Romney: I Will Be a Pro-Life President, De-Fund Planned Parenthood

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney made his pro-life views clear today in response to a question from a reporter on the campaign trail in Ohio.

Romney said he would govern as a pro-life president, de-fund the nation’s largest abortion company, and reinstate a policy preventing taxpayer funding of international abortion promotion efforts on the part of Planned Parenthood.

“I think I’ve said time and again that I’m a pro-life candidate and I’ll be a pro-life president. The actions I’ll take immediately is to remove funding for Planned Parenthood. It will not be part of my budget. And also I’ve indicated that I will reverse the Mexico City position of the president. I will reinstate the Mexico City policy which keeps us from using foreign aid for abortions overseas,” he said, according to Politico.

Earlier in the day, a spokeswoman for Governor Mitt Romney said the presidential candidate will be a pro-life president, a stark contrast the pro-abortion record President Barack Obama has built up during his time in the White House.

Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul has emailed out a statement about Romney to multiple media outlets after the liberal Des Moines Register newspaper ran a quote from Romney attempting to paint him as less than pro-life.

“Gov. Romney would of course support legislation aimed at providing greater protections for life,” Saul told National Review.

In a comment to NBC News, Saul added, “Mitt Romney is proudly pro-life, and he will be a pro-life president.”

Those comments are not going over very well with the nation’s top pro-abortion groups, which are working aggressively to defeat Romney because of his pro-life positions against abortion, abortion funding and taxpayer funding for the nation’s biggest abortion business.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL, said of Romney, “we cannot trust him to lead our country.”

“Romney has repeatedly supported overturning Roe v. Wade and would appoint Supreme Court Justices who share his anti-choice views. If that wasn’t enough, Romney chose Congressman Paul Ryan, someone who co-sponsored and repeatedly voted for the Federal Abortion Ban, as his running mate for President,” Keenan continued.

Keenan said NARAL “will engage its over one-million member activists to remind voters of Romney’s true anti-choice agenda.”

Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood is out today with a blog post attacking Romney and laying out how he opposes abortion and wants to overturn Roe v. Wade.

If he would now just come out in favor of protecting marriage, I suppose I could vote for him and pretend that if and when he fails to keep the promises that I believed him.

---------------------

Don't believe the smears, he's been working to protect marriage for a very long time already. The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that the state had to allow gays to marry. Romney led the effort to get a Protection of Marriage amendment on the state ballot so that the citizens could overturn the court. The state legislature stalled on allowing the amendment, so Romney led a rally in Boston demanding that the people be allowed to vote on it. In the end, the Democrat legislature voted down the amendment and wouldn’t allow it on the ballot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Massachusetts

________________________________________

Part of Romney’s speech at the rally:

“Legislators so energized to protect the newly discovered gay right to marry had no compunction about trammeling the long established, constitutional right of the people to vote.

The issue now before us is not whether same sex couples should marry. The issue before us today is whether 109 legislators will follow the Constitution.

Tomorrow, I will send these 109 a copy of the Constitution and of their oath of office.

And this week, we will file an action before the courts, calling upon the judiciary to protect the constitutional rights of our citizens.

Let us not see this state, which first established constitutional democracy, become the first to abandon it.”

http://illinoisans-4-mitt-romney.blogspot.com/2006/11/mitt-romney-remarks-111906-democracy.html

________________________________________

The gay lobby held a protest against Romney’s Protection of Marriage amendment:

Rally Against Romney “Bigot!”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaLsE-y1TQE

Romney has a long and dedicated history of being radically for the homosexual agenda.

Mitt Romney banned the Boy Scouts from the Olympics because of their refusal to allow homosexual scout leaders.

Here is another view of Mitt giving the nation homosexual marriage.

I. Mitt Romney demonstrates his commitment to homosexual “rights” before becoming Governor of Massachusetts in January 2003:

1994 Campaign vs. Ted Kennedy for U.S. Senate: Romney pledged he “will provide more effective leadership” than Kennedy on homosexual rights; endorsed by Log Cabin Republicans.
2000-2002: As head of Salt Lake City Olympic Committee, Romney banned Boy Scouts from participating.
2001 Called first citizens’ petition to define marriage “too extreme” and “bigoted” because it banned civil unions.
2002 Campaign for Governor: Romney makes promises to GLBT community, according to leading Boston homosexual newspaper; endorsed by homosexual activist Log Cabin Republicans.
II. Nov. 18, 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) rules that same-sex marriage is protected in the Mass. Constitution, and gives the Legislature 180 days to act (“Goodridge” ruling).

Nov. 18, 2003 Romney responds to SJC ruling with four-sentence statement implicitly recognizing SJC’s authority, says only remedy will be a constitutional amendment: “I disagree with the Supreme Judicial Court. Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman. I will support an amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution to make that expressly clear. Of course, we must provide basic civil rights and appropriate benefits to nontraditional couples, but marriage is a special institution that should be reserved for a man and a woman.”
Nov.-Dec. 2003 Romney reportedly working with Legislators promoting “civil unions”.
Jan. 2004 Romney silent on proposal to remove four SJC justices through Bill of Address (put forward by Article 8 Alliance / MassResistance).
Feb. 4, 2004 SJC tells Legislature that civil unions for same-sex couples will not satisfy its interpretation of the Mass. Constitution; only full-fledged marriage will do.
Feb. 5, 2004 Romney publishes editorial in Wall Street Journal laying all blame on the SJC for problem in Massachusetts. Suggests other states strengthen marriage statutes and pass constitutional amendments. Says don’t “attack … gays, singles or non-traditional couples.”
Feb. 2004 Justices of the Peace are told by their professional association they will be able to claim “conscientious objector” status and refuse to perform same-sex marriages — though this was never agreed to by Romney administration.
Feb.-May 2004 Pro-family leaders and columnists urge Romney to defy court, and issue Executive Order to block same-sex marriage; no public comment from Romney.
March 12, 2004 As Legislature postures on constitutional amendments, Romney continues to say amendment to Mass. Constitution is solution.
March 26, 2004 Word leaks out that Romney’s Dept. of Public Health (DPH) and attorneys are planning training sessions for Town Clerks and preparing same-sex marriage licenses.
March 29, 2004 Romney tells Republicans in Mass. legislature to vote for Travaglini-Lees “compromise amendment” which would ban same-sex marriage but establish civil unions (and would not go to voters before Nov. 2006). Republican legislators had earlier opposed this amendment because of the civil unions clause, and it passed only due to their changed votes.
March 29-31, 2004 Romney seeks stay of SJC ruling until constitutional amendment issue is settled, but Atty. General Reilly refuses to take Governor’s case before SJC. [Did Romney believe that same court that issued Goodridge ruling would seriously consider his request for a stay?]
March 30, 2004 Romney says he’ll “abide by the law of the land as it exists on May 17” and says he would not order town clerks to defy court edict. Romney says he’d not explored the Constitution section giving him power over “causes of marriage” and whether it gives him any legal power to stop same-sex marriage (according to spokesman).
April 12, 2004 Romney spokesman says training sessions for town clerks will begin “with plenty of room to spare before May 17.” Ron Crews of Mass. Coalition for Marriage states hope for an Executive Order to halt the marriages.
April 15, 2004 Romney files emergency bill in Legislature to seek stay of SJC ruling, and is rebuffed and reprimanded by Senate President Travaglini.
April 15, 2004 Romney’s DPH Registrar of Vital Records informs town clerks by letter of training sessions before SJC ruling becomes effective.
April 16, 2004 Romney announces his administration is scheduling training sessions for May 5-12 with licenses changed from “husband/wife” to “Party A/Party B”.
April 17, 2004 Mass. Dept. of Revenue (under Romney) declares SJC ruling the new “law”.
April 22, 2004 Romney does not comment on Rep. Goguen’s filing of Bill of Address for Article 8 Alliance/MassResistance to remove the 4 SJC judges, or Article 8’s revelation of Chief Justice Marshall’s violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct. (Marshall had appeared as keynote speaker at homosexual advocacy group dinner in 1999 advocated extension of “rights” for homosexuals, and failed to recuse herself from ruling on same-sex marriage though she had publicly expressed her bias.)
April 26, 2004 Romney’s chief Legal Counsel, Daniel Winslow, issues directive to Justices of the Peace to resign (or be fired, fined, or sued) if they are unwilling to perform same-sex marriages (exact date not given on document).
April 29, 2004 Romney writes to 49 other Governors to inform them he’ll uphold section of Mass. marriage statutes banning same-sex marriages for out-of-state couples.
May 5-12, 2004 Town clerk training sessions held. [GLAD – Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders — is only source on content of sessions; perhaps they were responsible for content?]
May 15, 2004 Romney issues proclamation: May 15 is “Gay/Straight Youth Pride Day”. Romney’s “Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth” events include parade, GLBT activism (with prominent transsexual radical activists), and a GLBT prom – two days before same-sex marriages are to begin.
May 17, 2004 Same-sex marriages begin across Massachusetts. Romney issues brief statement: “All along, I have said an issue as fundamental to society as the definition of marriage should be decided by the people. Until then, I intend to follow the law and expect others to do the same.” [What law? Original marriage statutes clearly defining marriage as between a man and a woman were –and are — still on the books, unchanged by the Legislature. So Romney is not enforcing the actual law—just a court opinion.]
May 18, 2004 Romney begins enforcement of section of marriage statute banning out-of-state couples marrying in Mass. if that marriage would be illegal in their home state, while other intact sections of the marriage statute (“man” and “woman”) are ignored.
June 22, 2004 Romney testifies before US Senate Judiciary Committee for federal marriage amendment and blames Court for situation in Massachusetts.
Oct. 29, 2004 Romney signs new law eliminating blood test for STDs as requirement for marriage license (Ch. 388 of Acts of 2004). [Note: this is the only part of marriage statutes changed to satisfy demands of same-sex marriage]
Dec. 2004 Romney has no comment on bills filed by Article 8 Alliance / MassResistance for 2005-6 session: to remove four SJC judges; strengthen definition of marriage in statute; and declare same-sex marriages since May 17, 2004 null/void and without statutory basis.
Feb. 21, 2005 Romney makes speech before South Carolina Republicans, then is accused of “flip-flopping” on civil unions by homosexual lobby. Romney also negatively refers to demands by the homosexual activists that birth certificates be changed to read “Parent A/Parent B” (instead of “father/mother”), arguing he had no authority to make such a change [though he had no such qualms about changing the marriage license].
June 16, 2005 Romney joins VoteOnMarriage (VOM) amendment effort, which would recognize same-sex marriages prior to amendment taking effect, and not ban civil unions. (Romney says VOM is superior to the Travaglini-Lees compromise amendment.) Romney also announces support of VOM’s proposed bill promoting partnership benefits for any couple wanting them (see “Benefits Fairness Act” filed Jan. 2006). Romney says he’s opposed to removing the four SJC judges. Calls for a “high degree of respect and tolerance for people whose lifestyle and choices and orientation is as they may choose.”
July 22, 2005 Romney says only Legislature can change birth certificates from “father/mother” to “Parent A/Parent B”.
Sept. 14, 2005 Travaglini-Lees compromise amendment defeated in Legislature.
Nov. 2005 Romney tells Federalist Society that judiciary must be grounded in Constitution and law and precedents, and only the Legislature and people can change that base.
Jan. 2, 2006 Boston Globe reports Romney issued special Governor’s ceremonial marriage licenses to 189 same-sex couples in 2005 (including to homosexual activist state senator), claiming he did not refuse because he was evenly applying the “statute”. [Note: There is no new statute establishing same-sex marriage.]
Jan. 11, 2006 Romney files “Benefits Fairness Act” with VoteOnMarriage, which is roundly criticized by GLBT lobby, and shelved in Committee as late-filed bill.
March 10-14, 2006 Romney says laws require Catholic Charities not to discriminate against same-sex parents in its adoption placements [but there’s only an administrative regulation]. He says same-sex couples have “a legitimate interest” in adopting children.
June 2, 2006 Romney sends letter to US Congress arguing for federal marriage amendment.
June 28, 2006 Romney urges Legislature to vote on VOM amendment, and addresses importance of following Constitution.
Sept. 30, 2006 Romney says he has to “follow the law,” and accept Mass. Superior Court ruling stating Rhode Island lesbian couple can marry in Massachusetts (following an earlier SJC ruling addressing Rhode Island’s lack of prohibition of same-sex marriage).
Oct. 15, 2006 Romney addresses nationally broadcast “Liberty Sunday” (Family Research Council) event in Boston. Blames SJC for Mass. problems, says we need an outpouring of respect and tolerance for all people regardless of different choices they make, and as a nation we must reject discrimination and bigotry. Calls for support of federal marriage amendment.
Nov. 19, 2006 Romney holds rally on State House steps announcing he’s delivering a copy of the Constitution to every Legislator who voted to recess the Constitutional Convention (to avoid the vote on the VOM amendment required by state Constitution). Romney also announces he’s appealing to the courts. [But he says nothing about the SJC precedent of Dec. 20, 2002, ruling that the Legislature must vote in this situation, which already affirms that he should call Legislators back.]
©2006 MassResistance (11-23-06)

He’s afraid to crawl back under his rock in case I post THIS again...

An Open Letter Regarding Governor Mitt Romney

January 11, 2007

Dear conservative friends:

We hail from a broad spectrum of organizations dedicated to fighting for the pro-family agenda in Massachusetts. As you know, Mitt Romney became the governor of our state in 2003. Since that time, we have worked closely with him and his excellent staff on that agenda.

Some press accounts and bloggers have described Governor Romney in terms we neither have observed nor can we accept. To the contrary, we, who have been fighting here for the values you also hold, are indebted to him and his responsive staff in demonstrating solid social conservative credentials by undertaking the following actions here in Massachusetts:

• Staunchly defended traditional marriage. Governor Romney immediately and strongly condemned the 2003 court decision that legalized “same-sex marriage” in our state. More importantly, he followed up on that denunciation with action – action that saved our nation from a constitutional crisis over the definition of marriage. He and his staff identified and enforced a little-known 1913 law that allowed them to order local clerks not to issue marriage licenses to out-of-state couples. Absent this action, homosexual couples would surely have flooded into Massachusetts from other states to get “married” and then demanded that their home states recognize the “marriages,” putting the nation only one court decision away from nationalizing “same-sex marriage.”

• Worked hard to overturn “same-sex marriage” in the Commonwealth with considerable progress to date. In 2004 he lobbied hard, before a very hostile legislature, for a constitutional amendment protecting marriage – an amendment later changed by the legislature to include civil unions, which the Governor and many marriage amendment supporters opposed. Working with the Governor, we were successful in defeating this amendment.

• Provided active support for a successful citizen petition drive in 2005 to advance a clean constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

• Rallied thousands of citizens to focus public and media attention on the failure of legislators, through repeated delays, to perform their constitutional obligation and vote on the marriage amendment.

• Filed suit before the Supreme Judicial Court. The Governor’s suit asked the court to clarify the legislators’ duty to vote and failing that, to place the amendment on the 2008 ballot. That lawsuit, perhaps more than any other single action, was by all accounts instrumental in bringing pressure on the legislators to vote. The vote ultimately was taken on January 2, 2007 and won legislative support – clearing a major hurdle in the three year effort to restore traditional marriage in the Commonwealth.

• Fought for abstinence education. In 2006, under Governor Romney’s leadership, Massachusetts’ public schools began to offer a classroom program on abstinence from the faith-based Boston group Healthy Futures to middle school students. Promoting the program, Governor Romney stated, “I’ve never had anyone complain to me that their kids are not learning enough about sex in school. However, a number of people have asked me why it is that we do not speak more about abstinence as a safe and preventative health practice.”

• Affirmed the culture of life. Governor Romney has vetoed bills to provide access to the so-called “morning-after pill,” which is an abortifacient, as well as a bill providing for expansive, embryo-destroying stem cell research. He vetoed the latter bill in 2005 because the could not “in good conscience allow this bill to become law.”

• Stood for religious freedom. Last year, Governor Romney was stalwart in defense of the right of Catholic Charities of Boston to refuse to allow homosexual couples to adopt children in its care. Catholic Charities was loudly accused of “discrimination,” but Governor Romney correctly pointed out that it is unjust to force a religious agency to violate the tenets of its faith in order to placate a special-interest group.

• Filed “An Act Protecting Religious Freedom” in the Massachusetts legislature to save Catholic Charities of Boston and other religious groups from being forced to violate their moral principles or stop doing important charitable work.

All of this may explain why John J. Miller, the national political reporter of National Review, has written that “a good case can be made that Romney has fought harder for social conservatives than any other governor in America, and it is difficult to imagine his doing so in a more daunting political environment.”

We are aware of the 1994 comments of Senate candidate Romney, which have been the subject of much recent discussion. While they are, taken by themselves, obviously worrisome to social conservatives including ourselves, they do not dovetail with the actions of Governor Romney from 2003 until now – and those actions have positively and demonstrably impacted the social climate of Massachusetts.

Since well before 2003, we have been laboring in the trenches of Massachusetts, fighting for the family values you and we share. It is difficult work indeed – not for the faint of heart. In this challenging environment, Governor Romney has proven that he shares our values, as well as our determination to protect them.

For four years, Governor Romney has been right there beside us, providing leadership on key issues – whether it was politically expedient to do so or not. He has stood on principle, and we have benefited greatly from having him with us.

It is clear that Governor Romney has learned much since 1994 – to the benefit of our movement and our Commonwealth. In fact, the entire nation has benefited from his socially conservative, pro-family actions in office. As we explained earlier, his leadership on the marriage issue helped prevent our nation from being plunged into even worse legal turmoil following the court decision that forced “gay marriage” upon our Commonwealth.

For that our country ought to be thankful. We certainly are.

Sincerely,
Rita Covelle
President, Morality in Media Massachusetts

Richard Guerriero
Immediate Past State Deputy, Massachusetts State Council, Knights of Columbus

Mary Ann Glendon
Learned Hand Professor of Law, Harvard Law School

Kristian Mineau
President, Massachusetts Family Institute

Dr. Roberto Miranda
President, COPAHNI Fellowship of Hispanic Pastors of New England

James Morgan
President, Institute for Family Development

Joseph Reilly
President, Massachusetts Citizens for Life

Thomas A. Shields
Chairman, Coalition for Family and Marriage

__________________________
Note: The signatories are all acting as individual citizens, and not as representatives of their respective organizations. Organizational affiliations and titles appear for identification purposes only.

http://aboutmittromney.com/pdf/massleaders.pdf

If he would now just come out in favor of protecting marriage

He's been doing that for a long time.

"Marriage is more than a personally rewarding social custom. It is also critical for the well-being of a civilization. That is why it is so important to preserve traditional marriage – the joining together of one man and one woman. As president, Mitt will not only appoint an Attorney General who will defend the Defense of Marriage Act – a bipartisan law passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton – but he will also champion a Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman."
Website

Nine conservative leaders from Massachusetts recently praised Mitt Romney’s record on protecting life, defending traditional marriage, and standing for religious freedom. The nine leaders wrote the following letter on Mitt Romney’s record in Massachusetts:

"Governor Romney immediately and strongly condemned the November 18, 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) decision that legalized “same-sex marriage” in our state. More importantly, he followed up on that denunciation with action – action that saved our nation from a constitutional crisis over the definition of marriage. He and his staff identified and enforced a little-known 1913 law that allowed them to order local clerks not to issue marriage licenses to out-of-state couples. Absent this action, homosexual couples would surely have flooded into Massachusetts from other states to get “married” and then demanded that their home states recognize the “marriages,” putting the nation only one court decision away from nationalizing “same-sex marriage.”…
"In 2004 he lobbied hard, before a very hostile legislature, for a constitutional amendment protecting marriage – an amendment later changed by the legislature to include civil unions, which the Governor and many marriage amendment supporters opposed. Working with the Governor, we were successful in defeating this amendment.
"Provided strong, active support for a record-setting citizen petition drive in 2005 to advance a clean constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The petition drive collected the largest number of signatures in Massachusetts history.
"Rallied thousands of citizens around the state to focus public and media attention on the failure of legislators, through repeated delays, to perform their constitutional obligation and vote on the marriage amendment. In November of 2006, Gov. Romney held the largest State House rally in Massachusetts history with over 7000 supporters of traditional marriage.
"Filed suit before the Supreme Judicial Court asking the court to clarify the legislators’ duty to vote and failing that, to place the amendment on the 2008 ballot. That lawsuit, perhaps more than any other single action, was by all accounts instrumental in bringing the ultimate pressure on the legislators to vote. The SJC unanimously ruled that the Legislature must vote and the historic vote was taken on January 2, 2007 winning legislative support. This cleared a major hurdle in the three year effort to restore traditional marriage in the Commonwealth…"
[Signed]
Rita Covelle
President, Morality in Media Massachusetts
Gerald D. D’Avolio
Former Executive Director, Massachusetts Catholic Conference
Raymond L. Flynn
Former U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See
Professor Mary Ann Glendon
Harvard Law School
Former U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See
Kristian Mineau
President, Massachusetts Family Institute
Dr. Roberto Miranda
COPAHNI Fellowship of Hispanic Pastors of New England
James F. Morgan
Chairman, Institute for Family Development
Joseph Reilly
Former Chairman of the Board, Massachusetts Citizens for Life
Thomas A. Shields
Chairman, Coalition for Marriage and Family

The largest Boy Scout council in the country responded to the call for volunteers issued by the Salt Lake Olympic Organizing Committee, but the welcome mat was rolled up and the door slammed in its face.
Olympic spokesmen for the 2002 winter games say the exclusion has nothing to do with recent protests by gay activists.

While the organizing committee for the Olympic event is prominently displaying a call for local volunteers, they have explicitly let it be known that the Boy Scouts need not apply.

“For us not to be involved is discouraging, considering the Atlanta games. The Scouting council there was extremely involved,” said Kay Godfrey, professional Scout executive for the Great Salt Lake Council of Boy Scouts.

A number of executives and volunteers from the council have worked for many months with Salt Lake Olympic officials under the assumption that the Boy Scouts would participate in Olympic ceremonies – until recently.

Boy Scouts were seen in many of the venues at the 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics, and they participated in a number of ceremonies there.

Salt Lake Scouts expected the same opportunity in 2002, particularly because Utah is so supportive of the BSA program. About 45 percent of the population of Utah belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the largest sponsor of Scout units in the country.

At a recent training event for Scout leaders, Marty Latimer, chief Scout executive for the council, revealed that the Scouts are no longer welcome.

“We don’t understand what’s wrong. They just don’t want us and won’t talk to us,” said Latimer.

He told NewsMax.com that Mitt Romney, president and CEO of the Salt Lake Olympic Committee, has not returned phone calls from a number of Scout officials who have tried to obtain clarification.

Latimer and other Scout leaders say they are confused because Romney is a former Scout and Scout Leader and a prominent member of the LDS Church.

Despite many attempts to work out a solution, Romney has not returned calls to the Scout leaders after months of attempting to negotiate with him.

“We also lost a great opportunity to house workers for the Olympics at Camp Tracy,” said Latimer, referring to a local scout facility.

A plan had been established to build a dormitory to house food service workers, but that group has also indicated they no longer plan to use Camp Tracy. No explanation was given to the Scouts for the change of plans.

R. Lawry Hunsaker, council president, told NewsMax.com he was surprised that Romney has ignored Scout leaders.

“We can’t get him to return our calls,” he said.

Hunsaker said other spokesmen from the Olympic committee have indicated to him that Scouts in uniform will not be permitted to volunteer at the Winter Olympics.

The Scouts are not the only ones having difficulty talking with Romney.

Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, told NewsMax.com that he waited for some time to get a personal response from Romney on the issue, but a public affairs person called instead.

Cannon is a strong supporter of the Boy Scouts and joined with others to found a Web site that collects money to help Scout groups whose funding has been cut because of their decision not to allow gay scoutmasters.

Cannon’s congressional district represents the Great Salt Lake Council.

“We were told it’s just an age-limit thing. The Scouts aren’t old enough to volunteer,” Cannon told NewsMax.com

Romney would not return calls to NewsMax.com.

“Our state has a strong volunteer heritage that has endured – like the Olympic Spirit – for generations,” said Romney in a published appeal for volunteers.

“The 2002 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games will provide a chance for thousands of Utahns to participate through volunteering. And it is only through volunteer support that we can succeed in 2002.”

Although Romney would not respond to repeated requests for an interview, Olympic Committee spokeswoman Caroline Shaw did call to deny that the Scouts have been turned away because of the gay controversy.

“The reality is we would love to take those volunteers, but we have an age requirement of our volunteers. I believe it’s 18,” Shaw said in a phone interview.

She said Scouts and their adult leaders were welcome to apply as volunteers individually on their own, as long as they don’t apply as a group representing the Boy Scouts.

They also may not work as a volunteer if they wear a Scout uniform, she said.

NewsMax.com learned that the claim of age is not quite accurate. There are children under 18 who will be a part of the Olympic ceremonies, but Olympic officials do not consider them to be volunteers. Instead they are called “cast members.”

“You know, they can certainly go on line and apply. That’s the one area where we are looking for younger adults and children to participate, and they can submit requests through going online to be cast members and so forth,” Shaw said in a phone interview.

Cast members participating in Olympic events may not wear Scout uniforms, she explained.

“We have had some Scouts participate with us already doing some cleanup out at Soldier Hollow and other areas,” said Shaw in an effort to show that Scouts can volunteer. The litter cleanup by Scouts in uniform was a one-time event and was limited to only a few participants.

The Greater Salt Lake Council has approximately 80,000 Scouts of various ages, and 35,000 adult leaders.

Latimer said he found it difficult to believe that Romney doesn’t welcome such a volunteer force, and one that has represented so well the American people.

Godfrey said he was still hopeful that something can be worked out.

“I just think that the committee needs to be aware that we’re here and still willing and we’d like to do something – perhaps more than litter detail,” said Godfrey. “We’re here and we’d like to help if there’s something that we can do.”

Shaw continued to say the only reason Boy Scouts could not be volunteers at the Olympics was because of their age, but she did not address why Scout leaders in uniform were not accepted.

“I’m sure we have volunteers, a large percentage of them have been former Boy Scouts, including our president and CEO [Romney],” Shaw explained.

“I don’t think we’re in a position to give every organization out there official status. There’s the Girl Guides and the Girl Scouts; I don’t know, there must be at least a million youth groups out there,” said Shaw.

“They’re a fabulous organization, but there are a lot of great organizations out there,” she added.

Shaw promised to get additional details and call back the next day, but three weeks have gone by with no further contact. NewsMax.com made numerous efforts to speak with her again, but she has not responded. Romney has also ignored requests for an interview.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that the Boy Scouts of America is a private organization that has the right to restrict who is and who is not an adult leader. The Scouts have always refused to permit openly gay individuals to be leaders or members.

Gay activists have since targeted the Boy Scouts, including public protests.

Some groups have succeeded in getting many United Way chapters to remove funding from local Scout councils. Some community organizations have begun to deny the Scouts access to public facilities and property on the grounds that they say the Scouts discriminate.

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.