Mitt Romney On Abortion, "Gay" Rights & Other Issues: How Much Can He Have Changed?

This video can also be seen here: The Real Romney?

Mitt Romney lost me at Mormonism, but if that isn't enough to convince people that he shouldn't be the Republican candidate, this video might.

The video also captures Ted Kennedy in all his cafeteria Catholic glory. At his particular judgment, he will have to face God knowing he, a Catholic, who should know better, stood before millions of people on camera, and repeatedly stumped for the right for women to kill their unborn babies through legal, elective abortion. He ought to fear God's judgment over that issue even more than he should fear God's judgment on his role in what happened to Mary Jo Kopechne at Chappaquiddick.

Any thoughts?

Comments

[Natalie]

If I was a republican, I'd be voting for Brownback and that's just not because he's Catholic. Romney reminds of Kerry too much.

[Bob]

As a Catholic, his Mormonism does not bother me a bit. He is by far the smartest person on either side running for president. He is a good man who believes in many of the things we Catholics do. This man is the one we should want as President. Don't get stuck on your antiquated notion of 'only Catholics can see things the way I do'. This is silly. Remember that the Presidency is a secular office.

[Dude]

Does anybody really still think that Ted Kennedy ever considers what God may think of his actions?

[carolg]

Bob,

The question is not if Catholics can vote for someone who is Mormon. This is never an issue as far as I’m concerned. And there is no antiquated notion that ‘only Catholics see the way things I do’. In fact you should read this blog more and you can see how even like-minded Catholics disagree on this or that.

The point of the post – and what pro-life voters need to realize – is that you can not vote for anyone who says, “I personally believe this but I’m going to support this totally immoral law because it’s well, the law” when it comes to the issue of abortion.

As far as I’m concerned what Mitt Romney is saying, and others like him, is nothing more than a cheap excuse to not stand up for what he says he believes in, it’s an effort to absolve himself of his responsibility regarding abortion and it’s him selling out his faith. Don’t kid yourself. No gutless wonder like this deserves to be president. The presidency may be a secular office but no one has the right to sanction the death of completely innocent and totally defenseless unborn babies.

If anything it’s more disgusting to me if the person knows it’s wrong and looks the other way and then offers cheap excuses about why they lack integrity.

[James]

I totally disagree with you on the Mormon question disqualifying Romney in your eyes. That is very questionable thinking on your part. Why Mormon? Why not Protestant as well? You pointed out yourself, Catholics like Kennedy disgrace themselves, so you'd not vote for Romney over Kennedy, Kerry, or their like? You'll just guarantee the victory of worse people. You have to vote for the best candidate available...not wait for the perfect one. I hope you'll reconsider your stance and comments and support the best conservative available on election day.

[James]

One more point: I doubt you have read Romney's comments on that video he released yesterday. You're only dealing with statements from a decade ago. Romney is pro-life, just like Ronald Reagan was...but he didn't advertise that fact when he ran for California Governor either. You have to get all the information, please.

[carolg]

James - I hope you're not writing to me.

I clearly wrote and believe:
The question is not if Catholics can vote for someone who is Mormon. This is never an issue as far as I’m concerned.

That means I'll vote for someone independent of the faith he professes. I'll vote for someone based on WHAT HE DOES not WHAT HE SAYS HE BELIEVES.

Anyone who says, "I think abortion is wrong but if someone else wants to kill their unborn child, I'll look the other way." Is NOT pro-life!!!

If Romney is pro-life he needs to plainly state that what he says in this video is wrong. The pro-life movement doesn't need people who have no courage or are not willing to 'advertise' their views. Abortion is a life or death situation - we need people who are going to stand up for what they believe in and do something about it.

If someone says I believe this, but I'm not going to do anything about it - does his or her belief have any meaning? Of course not. If someone says they are on the Atkins diet and they go home and eat a cheesecake everyday, are they really on the Atkins diet? Maybe, but they are doing a crappy job at it.

I'll never vote for someone who says, "I'll be pro-life, I'll just do a crappy job at it." No thanks. We need real pro-life people in office who will act. I don't care what faith they say they believe.

[HiveRadical]

carolg,

What do you think of Ronald Reagan?

He, unlike Romney, advanced the cause of abortion in the state he governed before he ran for president. Do you feel he was not one with sufficient integrity to merit your vote? Did you vote for Ronald Reagan either time?

[Roger H.]

What do you think of Ronald Reagan?

He, unlike Romney, advanced the cause of abortion in the state he governed before he ran for president. Do you feel he was not one with sufficient integrity to merit your vote? Did you vote for Ronald Reagan either time?

First of all, it should be noted that Reagan signed the bill decriminalizing abortion in California at a time when abortion was not the issue it is today, and well before Roe v. Wade. Reagan, as disclosed in this OpinionJournal piece from 2003, simply didn't think the measure he signed in his first year as governor would have any kind of impact. Within a year of signing the bill, Reagan realized he had a made a mistake, and actually admitted it. From then on, Reagan did what he could to advance the cause of protecting unborn life, including the penning of this article in 1983.

In the case of Mitch Romney, he is on record as saying he supports the legal right for women to have an abortion, and essentially that Roe v. Wade is correct. I agree with carolg that if Romeny wants my consideration for President, he needs to plainly state that what he said back in '94 in the debate with Uncle Ted was wrong, and that if elected President, he will do all he can to protect the life of the unborn.

[Steve]

In terms of the frontrunners for the Republican nomination (presupposing that the Democratic Party will not support a Pro-life candidate), former Mayor Rudy Giuliani is in favor of abortion,and is in favor of homosexual "marriage". Taking his philosophy in stride, it would only make sense that he supports federal funding of embryonic stem cell research (as this research is already being done with private funding).

Senator John McCain (R-AZ) seems to be pretty unreligious (only God can see into the hearts of men), but has a strong record on pro-life/anti-abortion votes in the Senate. Besides Romney, he seems the most viable candidate on the GOP side of the aisle, but concerns about his age 72-if elected, and the possibilities of his cancer coming back are also in play.

Governor Mitt Romney has changed his views on abortion, but has fought the Massachusetts' Democratic-controlled legislature on its deferment to the Massachusetts' high court to allow Homosexual "marriage". In fact, recently, Romney pushed for a state-wide referendum on the issue to let the people decide.

If changing your views on abortion is the litmus test issue, then I hope that no Pro-lifers voted for Ronald Reagan as he passed the most liberal abortion bill in America when he was Governor of California. In addition, President Reagan was also a divorcee.

As we look in hindsight, President Reagan was a proponent of the Pro-life movement, and stood athwart the tidal wave of the culture of death as it later engulfed American culture in the 1990's.

Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) is a Catholic and staunch supporter of human rights for all humans-born and unborn. Unfortunately after a Bush presidency, a more dynamic public speaker and charismatic candidate is needed, and I do not think he is electable.

In short, Governor Romney is worthy of Catholic support as he was pro-choice, but is now pro-life. He has used the Governor's mansion to fight the culture of death and relativism that spreads from both coasts inward. Despite my theological disagreements with Mormons, his values on life fall in line with my own. If you do not like his words, than evaluate for yourself his actions as Governor of Massachusetts on issues ranging from universal health care for all to his pro-life/anti-abortion stance to his fight for the dignity of homosexuals yet opposing their radical redefinition of marriage. In my view, he will walk the walk despite 12-year old video to the contrary.

[carolg]

HiveRadical,

I hate to say this but I was too young to ever vote for Reagan. I hope that doesn't make me sound young and naive.

If Mr. Romney has changed his views on abortion, that's wonderful. I think I'd like to see him plainly state that and repeatedly do things that show he will stand up for what he says he believes in.

[GanzaBoy]

Guys, as Catholics, there is no way we can vote for someone that is effectively a pagan. Why is Romney a pagan, because the Jesus he worships is (by their doctrine) not devine. Mormons beleive their god, the father of their jesus, was a mere mortal who was elevated to god.

I realize he was raised that way, but by the time he becomes a free thinking and supposedly intelligent adult, he should know that Native Americans are not a lost tribe of Israel, DNA proves it! I am not making this up, Mormons really do beleive this about Indians. IF a so called prophet were wrong on this, what else are they wrong about?

[joanne]

Well, if it turns into a personality contest, Obama will be the next president, so maybe for the sake of those babies, we should focus our prayer accordingly and begin a huge postcard campaign of purely positive pro-life messages directed to him. Just in case.

[Athanasius]

Are Roman Catholics aware of the strange incestuous teaching of Mormon prophets? They claim that Elohim, the god of planet earth, had many spirit babies who came to earth to take on human bodies in "mortality." One of these spirit babies was the Blessed Virgin Mary.

When Elohim decided to provide a phsycial body for his first spirit son, Jesus, so that he sould enter "mortality," Elohim came to earth and physically impregnated the Virgin Mary, who then was no longer a Virgin. She gave birth to Jesus, he spirit brother in pre-mortality.

The whole teaching is so sickening, that most people won't believe it. However, here is a link to a site verifiying everything I just posted:

http://www.mrm.org/topics/jesus-christ/mormonisms-teaching-concerning-virgin-birth

If Roman Catholics really honor the Lord's Virgin Mother, the Immaculata, then how can you possibly vote for someone who buys into a belief system which has taught such tripe?

Thanks Joanne,

I had forgotten about that one. Many members of my family were incensed that I could never vote for Romney if he were the Repulican nominee.

[General Woo]

This simply isn't true. As Mormons, we also believe that Mary was the virgin mother of Jesus Christ.

[General Woo]

I would suggest that if you have questions about Mormon doctrine, you would visit a source such as lds.org. rather than a website that is anti-Mormon. Does it not seem odd that you would research the Mormon doctrine on a website that says, "Challenging the claims of Mormonism since 1979." Would the same not be true if I visited a Protestant website looking for information about Catholocism? It's almost like taking a broken bone to the auto-mechanic to set. It does not make much sense.

[James]

Mitt Romney is the quintessential finger-to-the-wind politician - who will say anything to anyone to get elected.

He was pro-abortion, and because of him, sodomite 'marriage' came to Massachusetts. He enforced a court ruling that did not have the force of law - whereas, as governor, he is supposed only to enforce laws on the books. There is still no law in the Gay State having anything to do with 'gay' marriage.

Now little kindergarten kids in Newton, for example, get books read to them about "Prince and Prince" - where the poor prince can't find a girl to marry, and so picks a boy! - who he then kisses on the lips. (I suppose he anally sodomizes the other boy later, but thankfully that's not put in the book. Of course, kids now know that's what homosexuals do.) If you protest - like one dad did - you will be taken to court and VILIFIED.

That, folks, is pure evil done to little children - but HEY - this is mASSachusetts - where one senator left a woman to die in a car he flipped over while inebriated, and one rep had sodomitic prostitution goin' on in his apartment in Washington, and where all sorts of sexual freakishness comes marching down the Main Streets of towns and villages in front of kids.

No state has a greater exodus of families and children than Massachusetts. The two cities with the greatest exodus of families and children are San Francisco and Boston. Coincidence? I think not.

As for Romney, I wouldn't trust any thing that man says - because you will always find that a couple of years ago, he said the exact opposite! He is as truthful as Kerry was about his military record!

Besides - Romney's sorry candidacy is going nowhere anyway. Most people (rightfully) don't trust him or believe him. But hey, he earned that distrust the easy way - I'll grant him that.

James

[James]

Mitt Romney -

Just another cafeteria Mormon...

James

[Joe]

I have s simple solution, i'm writing in Pope Benedict as my canidate.

[otto]

Hey, Mitt, bro... I fear for thy soul.