romney has also pledged to support expanded access to emergency contraception, accused the GOP governor of trying to burnish his conservative credentials for a possible presidential run.
The bill that Romney vetoed would allow trained pharmacists to dispense the morning-after pill without a prescription and would...
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Reviewed your posts over the years???!!! My goodness, how arrogant to think you are so memorable people will remember your posts 'over the years'.
I know enough about you now that I know I wouldn't want to know you any better.
Have a nice day.
W is a conservative as we are going to get. He has been rock-solid on abortion, unlike Romney.
For whatever reason, W galvanized the conservative base in two elections. Being from Texas helps.
Are you implying that Romney will make up for his soft history on abortion by eliminating the CFR, cutting foreign aid, and getting tough on illegal aliens? Ha. He is "moderate" in every way that W is, and then some.
To translate the last sentence:
I know plenty of LDS members -- friends, coworkers.
They don't act like victims about their religion, even though I know they are disliked by many because of it. I admire that.
So don't play the victim card on Romney's behalf. If he's the prince you think he is, it is unworthy of him. And even if he isn't, the politics of victimhood is hardly conservative.
So exactly what kind of Christian-basher are you?
Anyone who's an identifiable Christian who doesn't like your pro-abortion hero Mitt you accuse of bigotry?
Go crawl back into your hole.
So according to you, Mitt Romney is the anti-GOP.
Guess that means you agree he's a RINO.
So according to you, Mitt Romney is the anti-GOP.
Guess that means you agree he's a RINO.
The presidential campaign is in full swing. I don't trust him as far as I can throw him. He'd make a great fake president in a movie though.
It doesn't matter what you have a problem with. It matters what the Church has a problem with. And the Church teaches that abortion is always a grave evil. The "morning after pill" is an abortifacient.
If he's the Republican candidate in '08 I will be happy to vote for him. As I voted for him when he ran for governor.
He is not pro abortion, and you know it, however, you do know he is a LDS, and that just irks you, doesn't it?
The reason GWB has had a difficult time getting the judges he wants, (or does he?) is because the GOP is a bunch of RINOs. Mitt is not, and you will find out soon enough.
Of course as we know Mitt Romney appoints gay activists as judges.
Checkmate!
I hope he's the next Senator from MA, not the next president. But like you, I'd vote for him in the general election. Not that it would help.
Likewise, I hope Pataki and Schwarzenegger nab Senate seats -- although I'd never want either man as President. You take what you can get in those states.
We don't have to have the same standards for President. In fact, those standards are ones that will lose general elections, because the GOP needs every single red state to win national elections, and that means a very energized conservative base
I said that Romney would be a disaster as the 2008 candidate, responding to a post about him flip-flopping on abortion, and you jump immediately to calling me a religious bigot.
If that isn't playing the politics of victimization, I don't know what is.
If you can show me that Mitt Romney holds Michael Savage and Pat Buchanan's views on things like immigration, I'd be *very* curious to see that. I'm sorry, you've really lost me if you are somehow trying to find a common thread between Romney, Buchanan, and Savage...
Do you instantly accuse the people who criticize Buchanan of being anti-Catholic, or the people who criticize Michael Savage as being anti-Semites, BTW?
Name a gay activist Mitt has appointed. I'd like to know, really. If you know who, and what you know of him/her, and the background of that individual, it would be good to know.
We do know however, that GWB has a AG that is not pro life. How did that happen?
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.