Well If you have your mind made up against Romney, then why are you asking me? I don't believe that I have asked you anything. You made an unsolicited statement to me in your post #14.
I told you why he won't respond to this. One, the story is from 1994, and is not circulating.
Time will tell.
Second part of the story is about a confidential topic and by addressing it he would be violating confidentiality with a parishoner.
If the allegations are just lies then Mitt Romney can and should refute them. He is under no obligation to permit such libel if it is in fact untrue, regardless of the nature of the relationship.
Third, by taking the time to address the issue, one that isn't being circulated, he would be giving it attention, and thus risk the possibility that even after he explains it, people like yourself still wouldn't believe him and thus he would lose confidence with the voters.
Sounds like Clinton.
Also Romney probably first took a serious position in 1970 (when I will remind you, he was 23, don't know too many under 23 that have serious political opinions, and this was likely his first position on the issue. (I dont believe the article states if he even had an opinion before 1970)
The article doesn't say anything relevant about 1970. The alleged incident happened in the late 1970's while Mitt Romney was a bishop.
Thus, because he took a Pro-Choice position in 1970, he didn't sell anything out in 1994, cause he ran on the same position as he had held since he was 23.
Where are you getting his position at age 23 from. He was pro-life in the late 1970's. Are you saying that he was pro-abortion before he was against abortion before he was for abortion before he was against it? Even John Kerry never managed a Flip-flop-flip-flop.
I don't understand your confusion, seems like you are just trying to make something out of nothing.
It seems like you didn't read the article. I'll be happy to highlight it for you using some HTML I put together on another thread:
And she said – What are you talking about? This is a life threatening situation. And he said – Well what about the life of the baby? X said she found herself arguing with Romney about her medical crisis, said he was very unsympathetic, very critical, and [he] said that under the circumstances in no way did he condone her aborting the child.
Mitt Romney sounds like he was heroically pro-life back in the late 1970's, but then when questioned about his public pro-abortion stand in the mid-1990's:
Well ["the Brethren"] told me in Salt Lake City I could take this position, and in fact I probably had to in order to win in a liberal state like Massachusetts.
If he had sincere pro-life convictions before becoming pro-abortion in order to win office, he lacks the character to be president. Again, I hope the allegations are untrue.
Whoa there.
In 1994, in a debate with Ted Kennedy, Romney explained his then belief in Pro-Choice positions with this explanation.
"I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate."
That is where I am getting the 23 year old statistic. This is a fairly well known quote, I apologize for assuming you might have come across this.
And yes I did read the story, which is why earlier I tried to explain to you why, even as a Pro-Choice politician, he would have advised against an Abortion. Mitt was always personally pro-Life (meaning he would never advice a woman to have an abortion) but at the same time, ultimately leaving the practice to be legal for those that disagreed with him. This is different from say a Barbara Boxer who believes that abortions can be appropriate, whereas Mitt does not think they are, but will not decide for the rest of society (kind of a quishy position if you ask me).
"Well ["the Brethren"] told me in Salt Lake City I could take this position, and in fact I probably had to in order to win in a liberal state like Massachusetts."
Like I said before, this is here say, and in the mucky world of politics, by responding to something like this, especially to something which is not circulating the media right now, would be politically idiotic. It would only serve to bring it to the limelight, which can only hurt Romney. Romney is a slick politician, and wouldn't do something like that. Personally, I don't believe Romney said this, it came from a desperate Feminist-Ted Kennedy backer 13 years ago using non-mainstream media sources to make the story. To me, it reeks of DanRatheritis.
If Romney ever does respond to this, get back to me, I'd be interested to hear what he says.