Oh, c’mon, xzins, you can do better than that, LOL.
There's no inherent contradiction between not wanting to reinterpret the 14th Amendment as protecting unborn human beings, to avoid constitutional controversy, and supporting adding an amendment to the Constitution, through the usual process that explicitly protects unborn human beings.
Even many pro-lifers - I mean REAL pro-lifers who have been pro-life consistently for many years - are skittish at the idea of doing something that smells a lot like the mirror image of Roe, a kind of bizarro-Roe, which is to “get our way” by a clever reinterpretation of the Constitution.
In any event, my original points stand: Gov. Romney's current positions are well within the bounds of those opinions we usually accept as “pro-life”; Even Rep. Ryan's position isn't perfectly consistent with that of pro-life "purists"; and Gov. Romney's current public views have been on the record since at least 2005, in media outlets such as the Boston Globe.
sitetest
You didn’t pay attention to the video.
Romney has been back and forth on this for years. And just last year, he affirms he doesn’t see babies covered under the 14th amendment. He’s lying, sitetest.
What don’t you see about that?