Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: IreneE
“When the Massachusetts’ Supreme Court imposed gay marriage on the citizens of the Commonwealth, Romney could have exercised a “bill of address” to impeach the activist judges. But he didn’t.

A governor cannot unliateraly impeach a justice. He needed a supermajority of the state legislature, which he would never have gotten, the legislature being dominated by dems.

He signed something he didn’t have to directing town clerks to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples or be fired. One Justice of the Peace Linda Gray Kelley did lose her job because of her religious views against gay marriage.

I defy you to support this assertion with a credible news source. And no, neither Newsmax, nor WorldNutDaily, nor Massresistance qualifies as a credible source.

Romney went even further however and directed his Department of Health to change the state marriage licenses to read “Party A” and “Party B” replacing “Husband” and “Wife.” Romney was under no legal obligation to do either of these things.

See above.

He now claims to support a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. Yet, in 2002, then governor Romney called a similar attempt to amend the Massachusetts’ Constitution “too extreme.”

Before the state supreme court imposed gay marriage, he did not think an amendment was necessary. However, once the court did it, he fought for an amendment with all his might.

It strikes me as pretty strange that there are people being “disciplined” over speaking out against the Mormon involvement in Prop 8, but I sure haven’t seen one single thing that would indicate that Mitt was or would be “disciplined” for his role in making gay marriage a fact in MA by the LDS “church”.

That's because the truth is the opposite of what you say: Mitt led the opposition to gay marriage in MA, the hateful nonsense spewed by idiots like Brian Camenker not withstanding.

128 posted on 11/11/2008 3:37:00 PM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies ]


To: curiosity

Mitt imposed Gay Marriage upon Marriage because
it would be convenient for polygamists.


129 posted on 11/11/2008 5:22:05 PM PST by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies ]

To: curiosity; greyfoxx39; Elsie
Whew... you sound like the DU'ers for BO with all that SPIN on Romney's lack of cajones to do the Holy thing about gay marriage.

The article was Townhall, btw.

Get your facts straight. Mitt just didn't fight it, face it. If he did, he wouldn't have let that Christian Justice of the Peace lose her job when she opposed having to marry gays!

It is very peculiar that no one is bringing up the polygamist who a few months ago went to court to legitimize his "marriages" because of all the gay marriages (that started in Mass.) LDS must have realized what a corner Mitt painted himself in.

Plus, backing anti gay marriage initiatives absolves LDS of their foundational problem that the "Mormon Fathers" that Mitt claims he follows, preached. And practiced. And practiced with the wives of other men.

It is a sick and perverted thing for Smith and Young to have dared tempt a Holy God by calling polygamy "holy". 'Specially when you just stole your neighbor's wife.

So, roll this hot potato political issue up and -- voila! LDS pays for Prop 8 in California.

Mormon Party Machinery for Mitt at work.

We are not fooled. And of course, neither is God.

130 posted on 11/11/2008 6:29:55 PM PST by IreneE ("The apprehension of beauty is the cure for apathy." - my paraphrase of Thomas Aquinas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson