Posted on 05/09/2007 4:47:37 PM PDT by wagglebee
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney says he's getting tired of the questions about his shift a few years ago from supporting to opposing abortion. In a television interview last night, he said he wouldn't be barraged with so many questions if he had switched from pro-life to pro-abortion.
The comments came during a Monday night interview on the Fox News Channel program "Hannity and Colmes."
Romney has frequently explained how he became pro-life a few years ago after having to deal with the issue of embryonic stem cell research as governor -- after campaigning as a pro-abortion candidate on previous occasions.
"What I find interesting is, had I been pro-life and then changed to pro-choice, no one would ask the question," the former Massachusetts governor said.
He added: "But if you go the other direction, as I have and as Ronald Reagan did and (former Illinois Rep.) Henry Hyde and (former president) George Herbert Walker Bush, it's like the media can't get enough of it: 'Oh, well, why did you change?' "
Romney talked about his abortion views during the Republican presidential debate last week.
Asked whether "the day that Roe v. Wade is repealed" would "be a good day for Americans" Romney replied, "Absolutely."
The former governor was also asked about his position change -- something that presumably led to the Fox News comments.
"I've always been personally pro-life, but for me there was a great question about whether or not government should intrude in that decision. And when I ran for office, I said I’d protect the law as it was, which is effectively a pro-choice position," Romney explained.
"About two years ago when we were studying cloning in our state, I said, look, we have gone too far; it’s a brave new world mentality that Roe v. Wade has given us; and I change my mind," he added.
"And I said I was wrong and changed my mind and said I'm pro-life. And I'm proud of that and I won't apologize to anybody for becoming pro-life," he concluded.
Without naming names let me tell you many a Romney thread quickly fill up with rabid nuts. Don’t stay too long if you enjoy rational, reasoned discussion.
Wouldn't it be easier if you and your friends would simply be rational and reasonable, and quit trying to spin away Romney's own words and record?
The only reason NARAL calls Reid "pro-life" is because he votes for life once out of every three times.
Very nice of you to actually understand the significance of the quote and make a rational comment on it. You are a dying breed.
Clearly the media and liberals have a mindset that their views are normal and default. Romney saying this is the first time in awhile I've heard the point made by someone other than Rush.
Romney came right out and stated his belief in the separation of church and state myth in Thursday night's debate.
“Wrong. He may have *thought* that’s what he signed, but what he *really* signed was an abortion liberalization law with loopholes that basically allowed abortion on demand.”
That’s certainly how the law was [mis]interpreted, but not how it was written.
Although I disagree with them, most folks who are pro-life accept legal access to abortion in cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother. It was for those exceptions that the law was intended by Mr. Reagan.
If Mr. Reagan was pro-choice, then so are most folks who consider themselves pro-life, even though they would make illegal 96%+ of abortions.
“People ought to stop lying about Romney.”
People aren’t lying when they note that Mr. Romney claims to have backed a nearly unlimited abortion license for over 30 years.
sitetest
Oh really? We attend the March for Life every year with a lot of other dedicated pro lifers. President Bush addresses the M4L every year and is welcomed with thunderous applause. Why you ask? Because he is the most pro life POTUS we have ever had in our lifetimes, bar none. He has done more for the pro life movement than you or I ever will and if there is a "lodestone" here in America it is President Bush.
But I clearly showed you a major difference in my prior post.
You showed no difference. Both men oppose federal funding of ESCR where new life is created to destroy it. That's the fact of the matter.
GW does not believe it is moral to destroy embryos.
He signed legislation to do just that. Another fact which doesn't mitigate the fact that he is the most pro life POTUS we have ever had.
Romney does. He confirmed it once again in Thursday night’s debate. I’ve already provided the quote.
You can provide all the quotes you'd like. There is no distance between Bush and ROmney on ESCR. Another fact. I'm not a Romney supporter but neither do I look at life through a prism of my own choosing. Facts are facts. Romney and Bush, at this point in time, are fellow travelers where pro life issues are concerned.
EV you do a great job of citing and linking to videos and text, but when you start your commentary it all goes wrong. Who’s your candidate again, Keyes?
Thanks. it just proves everything I said before.
Romney says he will not change the prochoice laws already on the books in any way. Will preserve, protect and enforce them... Considering that this is an attribution of the legislature (ie. changing laws) he is just stating the obvious.
If you don't have them handy, I'll search for them.
Romney apologists are out in force and we really need to source every claim we make about the man.
Sorry, but I’m listening to a youtube video right now, and I see Mr. Romney saying that he will protect a woman’s “right” to choose.
I’m listening right now to him tell Tim Russert that his position that woman have a “right” to choose goes back to at least 1970.
“’I’ll never vote for this wretched, miserable, slandering liar.’
“At first glance, you appear to be the type of person you’ll never vote for.”
LOL. A little bit of projection there, huh?
sitetest
Again, show me where the President has supported the destruction of human embryos, as Mitt Romney still does.
The reason I say that the President is harldy the lodestone is because he supports a rape and incest exception.
You can’t spin away Romney’s hardcore liberal record on abortion, [or guns, or socialized medicine, or the homosexual agenda] no matter how hard you try, newbie. It’s all there in black and white for honest folks to look at.
“I’m listening to a youtube video right now, and I see Mr. Romney saying that he will protect a woman’s “right” to choose.”
He said that because that’s what the law stated in Massachusetts. Did you want him to take a position that was against the law, that was illegal? refer to post #109
you wont find him claiming that he is pro choice or that abortion is a constitutional right, which I believe you claimed he had done on an earlier post.
Link?
"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
Alan Keyes has been steadfast for decades in defense of innocent human life, and has used his public platform to advocate for them more than any American I know of.
Do you have a problem with that?
In fact neither man can stop an abortionist from killing a full term baby minutes before birth. That too is the unfortunate state of the law in America. We must have a pro life POTUS, that I am committed to, because we must make it unlawful to murder unborn babies. We can't get to protecting embryos until we can protect 8 month old babies. That is also the fact of the matter.
Yes, but you never heard him expressing disagreement with the law or court decisions that protect a woman's false "right" to kill her unborn child until very recently. Look, Romney may have had some sort of pro-life conversion a few years back, but don't believe that conservatives are stupid enough to believe that he's been pro-life all along. I know you support him, and that's fine. But stop trying to whitewash his pro-choice record and statements. He's a good man and I believe that some of his pro-life conversion is sincere. But his past is his past and you shouldn't try to overcome his weaknesses on core issues by lying about his positions, past or present.
Existing lines. Get your facts straight.
"As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist. They were created from embryos that have already been destroyed, and they have the ability to regenerate themselves indefinitely, creating ongoing opportunities for research. I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cell lines, where the life and death decision has already been made." - George W. Bush
Embryos were necessarily destroyed to get the stem cells.
Pretty ghoulish, huh? Like I said, the President is hardly the lodestone.
Both men oppose the use of federal funds to destroy nascent human life.
True, as far as it goes. But the fact remains, Romney still supports the destruction of additional human embryos, while President Bush does not.
Neither man has the power to forbid anybody to do just that where federal funds are not involved. That is, unfortunately the state of the law in America. In fact neither man can stop an abortionist from killing a full term baby minutes before birth. That too is the unfortunate state of the law in America. We must have a pro life POTUS, that I am committed to, because we must make it unlawful to murder unborn babies.
Agreed. Squishes need not apply.
We can't get to protecting embryos until we can protect 8 month old babies. That is also the fact of the matter.
It's not an either/or question.
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.