Skip to comments.Fact-Check: Did Romney Lie About Cardinal and Contraception During Wednesday Debate?
Posted on 02/24/2012 11:39:35 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
As readers know, if there is one thing that gets under our skin here at BCI, it is deception. This one by former Gov. Romney about a situation here in Massachusetts affects how the country perceives values important to many Catholics, so BCI felt we could not let it sit without a response.
In the Republican Presidential debate Wednesday evening at about 8:50pm or so, former Gov. Mitt Romney said he never infringed on the rights of Catholics as governor of Massachusetts by requiring the Catholic Church to provide morning-after pills to rape victimsit was entirely voluntary on the part of the Catholic Church.
If providing morning-after pills was voluntary on the part of the Catholic Church, then that would mean that Cardinal OMalley volunteered to have Catholic hospitals give out abortifacients.
That is simply not true...
I thought this was a lie when I heard it.
This is the very reason why Lawyer lawyer Ricky stays focused on social issues. As VP for Bishop Romney, Lawyer Ricky can help defuse the facts that are sure to be widely publicized.
Bishop Romney is planning to wrap himself in a the values Lawyer Richy dwells on when the Fascist Democrat thugs throw them at him during the campaign. Electing Romney assures a long, expensive, murderous, future for Obama Care no matter what sort of tinkering with it Bishop Romney says he'll do. And when Bishop Romney explains why Obama Care has to stay good Lawyer Ricky will swear that he'll make sure it doesn't violate anyone's religious beliefs until at least after Bishop Romney is out of office.
This makes Romney no better than Obama on establishing a federal religion that mandates that individuals violate their own conscience and theology.
Thanks for the nice find, STA! I’d bet that Santorum’s writing pad was so full he either failed to write it down for refutation or ran out of time before he mentioned it. (With Cushing, it might have been a different story.)
Romney is a big government guy. He will always be a big government guy, no matter how many lies he has to tell to make us believe otherwise.
Maybe the taxpayers should refuse to pay education costs for the tumors/glob of cells expelled from his wife’s body.
Shouldn’t equal rights demand that the government pay healthcare costs for my snot or biopsies, since that’s what the federal government says the “products of conception” are? Oh, wait a minute. Roe v Wade said the “products of conception” are “potential life”. So snot or biopsies wouldn’t count, unless they can be cloned somehow. Semen and ova, on the other hand, could be called “potential life”.
Obama needs to explain why the government doesn’t have to educate menstrual blood or semen. By law it’s the same stuff as the “blob of cells” he calls his daughters.
Absurd, yes, but that’s Roe v Wade and Obama supports that decision so he should have to explain it to the rest of us.
-—This makes Romney no better than Obama on establishing a federal religion that mandates that individuals violate their own conscience and theology——
Yes. It makes him a liar too.
Also, he expended ZERO political capital in “opposing” sodomite “marriages.”
Newt was shaking his head in utter disbelief when Romney answered. Like many Americans, he was seemingly amazed with the ease at which Romney could look you right in your eye and tell an outright lie. That tells me what cover Romney feels he has in the media and it also tells me how much trouble we are in if he is our candidate. Go Newt!
In 2005 Romney vetoed a bill to provide access to the so-called morning-after-pill, knowing his veto would be overridden...
>>Romney’s sin is that he didn’t have even 1/3 of either chamber of the legislature that was pro-life enough to sustain his veto.
I’m going to make this another thread, but behold the weaselness:
The standard narrative regarding Romneys handling of the Goodridge same-sex marriage decision is that the State Supreme Court forced Romney to implement same sex marriage in Massachusetts. But thats not what happened. Massachusetts is unique in that its state constitution specifically lists marriage as a policy area reserved to the legislative branch, but the court illegally tried to order the legislature to change the marriage statutes. However, even the liberal dominated legislature resisted the unconstitutional encroachment on its enumerated duties and refused to change the marriage statutes. Amazingly, to this day, the statutes continue to refer only to male/female marriage despite efforts made every legislative session since 2004 to change it.
Contrary to Team Romneys propaganda, the legislature never acted on this issue, yet Romney repeatedly referred to the court opinion as law. And though the court never ordered the governor to do anything, Romney came to their rescue and unilaterally ordered his Town Clerks and Justices of the Peace to marry same sex couples. Homosexual marriage exists in Massachusetts today solely due to Romneys executive actions. This constitutes one of the most outrageous examples of executive branch activism in modern history.
But Romney mindful of his impending presidential campaign pretended he was forced to implement gay marriage and called for a constitutional amendment to reverse the Goodridge decision. He was clever enough to entice national pro-family groups to hold a large rally in Boston in 2006 near the end of his term to push for an unnecessary and hopeless marriage amendment. As Romney expected, the rallies received great television coverage and national media attention.
However, while Romney was being portrayed as a champion of traditional marriage, internal administration documents reveal that two years previous to the rally his administration was quietly making all the administrative changes necessary to implement same-sex marriage. This was sickening.
If Romney really wanted to defeat gay marriage, all he had to do was declare the Goodridge decision to be in violation of the state constitution and announce he would implement gay marriage only if the legislature were to pass such a bill.
But Romney knew exactly what he was doing. He was doing what he has always done playing both sides. He had earlier promised the gay Log Cabin Republican Club at a private meeting that he would accept the Goodridge decision and would not fight homosexual marriage.
Furthermore, he rejected the advice of some of Americas leading constitutional scholars, who were nearly unanimous that the Goodridge decision was unconstitutional and thus shouldnt be acted upon. Some gave informal opinions in the press or in various writings and some actually met with Romney face to face. This group included such scholars as Hadley Arkes, Mary Ann Glendon, Dwight Duncan, Scott Fitzgibbon, Jan LaRue, and Mat Staver.
If you accept that contraception is medicine and therefore it should be covered as a part of health insurance; then, it seems logical to me that auto insurance companies, like Warren Buffet’s GEICO should have to pay for tires and oil changes.
Hey Warren!!! And your GEICO gecko .... What's In Your Wallet? We want it.
True. Though a person doesn’t have to have a car, but they can’t get by without a body.
Muslims are exempted from the health insurance thing because they got an imam to say they are opposed to insurance because it is “gambling”. Does that mean that Muslims aren’t required to buy car insurance if they have a car? Are Muslims the uninsured people that I’m being forced to buy car insurance for? Am I already paying a “dhimmi tax” through my car insurance?
Or are Muslims forbidden by their religion from driving a car, since they can’t be insured as required by law in order to drive a car? Somebody should ask them this. Ask CAIR if Muslims are forbidden from driving on the roads because they aren’t allowed to have the required insurance.
And oh my goodness. If they aren’t allowed to have the required insurance to simply be alive....
Yes. Without flinching.
And insurance should hae to pay for any elective car-care stuff as long as it pertains to vehicles, like all the jacked-up stuff on trucks, fancy stereos, etc too.
If I want to have my truck jacked up 15 feet everybody else should have to pay for that. And if I want a loud stereo that breaks the windshields of anybody within 4 city blocks of my booming noise everybody else should have to pay for that too.
Everybody deserves to have an eardrum-breaking, heart-attack-inducing subwoofer on the public dime...
Yes, but people can get by without sex (though most prefer not to). Anyway you look at it, contraceptives are not medicinal prescriptions. Obama and his media have done a great job of letting the conversation go off track and the conservatives are falling for the false premise.
Here is the transcript: Did Romney Lie at the Debate?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.