Posted on 01/17/2008 6:38:28 AM PST by tortdog
“I consider myself to be Christian because I believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, the Only Begotten, and the Son of God.”
I will fight to the death to defend your right to believe that. Would it be that more would do the same to defend my right to not.
Romneys Own Words On Abortion 2002
======================
"I didn’t see that you had marked it as a quote."
Look again
I have put this on my portable and have been showing it to everyone who will watch it.
You may claim it means whatever you want to claim it means, all the Mitt bots seem willing to claim all sorts of nonsense. Most people I show it to have responded to this the same way I did, however. Feel free to make whatever claims and denials you wish, and see how far your persuasion goes against Mitt in his own words.
>I will fight to the death to defend your right to believe that. Would it be that more would do the same to defend my right to not.
Couldn’t agree more. Nice to know there are some sane people on the right.
OK, this is "funny."
The article you cite is from the May 25, 2005 Boston Globe where Romney spokesman, Eric Fehrnstrom ...has repeatedly said that Romney's core positions -- personally anti-abortion, pro-parental consent, and in favor of a ban on what opponents call ''partial birth" abortion -- haven't changed.
(1) Please note that at a press conference 2 days later, May 27, 2005, your "personally anti-abortion" boy said the following at a press conference:
"I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice."
(Wow! The late-term babies in the womb on May 27, 2005 were glad to hear that stellar "pro-life" conviction from such a stellar "anti-abortion" officeholder!!!)
Amazing what Google can do, isn’t it?
Yeah, I agree, isn't it amazing that if you turn just one more Google corner with Romney, you'll discover yet another twist & turn!!!
(2) As for his spokesman's claim that he favored a ban on partial-birth abortion as of the Spring of '05, I can't find any pre-Spring '05 Romney statement specific to PBA. Since Romney was politically position himself to be less pro-abortion at this time, then I will continue to assume that this transition included shedding the baggage of partial-birth abortions.
Look: Romney filled out 2 pro-abortion questionnaires during 2002 (plus called Majority Choice group to solicit their endorsement). He could have included exceptions to supporting PBA in 2002. (He didn't)
According to Weekly Standard: In the spring of 2002 Romney completed a Planned Parenthood questionnaire. Signed by Romney and dated April 9, 2002, it contained these responses: Do you support the substance of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade? YES...Romney also completed the questionnaire of the National Abortion Rights Action League, or NARAL (now called NARAL Pro-Choice America), with this statement: "I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's. The truth is no candidate in the governor's race in either party would deny women abortion rights. So let's end an argument that does not exist and stop these cynical and divisive attacks that are made only for political gain." As he had with Planned Parenthood, Romney answered "Yes" to questions asking whether he supported Roe v. Wade and opposed attempts to restrict abortion. After completing the questionnaire, Romney met with three NARAL executives. In this meeting, NARAL executives recount, Romney evidenced no hesitation about his pro-choice views... Source: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=13222&R=111EFD5
So apparently Romney has always been: * personally anti-abortion...
It's interesting. Here, a Romney spokesmen says in effect "oh, it's 2005, nothing's changed as far as Romney being personally anti-abortion" and you then read into this comment that Romney has always been so!
What? You take that hook, line & sinker & run with it? So your "always" "personally anti-abortion" guy 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." (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy)
Gee, Tortdog, you wouldn't be able to tell us something/someone else LDS folks "sustain" on an ongoing basis, would ya?
Romney, circa 2002: “I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose, and have devoted and am dedicated to honoring my word in that regard… (Nov. 2, 2002)
(Maybe you're just a closet Stephen Douglas fan who when opposing Lincoln in 1859 thought that you could be personally against slavery but still be in favor of legal slavery)
Oh, and one more thing about that '05 statement you quoted: How long have you had this false trust in either politician spokesmen or politicians that what they're saying about their previous position is "so?"
I mean, just look at two 2007 statements where Romney is describing his pro-abortion years:
Feb. 8, 2007: "I am firmly pro-life… I was always for life." (Jim Davenport, "Romney Affirms Opposition to Abortion," The Associated Press, 2/9/2007)
August 2007 interview with Chris Wallace of Fox:
"I never called myself pro-choice. I never allowed myself to use the word pro-choice because I didn't FEEL I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn't pro-choice, and so..."
(Boy, it makes ya wonder if those concentration camp workers were personally pro-Semitic, eh?)
Indeed. Isn't just absolutely amazing what Google searches will do!!!
The Mittster has got to be hating YouTube by this point.
In my mind, actively defending the right is to go out and champion the cause and seek legislation to get it done.
Did Romney do that?
“I am a social conservative (not a prude). I am a fiscal conservative (not a Scrooge). I am a defense/security conservative (not a war-monger).
So, am I one-third “religious bigot.””
What the heck are you talking about. You have the right to have what ever religion you want. What is wrong with others having the same right? Why is your religion better or more valid than mine? Answer: it isn’t. If you are ok with that you are not a religious bigot.
At 29 seconds into the tape, Romney states that he supports the right of the BSA to discriminate against gay leaders.
Thank you for confirming that my recollection is correct.
In my mind actively defending the right is a governor saying “I will preserve and protect a womans right to choose”.
“>I will fight to the death to defend your right to believe that. Would it be that more would do the same to defend my right to not.
Couldn’t agree more. Nice to know there are some sane people on the right.”
Believe it or not it is actually in the Constitution. :) The more time I spend on FReeper and see all the people confusing Christianity with Conservatism (it’s not the same). I think I am defining myself more and more as a Constitutionalist. The Constitution may not get you to heaven, but following it as a set of governing principles is a whole lot better than any holy book.
After all, the Bible seems to be fine with Kings and High Priests. I don’t think it mentions democracy or freedom of the press, etc. on the top ten list. I think the best words are the ones attributed to Jesus in Matthew 22:21
“What he did claim is that he was called by God as a prophet just as Moses, and that we had to pay attention to what God said. If Joseph Smith was a cult leader, then so were all the other prophets of old.”
That depends on whether he really was called by God as a prophet, as Moses undoubtedly was. If he was so called, then all these people slagging off mormons are in trouble :) If he thought he was but was mistaken, then HE is in trouble. If he was actually lying about his calling, then he is in BIG trouble.
“And let me add, if Joseph Smith claimed to be divine, would you then agree that he was not a leader of a cult?”
No, I wouldn’t, because a claim to divinity in and of itself does not make someone a leader of a cult or the progenitor of a valid religion.
I’m not a Romney supporter, but if his candidacy is firing up the conservatives why are people like Pat Robertson supporting Rudy Giuliani? I don’t see the Conservatives fired up; not for Conservatives anyhow. There’s only one true Conservative in this race. See my tagline.
I don't have a "beef" with general non-Christians. But just as Jesus had a "beef" with legalistic counterfeit Jews known as Pharisees, I have a problem with those who first try to exclude all Catholics, all Protestants & all Orthodox folks by labeling them as "apostates" (as do true believing Mormons) & then have the audacity to say, "Well, we're the true Christians."
(I mean can you imagine LDS folks being all hunky-dory with fundamentalist polygamous sect members like Warren Jeffs concluding, "We're Mormons, too" without any objection from Salt Lake City?)
I hear you. For the life of me I never thought that I would find myself arguing that the United States was not set up to be a Christian nation. I strongly believe the United States and its laws are based on Judeo-Christian principles, but...
Then along came a person on here who strenuously argued that the United States was set up to be a Christian nation. We had discussions over what a Supreme Court opinion met.
It seams that there is a significant portion of the GOP that wants to declare the following as uninvited:
* Muslims
* Jews
* Mormons*
* Mexicans
Yet members of those groups seem to have strong, traditional family values. They have strong families. They have a good work ethic. Why cast them out?
Pathetic. Bigoted. Wrong.
*This one ticks me off the most because its generally some so-called “Christians” who declare that the Mormons who profess to believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior don’t really mean it.
"Good Christians" and push pollers that appear to be tied to the Huckabee campaign are not synonymous. The irony of your broad brush attack is that Romney has hired push polling extrordinaire sleazebag Warren Tompkins as a top political advisor, the very same man who in 2000 pushed out the poll lie regarding McCain's purported illegitimate child. If Romney is going to hire slime like that then he has no ground for complaints when others do the same to him
Cordially,
You realize that it was a Utah prosecutor and Utah police who went after Warren Jeffs, right?
That’s fair enough, for sure Christianity does not equal conservatism. I know some very fine christians who are socialists. I know some conservatives who hate God.
However, your comments on the Constitution being better than any holy book???? Friend, the constitution is a written document. A very long one - a small book in fact. Consider whether you are MAKING it your holy book :)
That is a false statement.
Jesus Christ is the Great Jehovah of the Old Testament.
He is the Creator of this earth.
He came to Earth to atone for the sins of all who will follow him. He died on the cross for that atonement. That atonement provides that all will be resurrected after we leave here.
He is my personal Savior.
Anyone who would make a false statement like that is a bigot. He will be the Judge of all of us when we return to him.
I used the term “good Christian” loosely. As already explained, I am assuming that these people believe they are doing good work in keeping a member of an evil and perverse cult out of the Presidency, even if it means telling a few lies.
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.