Mitt Romney Interview: Abortion Takes a Human Life, Overturn Roe

LifeNews.com ^ | February 19, 2007 | Steven Ertelt

[EternalVigilance]

Make no mistake. No matter how many pretty words he says, when it comes to actual policies, he's still as pro-abort as Hillary, and as pro-abort as he's ever been.

It's all right there in the article.

"Romney admitted that he has always been "personally very much pro-life in my own life, my family's life" but that he didn't "know what the role of government should be..."

It's all right there in the Declaration of Independence, the Preamble to the Constitution, and the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments.

Maybe you should try reading those documents sometime, Mitt, with comprehension.

[EternalVigilance]

ping...

[Mr. Mojo]

Every election cycle the pro-abort candidates in the GOP field do the same dance.

[MHGinTN]

How can you say he's as bad as the rodhamster? Frankly, he's never been that bad. Stay grounded EV.

[sevenbak]

This is not new from you. You are so opposed to Romney because of his faith that you can't see past the text to see what he is saying. This is a states rights vs. Fed. Government issue with him. He has always been pro life, he has ALWAYS said that except for incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother, abortion is an evil thing. He is thinking more constitutionally, less government control, more freedoms for us, than you will ever give him credit for. All at the same time agonizing over the conflict of both beliefs, both of which most of us here share. Give the guy some credit will ya!

[EternalVigilance]

Every election cycle the pro-abort candidates in the GOP field do the same dance.

Yeah, I know, and it disgusts me to no end.

AFTER his so-called "conversion," he said the following:

"Some stem cells today are obtained from surplus embryos from in-vitro fertilization. I support that research, provided that those embryos are obtained after a rigorous parental consent process that includes adoption as an alternative."

The problem with the stem cell bill

If he believes that we're talking about human life after conception, why then does he think it's okay to snuff out human life? Why does he continue to take the "confederate" view on abortion?

[EternalVigilance]

He has always been pro life

Oh? Are you calling him a liar?

"I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it." - Mitt Romney

[EternalVigilance]

I'm saying this: In a practical sense, there is no difference. They both talk about how much they "personally" hate abortion, and then take political positions that guarantee that not one abortion will be stopped.

[EternalVigilance]

You are so opposed to Romney because of his faith that you can't see past the text to see what he is saying.

When you're talking about Mitt Romney, you are forced to look "past the text," since his record is as a pro-abort politician. By his own admission, he supported abortion since before Roe.

As to your claim of bigotry on my part, prove it. I dare you.

[joyce11111]

Romney is like a yo yo....bouncing back and forth. He is not trustworthy at all.

[EternalVigilance]

No kiddin'.

[TimSkalaBim]

He has always been pro life, he has ALWAYS said that except for incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother, abortion is an evil thing.

In fairness, one could be left with the impression that Mitt views abortion as nothing more than a positional hurdle that he has to rhetorically overcome to get to his chosen elective office.

[sevenbak]

"He has always been pro life

Oh? Are you calling him a liar?"

Put back the rest of the sentence I posted after "He has always been pro life" and you will see why I said that. You can't dispute that reason for it.

[glorgau]

They both talk about how much they "personally" hate abortion, and then take political positions that guarantee that not one abortion will be stopped.

Bingo! Actions speak louder than words.

[EternalVigilance]

I can dispute it for the same reason I dispute such silly claims when Romney makes them.

He's always been a pro-abort until now when he wants to win a national Republican primary.

[sevenbak]

You are right, I confused you with someone else. There are many on FR that fall into that category, my apologies.

By his own admission yes, and you know the reasons for that too, death in the family reasons from a botched abortion.

That still doesn't mean that he can't have 2 conflicting views, personal and political. Personal because he knows abortion is wrong, political, because he knows government controlled mandates with no exclusions are wrong.

I too believe that abortion if horrid, immoral, murder, but I also think we have to be careful to not allow a law that bans a girl from getting an abortion after she is raped by her father, or not allowing a doctor to chose a mother's life over a fetus's life. Everything isn't black and white. Thant's what I'm saying.

[sevenbak]

Yes one could, and one is. It will be a difficult thing for him to overcome. In the article posted to which we are discussing, the last thing Mitt said is what he needs to say more of on this matter, otherwise he just looks like a flipper.

"[W]e should let each state have its own responsibility for guiding its laws relating to abortion," Romney said. "I'd like to see the Supreme Court allow states to have greater leeway in defining their own laws."

"This is about allowing states to make a decision on an issue of great moral significance to a lot of people and I think, state by state, we should allow a federalist approach as it relates to the issue of abortion,"

[EternalVigilance]

I too believe that abortion if horrid, immoral, murder, but...

Usually, the`word "but" has the effect of negating everthing that preceded it.

I can hardly think of a circumstance in which that handy little rule applies better than this one.

[EternalVigilance]

The "federalist approach" is a copout. It's the exact same tactic that was`once employed by those who wanted to keep slavery "legal": Hide behind states' rights to deny unalianable God-given rights to life and liberty.