Interesting that he “changed his position” just as he was deciding to run for President. At least Rudy is being intellectually honest about being a pro-abort. Romney’s just saying whatever needs to be said to get the nomination.
On almost everything. That's the real kicker.
Of course, he hasn't Mitt-flopped on everything: He still openly supports an assault weapons ban, the Department of Education, and killing human embryos, to name a few things.
Because of the mainstream media in this country and their support of abortion it is dangerous to be pro-life in politics.I really believe it would’ve been much safer for Mr. Romney to stay where he was on his abortion positions. I believe it takes courage to say you were wrong and then support that change with very strong words.
Well, ya gotta be "pro-life" to run downhall in the Repub primary; then ya gotta head to the largely non-committal "Bunny" slope in November. I guess what I find interesting is that it never seemed to be an "uphill" climb ski step by ski step in 5 feet of snow for him to be "pro-abortion" as an LDS leader. (Romney, I believe, has had bishop responsibilities at one time in the LDS church; so he wasn't just your average LDS deacon who becomes a deacon @ 12 years of age). Oh sure, to be pro-abortion in largely pro-abortion MA was a hugh downhill run.
But why did LDS themselves make it so easy for one of their bishops and public-face reps to be pro-abortion? [It's one thing for an LDS politician to be pro-abortion; it should be another thing to be pro-abortion minus spiritual resistance in light of (A) a well-educated grass roots; and (b) a church that published a line once that when a prophet speaks on a matter, "their thinking has been done" (Improvement Era LDS pub).]