Romney backs away from gay adoptions [Friday night, after endorsing Thursday]

CBS news ^ | May 11, 2012 | Matthew Shelley

[kevcol]

(CBS News) Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Friday backed away from his support of adoptions by same-sex couples, saying that he simply "acknowledges" the legality of such adoptions in many states.

A day earlier, Romney, in an interview with Fox News' Neil Cavuto, had indicated that while he does not support same-sex marriage, he considers the adoption of children by same-sex couples a "right."

He said on Thursday: "And if two people of the same gender want to live together, want to have a loving relationship, or even to adopt a child -- in my state individuals of the same sex were able to adopt children. In my view, that's something that people have a right to do. But to call that marriage is something that in my view is a departure from the real meaning of that word."

But then on Friday, he was asked, in an interview with CBS' WBTV in Charlotte, N.C., how his opposition to same-sex marriage "squared" with his support for gay adoptions. Romney told anchor Paul Cameron, "Well actually I think all states but one allow gay adoption, so that's a position which has been decided by most of the state legislators, including the one in my state some time ago. So I simply acknowledge the fact that gay adoption is legal in all states but one."

[SoConPubbie]

Now should there be some sort of priority given to a married couple? (the best possible placement choice) sure. But once a kid has been passed over time and again by all the married couples... I see no problem with opening up their adoption to singles, gays, or whoever wants to give them a home. Especially if the child is old enough to agree to such a placement.

Now if you are a Christian, and believe the Bible is the word of God, then you know that a so-called "Gay" couple have NO honest desires to help children by raising them.

Their goals are nothing less then to molest the child mentally, and spiritually, and more than likely physically.

There is not an ounce of goodness in their souls, they are the embodiment of evil because they CHOSE evil over righteousness, that is why God gave them over to the perversion, the evilness, they now suffer with.

Romans 1:18-32

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

[SoConPubbie]

More and more it’s clear that in this election, it’s going to be a question of naming your poison.

Only if you allow yourself to be manipulated into voting for the two poisons Obama and Romney.

There are other choices, like valid conservative Third-Party candidates like Virgil Good or writing in Sarah Palin that will not violate your principles.

The choice is yours.

[dfwgator]

I would love to see Goode catch fire....but I just don’t see it happening.

[little jeremiah]

I was just conversing with someone else about the “Romney is inevtible so don’t bash him” topic. My response to her:

---

My view is that we fight Romney vigorously to send the delegates and other Rs at the convention the message that WE’RE MAD AS HELL AND NOT GOING TAKE IT (disgusting establishment RINOs) ANY MORE!!!

Then, if they don’t get the message, people can support Romeny if they want.

But NOT until then. It is not over yet. If we give up pre-emptively with a “sigh, I guess we’ll have to swallow our vomit and vote for the lesser of two evils YET AGAIN...” they’ll think they can stuff him down our gullets. Giving up the fight at this point is assisting the establishment traitors.

---

And, what about this?

Reality Check: Why all RNC delegates are ‘Free Agents’ and unbound

http://www.fox19.com/story/18305604/reality-check-why-all-rnc-delegates-are-free-agents-and-unbound

[dfwgator]

I agree that even if I do vote for him, and I’m not saying that I will, I want it clear, that if Romney wins that we put him there, and we can just as easily kick him out.

[Colonel_Flagg]

If Mutt changes positions any faster, he’s gonna rip himself in half.

[RightLady]

I don’t think any politician should be free from criticism on Free Republic, but why don’t express your disdain of the liberal policies rather than your hate for the politician (unless it’s Obama or his cohorts, of course). I fear all these things will be used against us in the general election. Obama will have his work cut out for him.

[mulebones]

You have seen what is being taught in our schools concerning tolerance to homosexuality. Gays offer children a place in their home to advance their perverted agenda. Can you imagine the horror should that child reject the perversion and grow up to be straight!

[GeronL]

Romney is an unprincipled liberal through and through, I judge him by his record not his words.

If I post articles that are negative on RomneyCare, I expect the shills to show up and tell me how it helps Obama or something. If we post things negative about liberalism that Romney supports, we expect those kinds of posts these days.

[GeronL]

The centrifugal force of that spin added to the flip flopping would seem to endanger the lives of those around him. /sarc

[unique1]

Question: So, Romney clearly isn’t your cup of tea. Therefore, the only other viable nominee looks to be Obama. Is there nothing that Romney has to offer that would prompt you to vote for him or vote against Obama by voting for Romney? Since you are a conservative, wouldn’t no vote at all for POTUS be, in effect, a vote for Obama?

Now, I fully understand your firm position on the Romney issue, but I don’t understand how Obama ends up a better choice then Romney at any level and on practically any issue, especially since Obama will go hard left if re-elected and not subject to being elected again, except perhaps in another country.

I’m not a shill for Romney, I’m just attempting to understand the outcome of those posting here that appear to be electing not to vote at the POTUS level or even vote for Obama. I just don’t get the value of the possible result - the re-election of Obama.

[JediJones]

If I recall correctly, kabar is a longtime Romney booster around here. Not exactly an objective voice on the issue of Romney.

Funny thing is the very brief ABC radio news report on Romney’s speech for no reason brought up that Romney is a Mormon within the few seconds they had to do a report. They tacked on at the end, “Romney did not bring up his own faith during the speech. Romney is a Mormon.”

More of the kitchen sink they’re throwing at Willard, seeing how many voters his Mormonism can alienate. However the media piling on him like they have been lately certainly helps him with the base.

[GeronL]

Since you are a conservative, wouldn’t no vote at all for POTUS be, in effect, a vote for Obama?

No. Votes not cast are not counted. It's as purely simple as that. If 50 million people did not vote, those votes do not count for anyone. It is not a hard concept to grasp.

You are trying to make an argument that the GOP is entitled to my vote, they are not. If your argument were accepted by everyone there would be no conservative movement at all, the GOPe would reign supreme and Free Republic would be nothing but an echo chamber for the country club establishment elite.

If we voted for whatever they served up, then we have shown that conservative principles are utterly meaningless. We will show that they do NOT have to listen to us at all, because they have our votes no matter what. How will they further conservatism? It won't.

I am a conservative, Romney is not. It's simple to grasp.

[JediJones]

Was at the barber today. He’s a pretty consistent Republican who’s not that picky and will vote for Romney. But he mentioned his customers are coming in talking about how badly Obama has screwed things up but then saying even worse stuff about Romney, that he’s out-of-touch, and that it sounds like they won’t switch their vote to him. Keep in mind this is a blue collar Reagan Democrat area of PA, but it shows that Romney will not be able to grab those important voters. His status as a mega-millionaire who SEEMS out-of-touch with the common man will sink him with that voting block, which most definitely puts PA out of reach for him.

[SoConPubbie]

I would love to see Goode catch fire....but I just don’t see it happening.

From a principled conservative perspective, it's not about winning at any cost (Progressive Liberal Mitt Romney) but about being a principled conservative, actually believing in conservative principles and acting on those beliefs.

"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton

[JediJones]

Yup and if Romney is that unpopular in 2016 to get voted out, a Democrat Congress will sweep in. The sweep for Dems will probably start in 2014. And because the Dems had to move so far left to distinguish themselves from moderate Mitt, it will be the most radical leftist government we’ve ever had. It’ll make Obama look like a conservative. Massive tax hikes, national gay marriage, single-payer health care, control of our military ceded to the U.N., etc. History tells us that’s what we’re in store for if Romney wins. And because he is so wimpy and limp, he won’t have accomplished a single meaningful conservative reform or part of the agenda in the 4 years that he will have.

[unique1]

Hmmmmmmm.....

Now, that doesn’t make sense to me. If 5 million conservatives do not vote for Romney because as the Republican nominee he’s not conservative enough or at all, yes - those votes aren’t counted - but, very few liberals on the other side will hesitate to vote for Obama - he wins in a landslide since conservative votes are required and necessary for the Republican to generate the volume needed to win.

And True, the GOP is not entitled to your vote but more than likely received your vote last time around and many times before that. This time, they will not and you don’t have a nominee to vote for, you will sit this one out - Obama wins big. Interesting way to go.

Also, you seem angry. I’m just curious, not intending to be confrontational.

[GeronL]

Romney does not deserve my vote. He is a terrible candidate and a liberal.

If Romney doesn’t inspire people to vote for him the problem is with the candidate. If those 5 million people leave the Presidential line on the ballt blank, then the problem is still with Romney. Romney does not automatically get our votes because he is the GOP nominee.

If the GOP decides to go to hell, I am not going with them.