Skip to comments.Romney's boilerplate message on marriage at Liberty U: conservatives are being taken for a ride
Posted on 05/14/2012 2:28:06 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
Why the lack of pounding home this message at Liberty U?
If he could take the time to say that marriage is "the relationship between one man and one woman" he could have used this occasion to pound the message home that he will push for a constitutional amendment that says that marriage shall be between one man and one woman.
Some might say that there was no need to since Romney is not going to focus on social issues like this, as this would be a distraction and all.
But that argument doesn't hold water, because if he could stop to say that "marriage is the relationship between one man and one woman" he could have added to that & pounded the message home that he will push for the aformentioned constitutional amendment.
Additionally, Romney has recently said that this issue should be left up to the states, which undermines his previous stance.
Add to that RNC head Reince Priebus saying on Andrea Mitchell Reports that Romney and the Republican party aren't going to seek to federalize this issue. To further muddy up the water, Ed Gillespie - two days after Priebus spoke - said that Romney and the GOP will, WILL push for this constitutional amendment. What?! talk about opposing messages.
Romney and the GOP leadership are taking social conservatives for a ride......
Homosexual agenda Ping!
Half-hearted Romney ping...
As long as they are not married, Mitt Romney is ok with gays adopting children.
His words and record do not match up
In my opinion, the war on marriage was lost when the churches turned a blind eye to divorce. If we believe in the sanctity of marriage, it needs to be MORE than defining it as "one man/one woman" but also "'til death do us part".
To get there will require changing the culture, not grandstanding on some change to the Constitution.
In the meantime, Romney should focus on his strengths and 0 weaknesses, and not be pulled into the culture war ploy.
The ugly truth is that Obama and Romney have the exact same policy stance on gay marriage and that is that question of gay marriage should be left to the states.
Romney sure didn’t consider it “grandstanding” when he signed the pledge that he was for a constitutional amendment that marriage “shall be the union of one man and one woman” and that alone. And it wouldn’t scuttle his campaign, either.
Romney took us for a ride. He signed the pledge because his campaign would have been over had he not signed it.
Now that he has the nomination, he has dumped social conservatives and tossed us under the bus. Romney thinks that he no longer needs social conservatives.
Romney’s words and record not matching up is an understatement.
Conservatives are figuring out that Romney and his RINOcrat handlers have taken us for a ride.
Get over it!
Vote for Zer0, and probably your property will get confiscaticated by the Socialists;
Vote for Romney and suck it up, wait for another day in the United States of America - not Amerika!!
To my knowledge, throughout this campaign Romney has stated again and again (including at the debates) that he supports a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as he spoke of it at Liberty U.
I do not see him giving any opposing message on it himself.
Others in the GOP perhaps have, but on this issue I have yet to see it from Romney to date. Please point me to an opposing statement by him as regards the Marriage Amendment. All I have heard is his support of that amendment, which is exaclty in line with what he stated at the speech.
He reaffirmed this last week in a statement to Denver station KDVR-TV,
“Well, when these issues were raised in my state of Massachusetts, I indicated my view, which is I do not favor marriage between people of the same gender, and I do not favor civil unions if they are identical to marriage other than by name.”
He went on to reaffirm his supports of a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman according to the National Organization for Marriage pledge he signed.
He also pledged to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court, in contrast to the Obama administration, which does not defend DOMA as it thinks the 1996 law banning is unconstitutional.
You should also note, that after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that gays had the right to marry in MA in 2003, initially Romney said he would follow the ruling, but seek a constitutional amendment to overturn it.
Ultimately, he used a variety of tactics to try to block the ruling, but he was unsuccessful through the remainder of his term in office. This was because the overwhelming majority of legislators and Judges in Mass, for a long period of time, have been Democrats and very left leaning.
AMERICA AT THE CROSSROADS OF HISTORY
THE MAN WHO DESPISES AMERICA
I agree it is the only ride we have right now
I wish someone would pass this along to Romney:
“58 percent of the children of lesbians called themselves gay, and 33 percent of the children of gay men called themselves gay.”
I do not understand this fixation on constitutional amendments. It is highly unlikely a 2/3 majority can be obtained in both houses of Congress. In fact is it unlikely such an amendment would get a simple majority.
It is an order of magnitude more difficult to get 3/4 of the states to ratify. This means of the 99 houses in the state legislatures, 13 could block ratification.
We are rapidly approaching an election in which a proponent of gay marriage may be re-elected president. Yet people are talking about an amendment as a cure, something 20 or 30 times more difficult to achieve?I just don't get it.
It's like having difficulty completing a one-mile run today, but thinking the solution is to run a marathon tomorrow .
Yes, I don’t know why Romney was fixated on saying that he would push for a constitutional amendment that said that marriage shall be the union of one man and one woman, and signed the pledge concerning this, only for him to later pivot and want this issue should be left up to the states and not federalized.
And I don’t understand why Romney would flip-flop on gays adopting children, say that they had this right, and then later say that he was merely affirming the rights of states to enact these laws allowing gays to adopt children.
Indeed, why is Romney fixated on flip-flopping...
Romney said recently that he believes that the issue of gay marriage should be left up to the states, thus pivoting away from federalizing the issue. This is common knowledge.
BTW, Romney also said first that gays have the “right” to adopt children, only to later pivot from this and say that he was merely affirming that this is an issue that states now allow. Romney today was hammered on this on MSNBC. Several newspapers have also taken him to task on this. Dems intend to make hay of Romney’s pivots (flip-flops), and Romney has only himself to blame.
If you keep voting for the same thing, you keep getting the same thing:
RINO GHWB versus Dem Clinton.
RINO Bob Dole versus Dem Clinton.
RINO McCain versus Dem Obama.
RINO Romney versus Dem Obama.
It keeps going back and forth, and I am weary of RINOs, and liberal Dems, too.
I reject your false dichotomy that it is either vote Dem or Republican. I am going to focus on the Tea Party and helping to get more of them elected and keeping the ones that we have, and will vote for Virgil Goode, Constitution Party.
.......................I reject your false dichotomy that it is either vote Dem or Republican. I am going to focus on the Tea Party and helping to get more of them elected and keeping the ones that we have, and will vote for Virgil Goode, Constitution Party......................
As you wish! A vote for Goode, is a vote for Zer0!!!!!
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.