[Gelato]

Good post.

Romney hasn't changed, only his ability to obfuscate has improved.

Romney is like many Democrats: he is "personally" opposed to abortion, but ultimately believes it should be legally accessible to those who want it. Lately, he is fond of calling it a states' rights issue (which is the same as holding the Confederate line on slavery), and has said that any state that wants abortion should be allowed to have it.

"I believe that each state should be able to make their own choice as to whether they are pro-life or pro-choice." -- Mitt Romney, Hardball with Chris Matthews, Dec 12, 2005

Romney doesn't qualify as pro-life. To be pro-life is to believe that abortion is an intolerable injustice against the unborn child, and that the laws must protect that life. You never see Romney argue that point, that the human life in the womb has a God-given right to live.

No matter his attempts to appeal to conservatives now, Romney remains pro-choice because abortion is not an issue of justice with him. He doesn't understand that the right to life trumps the right to choose, even the right of a state to choose. The government must protect life above all, or society will literally die.

Under the same principle that outlawed slavery as an injustice, we must outlaw abortion.

[Sloth]

Romney is like many Democrats: he is "personally" opposed to abortion, but ultimately believes it should be legally accessible to those who want it.

Indeed. I have never encountered ANYONE with that position who, when challenged, could give a coherent explanation of why they "personally" oppose abortion.

There's only one reason to oppose abortion -- it's murder. If it's not murder, then why oppose it? It'd be like saying "I am personally against tonsilectomy." On the other hand, if it is murder, then why allow it?