Why Romney is now pro life

[avatar4321]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/07/romney.abortion.ap/index.html?eref=rss_politics

I see some very compelling reasons here which explain why Mitt Romney was at one time pro choice and has since become pro life. If someone has a compelling reason not to believe him, I would love to see what it is.

[Abbey Marie]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/...f=rss_politics

I see some very compelling reasons here which explain why Mitt Romney was at one time pro choice and has since become pro life. If someone has a compelling reason not to believe him, I would love to see what it is.

Avatar, I keep gettng "Page Not Found".

[jillian]

Romney has always had his own personal beliefs about choice.

The question is why decide right before you're going to run for pres that you now want to impose those beliefs on others?

Answer: the base... the base... the base.

[avatar4321]

Ill see if can fix it. it was working like 20 mins ago.

Should work now

[manu1959]

Romney has always had his own personal beliefs about choice.

The question is why decide right before you're going to run for pres that you now want to impose those beliefs on others?

Answer: the base... the base... the base.

after reading the article it would appear that he wanted to be honest with himself....would you have prefered he lied and remained pro choice just to keep the moderate base happy ..... being pro choice or pro life will not in itself win or lose you the election ....

[Abbey Marie]

after reading the article it would appear that he wanted to be honest with himself....would you have prefered he lied and remained pro choice just to keep the moderate base happy ..... being pro choice or pro life will not in itself win or lose you the election ....

It also sounds like "became" pro-choice because of a tragedy in his family. Which indicates that he was originally pro-life, and is going back to his original beliefs.

[manu1959]

It also sounds like "became" pro-choice because of a tragedy in his family. Which indicates that he was originally pro-life, and is going back to his original beliefs.

one could read it that way, beliefs are formed by events....when we are young the first event gets us started....it is possible he did not hold a belief until the young lady died....none the less, it is his belief, he holds it for his reasons. for someone to say he holds it for political reasons and not personal reasons is disingenuous...

[avatar4321]

one could read it that way, beliefs are formed by events....when we are young the first event gets us started....it is possible he did not hold a belief until the young lady died....none the less, it is his belief, he holds it for his reasons. for someone to say he holds it for political reasons and not personal reasons is disingenuous...

I agree with that. I know some politicians might change on something like that. But it sure sounds like valid experiences. And personally Ive seen nothing about him that would make me disbelieve him yet.

[jillian]

after reading the article it would appear that he wanted to be honest with himself....would you have prefered he lied and remained pro choice just to keep the moderate base happy ..... being pro choice or pro life will not in itself win or lose you the election ....

He was never pro choice for himself. He did feel, though, that he had a constitutional mandate to protect the rights of his constituents. That, apparently, is no longer relevant to him.

I'm not sure if it can win or lose you the general election in and of itself. I suspect there are more pressing issues which do that. But it certainly gets you through primary season. (which is why people will look at someone like him and not go for Giuliani, who's really the slam dunk if he gets to a general election).

[Abbey Marie]

He was never pro choice for himself. He did feel, though, that he had a constitutional mandate to protect the rights of his constituents. That, apparently, is no longer relevant to him.

I'm not sure if it can win or lose you the general election in and of itself. I suspect there are more pressing issues which do that. But it certainly gets you through primary season. (which is why people will look at someone like him and not go for Giuliani, who's really the slam dunk if he gets to a general election).

Maybe he has decided to also protect the consitutional rights of his unborn constituents?

[manu1959]

I agree with that. I know some politicians might change on something like that. But it sure sounds like valid experiences. And personally Ive seen nothing about him that would make me disbelieve him yet.

further, changing his posistion in the context of the entire presidential race may well help him with the "base" but will hurt him nationally.

a truely smart candidate would play the, abortion is not a federal issue it is a state issue and it is currently protected by current law. my personal views on abbortion are of no importance as they do not affect my goals for: foriegn policy, the economy, education, national infrastructure, the military, health care and social security....politicians are stupid and get taken off point by social issues.....

[jillian]

Maybe he has decided to also protect the consitutional rights of his unborn constituents?

There's no such thing.

[Dilloduck]

There's no such thing.

What ? Then who in the hell are we trying to save the environment for ????

[manu1959]

There's no such thing.

there is no such thing as a constitional right to an abortion either....

[jillian]

there is no such thing as a constitional right to an abortion either....

As long as Roe stands, there is.

[manu1959]

As long as Roe stands, there is.

roe does not rule it is a constitutional right.....it is an argument that abortion is inside the right to privacy....i could make an arguement that a fetus is alive and thus protected with life liberty and the persuit of happiness....thus abortion is murder.....

[jillian]

roe does not rule it is a constitutional right.....it is an argument that abortion is inside the right to privacy....i could make an arguement that a fetus is alive and thus protected with life liberty and the persuit of happiness....thus abortion is murder.....

You could make that argument. But again, it has always been the case that the Constitution means what the Court says it does. And so long as it is protected by the right of privacy and until Roe is overturned or wholly eviscerated, then it is what it is, and our elected officials, being bound to defend the constitution. have an obligation to defend that right as well even if they'd make other personal choices for themselves.

[avatar4321]

There's no such thing.

There was no such thing as a constitutional right for blacks and women at one point.

[Dilloduck]

You could make that argument. But again, it has always been the case that the Constitution means what the Court says it does. And so long as it is protected by the right of privacy and until Roe is overturned or wholly eviscerated, then it is what it is, and our elected officials, being bound to defend the constitution. have an obligation to defend that right as well even if they'd make other personal choices for themselves.

I guess it's down to the unelected lawyers to make constitutional challenges then.

[manu1959]

You could make that argument. But again, it has always been the case that the Constitution means what the Court says it does. And so long as it is protected by the right of privacy and until Roe is overturned or wholly eviscerated, then it is what it is, and our elected officials, being bound to defend the constitution. have an obligation to defend that right as well even if they'd make other personal choices for themselves.

if and or when roe v wade is overturned .... states rights will kick in and all yall can move to california

[Dilloduck]

What ? Then who in the hell are we trying to save the environment for ????

helloooooo !!!!!

The future offspring of Americans have no rights yet some are trying to convince us we need to clean up the world for them ???

[manu1959]

helloooooo !!!!!

The future offspring of Americans have no rights yet some are trying to convince us we need to clean up the world for them ???

well the dems are killing their unborn.....so they are saving the world for the GOP who give birth to a litter of puppies

[Dilloduck]

well the dems are killing their unborn.....so they are saving the world for the GOP who give birth to a litter of puppies

ahhhhhhhhh that explains the need for all the immigrant proxy voters !!!

[Abbey Marie]

There's no such thing.

Because 5 robed men with an agenda say there isn't? Perhaps Romney thinks there ought to be. It's certainly less of a stretch than the invisible so-called Constitutional right to privacy. I don't need a penumbra to see that a fetus is a little growing human.

Btw, thanks for the "valid point" comment earlier. :)