[P-Marlowe]

It would be inappropriate to hold back voting for Romney because he is mormon. (Although I would vote against a Muslim....but that is because a good muslim must be a jihadist hoping to subjugate Christians and others.)

Mormonism is a religious sect. Islam is a political movement that uses religion to further its goals of world domination. So in that sense I would probably not vote for a Muslim anymore than I would vote for a Nazi. Additionally the Koran encourages Muslims to lie to infidels, so I would find it hard to be reassured by a Muslim that he is not an Islamist. Mormonism has no goal of world domination and their holy scriptures do not encourage their members to lie to unbelievers.

Between Guliani and Romney, I suspect that Guliani is a true believer in "Abortion Rights" whereas Romney professes a pro-choice stand for purposes of political expediency (yeah that's probably dishonest). I suspect that if given the opportunity Romney would be more likely to appoint conservative pro-life judges than Guliani. And unfortunately the court is where the future of the pro-life movement lies.

[Gelato]

I suspect that Guliani is a true believer in "Abortion Rights" whereas Romney professes a pro-choice stand for purposes of political expediency (yeah that's probably dishonest).

If I may offer a possible correction to that thought, Romney has apparently held a pro-abortion position since before Roe v. Wade, in 1970--at a time when legalizing abortion was a radical idea, and the public on the whole was far from supportive.

As SDGOP posted earlier, Mitt has said:

"I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since 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." -Mitt Romney in a 1994 Senatorial debate

That's a strong statement--far beyond what a person would offer up if it conflicted with his true beliefs. Political expediency does seem a familiar tactic with Romney, but when it comes to his core beliefs on abortion, he doesn't understand the pro-life position, and has allowed room for choice. How he delineates the boundaries of that choice may vary from time to time, according to political expediency, but ultimately, as he said, his views are shaped by the influence of his pro-choice mother.

Just like John Kerry, the Mitt Romney of today calls himself "personally pro-life." Beware the candidate who cloaks himself with that terminology. No matter what he prefers "personally," a person's true abortion position is measured by his view of justice and the necessary response in the law.

It is clear that Romney doesn't believe the unborn child has a right to life that must be protected by law against the choice of the mother. He seems to say, "Whatever the people want today, I will support."

That is what makes Romney an acceptable candidate to me. It's a shame some are blinded by his religious affiliation, when the real reasons for opposing him are so glaring.