The article raises several good points, namely that Mitt has always been personally been opposed to abortion.
I was anti-abortion because of a strong sense that it was morally wrong but I made a shift in the 90s to understand that it was also a civil rights issue and ultimately, that it defined our times as being a prolife or a prodeath culture. I have oddly enough, Nat Hentoff and JPII respectively to thank for those positions.
"How is it better to argue, essentially, Romney has always thought abortion is murder, but only recently has he decided to rise above politics and stand on that principle? But he has always believed it was wrong? It seems that it would say more about his character if he legitimately believed abortion was morally neutral until very recently. To suggest that he only recently had the courage of his long-term convictions seems to say that he wanted to be governor of Massachussetts more than he cared about the lives he believed were being taken."
-manfred
Interesting article ,thanks for posting .
Governor Mitt Romney, who has said his abortion stance dates to his mother's 1970 run for US Senate, released a campaign document yesterday that an aide said showed his mother supported abortion rights.
Lenore Romney, an unsuccessful candidate for US Senate in Michigan, said in her platform, ''I support and recognize the need for more liberal abortion rights while reaffirming the legal and medical measures needed to protect the unborn and pregnant woman [sic]." She also endorsed ''greatly expanded programs of providing adequate family planning services to all those who want but can't afford them," adding that ''I would oppose any governmental coercion of parents."
In an October 1994 debate with US Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, Romney said: ''I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it."
He also said during the 1994 campaign that his view was shaped by the abortion-related death of a relative in the 1960s.
This guy never hammers it home does he? He is not my pick for President. He is way too phony for me.
Boy, they just keep spinning this.
All I can say is that if he knew abortion was wrong, but promised he would do nothing to oppose it while he was governor, then he DELIBERATELY chose to condone this evil.
I don’t see why that makes him look better. That’s been my problem all along—that he seems capable of doing just about anything if it’s necessary to further his career.
In view of a recent decision of the United States Supreme Court, we feel it necessary to restate the position of the Church on abortion in order that there be no misunderstanding of our attitude.
The Church opposes abortion and counsels its members not to submit to or perform an abortion except in the rare cases where, in the opinion of competent medical counsel, the life or good health of the mother is seriously endangered or where the pregnancy was caused by rape and produces serious emotional trauma in the mother. Even then it should be done only after counseling with the local presiding priesthood authority and after receiving divine confirmation through prayer.
Abortion must be considered one of the most revolting and sinful practices in this day, when we are witnessing the frightening evidence of permissiveness leading to sexual immorality.
Members of the Church guilty of being parties to the sin of abortion must be subjected to the disciplinary action of the councils of the Church as circumstances warrant. In dealing with this serious matter, it would be well to keep in mind the word of the Lord stated in the 59th section of the Doctrine and Covenants, verse 6, “Thou shalt not steal; neither commit adultery, nor kill, nor do anything like unto it.” [D&C 59:6]
As to the amenability of the sin of abortion to the laws of repentance and forgiveness, we quote the following statement made by President David O. McKay and his counselors, Stephen L Richards and J. Reuben Clark, Jr., which continues to represent the attitude and position of the Church:
“As the matter stands today, no definite statement has been made by the Lord one way or another regarding the crime of abortion. So far as is known, he has not listed it alongside the crime of the unpardonable sin and shedding of innocent human blood. That he has not done so would suggest that it is not in that class of crime and therefore that it will be amenable to the laws of repentance and forgiveness.”
This quoted statement, however, should not, in any sense, be construed to minimize the seriousness of this revolting sin.
The First Presidency
Harold B. Lee
N. Eldon Tanner
Marion G. Romney
(Marion G. Romney is Mitt's father's cousin.)
The problem with this position is, it doesn't lend itself to the bumper sticker/sloganeering world of politics. Plus, it doesn't quite fit into either the pro-choice or pro-life camp's definitions of what it means to be "on their side." So are Mormon's pro-life or pro-choice? Abortion is a grievous, "revolting" sin and yet there are rare circumstances in which, after sincerely seeking for and obtaining divine guidance, it may be permissible. But, given the seriousness of this sin, in nearly all cases, abortion will not be the answer.
So, in that sense, Mormons are very much pro-life. But since there is that exception, choice enters into the equation but not in the way pro-choicers view it. All choices have consequence and when matters of such import are decided, it must be with the guidance of the Lord in accordance to his will and that's something that the left and many in the middle, just aren't going to understand. So, as you can see, this just doesn't lend itself to an easy sound-bite, lapel button or bumper sticker, but it is a principled position.
Ironically, Mitt's refrain on abortion did not even include that "rare" caveat. He said over and over again: safe and legal, safe and legal, woman's right to choose must be protected.
Anyway, Mitt's supposed epiphany on abortion and the Harvard researcher/stem cell thing has been pretty well debunked as a cover story. Mitt was supporting embryonic stem cell research well AFTER such research supposedly turned him pro-life.