Posted on 05/10/2012 6:38:57 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (R) said Thursday that he believes gay couples should be allowed to adopt children, even as he reiterated his view that marriage is defined as a relationship between a man and a woman.
In an interview with Neil Cavuto of Fox Business Network, Romney was asked whether he believes the gay marriage debate is a new civil rights movement, as some Democrats have framed the issue.
“I don’t see it in that light,” Romney responded. “I believe my record as a person who has supported civil rights is strong and powerful. At the same time, I believe that marriage has been defined the same way for literally thousands of years by virtually every civilization in history and that marriage is by its definition a relationship between a man and woman.”
He added that “if two people of the same gender want to live together, want to have a loving relationship, even want to adopt a child — in my state, individuals of the same sex are able to adopt children. In my view, that’s something which people have the right to do, but to call that marriage is, in my view, a departure from the real meaning of the word.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Looks like Romney is “evolving”.
That’s twice now in barely a week where Romney has put his interest in homosexuals FIRST despite the best interests of his campaign.
If it decreases the infanticide of abortion, I would rather the child have a choice of this start than no start at all.
Trying to appease both sides.
He.l.l NO.
Lord, Please send us someone else.
BA
F### the establishment for choosing romney for us. and God Save our Nation!
shake shake shake.
Why would it reduce abortion? Please tell me how gay “marriage” or homo adoption or anything related to this perversion prevents abortion. Please do tell.
Romney is an idiot and doesn't have a clue about the issues involved.
Don't know where he's getting his morality, but this makes the Pink Swastika a possibility.
Sex cults should have the right to adopt too?
I knew he would be a disaster because the democrats would play him like a fiddle.
we’re so screwed in this election
Saying that gays have a "right" to adopt puts them in the same line with heterosexual couples for a very small number of eligible infants and young children. A pregnant woman who has no control over where her child is placed might well reject the possibility of adoption--and perhaps even choose abortion instead.
We are so screwed!
Simply put, the greater the demand for those who want to adopt = decreased demand for those who are killed.
Has there EVER been a greater disaster, as a nominee for POTUS, from ANY Party??
“If it decreases the infanticide of abortion, I would rather the child have a choice of this start than no start at all.”
You are right. Also adoption by any loving couple is better than an orphanage or the foster care system in most states.
There are, of course, others.
Hmmmm...one candidate is a socialist who wants homosexual marriage and homosexual adoption.
One candidate is a capitalist who is against homosexual marriage but for homosexual adoption...
Lets not vote for the second one so the socialist will win.
Brilliant!
/s
I simply cannot vote for this man.
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.