So, in your world, every person who has ever been soft on the pro-life issue should never change their mind and become pro-life. No one should listen to anything the conservatives and groups like Right To Life say about the abortion issue because, even if they come over fully to the pro-life side, you're still going to condemn them. Why should anyone listen to conservatives and change their minds if they're not going to be recognized for learning the truth and making the right decisions. The attitude you display, and those like you, actually serves to discourage anyone from changing their opinion. It is self-defeating and damages the pro-life cause.
Soft on pro life issues, are you kidding he was pro abortion/choice until he decided to run for president. soft - LOL
In my world, someone who keeps changing his mind back and forth on such a fundamental issue as abortion demonstrates a lack of core values and generates distrust. When he ran for governor, Romney was "pro-choice," and then became a born-again pro-lifer as he began his run for the presidency--until he got to Las Vegas, Nevada, where he came out in favor of "states rights" on the issue.
Well...
No one who has been in the CHURCH since dirt was invented - one who held various positions of responsibiltiy in the CHURCH in his life - not one whose CHURCH has ALWAYS been against abortion - not one who wants folks think that his CHURCH is the most ACCURATE and ONLY one that has the 'keys to the kingdom'.
Romney took…
… 3 different positions on forcing businesses to hire alternative sexual orientation minorities in 13 years (for it in ’94; against it in ’06; then in late ’97 he decides he’s for it again—only not the feds…he wants the states to implement it;
…three different positions on embryonic stem cell research in 5.5 years--offering a distorted twist last December when he told Katie Couric that a "parent" could either have their frozen embryo "adopted" or they could "donate" him or her to "research" [for dissection]--something perfectly "acceptable" to him...[AND EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HIS GENESIS TO BECOMING 'PRO-LIFE?']...
… abortion weaves that were even worse: Pro-abortion in 1994; didn't wish to be labeled "pro-choice" in 2001; back to his heftiest pro-abortion actions & rhetoric in 2002; pro-life actions in Winter/spring 2005; pro-abortion commitment re-stated on May 27, 2005 sandwiched between pro-life actions; back to aiding & abetting Planned Parenthood & taxpayer subsidized abortions in Spring of 2006. Then a year full of 2007 where he would alternately tell us that he was "effectively pro-choice...the last multiple years" but that he was "always pro-life" (11 days apart). By 2007, he was saying he was "never pro-choice" 'cause he never allowed to call himself "pro-choice."
Whew!!! Come, on, Spiff, pro-lifers – just like Mormons welcoming new Mormon converts -- will settle for two positions (a “before” and “after”). But the weird nuancing he attempted in the ’07 campaign alone – never mind acting like a dog returning to his own vomit in May of ’05 and merging abortion and Planned Parenthood into RomneyCare that makes it quite obvious he could not stick to his “new” position without taking yet a “newer” stance.