Posted on 02/02/2012 9:37:42 PM PST by NKP_Vet
A defining moment in Mitt Romney's post-pro-life-conversion political career came in his third year as governor of Massachusetts, when he decided Catholic hospitals would be required under his interpretation of a new state law to give rape victims a drug that can induce abortions.
Romney announced this decision -- saying it was the "right thing for hospitals" to do -- just two days after he had taken the opposite position.
The story begins in 1975, when Massachusetts enacted a law that said, "No privately controlled hospital .. shall be required to permit any patient to have an abortion ... or to furnish contraceptive devices or information to such patient ... when said services or referrals are contrary to the religious or moral principles of said hospital ... ."
Twenty-seven years later, when Romney was running for governor, he filled out a questionnaire for NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts. It said: "Emergency contraception does not cause abortion. Rather, it prevents pregnancy from occurring. Will you support efforts to increase access to emergency contraception?"
Romney said: "Yes."
The next year, the Massachusetts legislature considered an "emergency contraception" mandate. It would have allowed pharmacists to sell Plan B -- an abortifacient -- without a prescription and without parental consent. It also would have required all hospitals to inform rape victims of the availability of such "emergency contraceptives" and provide them to the rape victim if she wanted them even when they would cause an abortion.
Maria Parker of the Massachusetts Catholic Conference, the public policy organization of the state's Catholic bishops, explained in testimony to the state legislature why Catholic hospitals could not do this"
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Yeah....but somehow I think they’re just going to stay around and torment all Americans.
I think you’re right.
Well....all we can do for now, is keep on praying, and keep on talking to people, by whatever mode, about Newt, about Romney....and try to get them to understand what’s right and wrong, respectively, with each of them.
Exactly so. Keep praying.
Well folks, unless Newt and Rick actively avoid splitting the vote, Romney will win the nomination.
There’s no indication that Rick nor his supporters will join the much larger Newt contingency. Good chance we’re #ed.
Knock ‘em out, Ross Santorum!!!
One good prayer: pray that the scales are removed from the masses’ eyes.
Did you read the entire article??? TownHall being decitful.
Deep on page 2: On July 25, 2005, Romney vetoed the bill — even though it was clear his veto would be overridden.
He published an op-ed in the Boston Globe the next day explaining his decision. “The bill does not involve only the prevention of conception,” he wrote. “The drug it authorizes would also terminate life after conception.” Romney said the veto kept his pledge not to change the state’s abortion laws.
....
Romney was the good guy on this Bill....
Deep on page 2: On July 25, 2005, Romney vetoed the bill — even though it was clear his veto would be overridden.
He published an op-ed in the Boston Globe the next day explaining his decision. “The bill does not involve only the prevention of conception,” he wrote. “The drug it authorizes would also terminate life after conception.” Romney said the veto kept his pledge not to change the state's abortion laws.
....
Romney was the good guy on this Bill....
“Romney is just a paler shade of Obamao”
Since there’s no daylight between them, it’s hard to tell what color they are.
The veto was just political posturing— I find his support of NARAL more telling.
His explanation of being Pro-Choice and Pro-Life at the same time is analogous to a Saudi Arabian who is personally against wife-killing but thinks other husbands should have a choice to kill their wives without government interference.
“His explanation of being Pro-Choice and Pro-Life at the same time is analogous to a Saudi Arabian who is personally against wife-killing but thinks other husbands should have a choice to kill their wives without government interference.”
IOW, he talks out of both sides of his mouth?
Catholics started the first hospitals in this country, based on the need for women’s health care.
Now being told how to provide “health care” to women.
This is an assault against Catholics, and I believe many assume him to go to hell. Romney lost votes of Catholics for sure.
Romney is not a workable choice. Vote Santorum.
We all need to start using Bishop in front of romney’s name. After all it is his correct title and could not be considered negative campaigning. It’s true.
Bishop Romney says.....
BISHOP Romney does....
Gets the message out.
the establishment back a guy where his own voting numbers are lower than the last election, they back a guy which has ignored the base and they think we will support him, no way, they back a guy which cannot win even his own state and the only state he might get is NH out of the north east.
They back a guy which has so many flip flops that he will be ripped apart, they back a guy which has no concept of how the average person on the street feels, spends their money or works very hard.
They back a guy which is the typical stereotype of what the left says republicans are, they back a guy which has never served, no military, stands on liberal social issues.
They back a guy which has pissed and made fun of the base and has done no outreach to conservatives, they back a guy which has no clue about the constitution , our history, they back a guy which does not bring any core groups in military, blacks hispanics
AND THEY THINK HE CAN WIN.
Yet again the RNC, GOP show that they have no clue how the real person down south, and the midwest feels or thinks and if they got out of their north east beltway elitist circles they would find to and they would find out we don’t want a MA liberal so he can appoint liberal judges
it sickens me to no end that we have a liberal socially and a man from MA the elitist establishment who has no clue what it is like for you and I going for food shopping, where we watch what we spend and we look after our families without spending too stupid.
Maybe up there in the north east and the beltway they don’t care about men touching me in the street, or saying they are married, maybe they don’t about any social issues because they meet these people at their elitist cocktail parties but you know what.
Down here we do care , we do have social issues as we believe the backbone of this country is the family and the communists knew this too and that is why on their 1963 rules they went and targeted the traditional family.
The north east and the belt way is not all of America and if they actually got out of there for a year or two they would understand that.
Boy am I sick of them shoving their guy onto us and then saying we should unite, no way.
If Newt or Sarah etc had won the nomination the establishment would not help them so why should us act like sheep and help them after they attack us.
I’d have loved Allen west, or Rubio, to have run with Sarah, or even two of the three
it would have brought FL for us, women, hispanics, and the most important the conservative base.
Instead we are left with this
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.