A May 2005 interview on Fox News illustrates the difficult path he's treading. Chris Wallace had Romney on a show with Boomer Esiason, a former NFL quarterback and proponent of embryonic stem cell research. After hearing Esiason make his case, Wallace turned to Romney.
"Let's talk first of all about the fact that you support the idea of using these embryos that are left over in fertility clinics and that would otherwise simply be thrown away," Wallace said.
Romney didn't directly address the point, saying that he draws the ethical line "in a very similar place" to that of Bush.
Wallace tried again: "But if I may ask you, governor, specifically, you don't see, as I understand it, the use of these leftover embryos in fertility clinics as destroying life?"
"That's right," Romney responded,
& Romney spoke with CBS News about his views and host Katie Couric asked Romney to describe the kind of embryonic stem cell research he might support. "So what kind of embryos -- embryos that are created for procreation and then would be discarded? Are those the ones that you feel are perfectly fine from which to cull cells for stem cell research?" Couric asked. "Yes," Romney responded, "those embryos that are referred to commonly as surplus embryos from in-vitro fertilization." Romney said he would first like to see human embryos adopted by families before put up for their destruction. However, he explained how he would have no problem with parents who want to allow those human embryos -- unique human beings -- to be destroyed for research. "But if a parent decides they would want to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable," he said. "It should not be made against the law."
Our teachers are on top of this. Invoke what you want, I know what they want.
“According to you, “Romney is absolutely pro-life.” Well, let’s look at that silly assertion. Do you consider it pro-life to offer embryonic aged humans for research as ‘leftover’ people? Romney does. So he’s not actually ‘absolutely pro-life now is he?”
I’m so tired of one issue Freepers who thinks the whole world thinks as one-dimensionally as they do, and parse every little word that has to do with their pro-life stance to suit their political needs. There are lots of issues out there in the world, and you continually seek the perfect in an imperfect world.
When you are looking for a well-rounded candidate who is right on most issues, then you have Romney, including that he is pro-life both in practice in his own family (chock full of children, including his 5 sons), and also since he became a pro-life advocate politically. I suppose you would have wished that he wouldn’t have evolved to his pro-life stance and remained pro-abortion? Then stop preaching to others how they should become pro-life if you don’t believe it never works to change their opinions. Bah, humbug.
Tired of the one-issue Freepers who knit pick constantly, looking for the one fatal flaw of any given conservative candidate if it doesn’t exactly fit your pro-life template. The good news is the tide has turned against you, and the majority of intelligent conservatives want Romney, even if he has the occasional wart, just like, I’m sure, you have too. Or are you perfect?