Posted on 10/15/2007 4:32:14 PM PDT by Spiff
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney says Americans are ready to overturn the Roe v. Wade ruling that paved the way to abortion on demand and well over 48 million abortions. However, he said he doesn't think Americans are ready for a Constitutional amendment giving full legal protection to unborn children. Asked Friday at a Nevada town hall meeting if he would support a constitutional ban on abortions, Romney said, "I would love to see an America where there was no abortion, but that's not where the American people are."
"What I do want to see, and where I think the American people are today, is to see a conservative jurist on the Supreme Court and to see Roe v. Wade overturned," Romney added.
He also criticized the pro-abortion views ofd Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor, and said he doesn't represent most Republicans.
"I believe conservatives across the nation and particularly in states where I have been able to take my message, like Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina and Michigan and Florida and Nevada, that conservatives that have heard me time and again recognize that I do speak for the Republican wing of the Republican Party," Romney said.
As LifeNews.com reported in August, top Romney officials said the candidate favors a two-step process towards eliminating abortions with overturning Roe as the first step and a constitutional amendment as the second.
Appearing that month on "Good Morning America," Romney told ABC News that he supports the GOP platform on abortion, which calls for a human life amendment that would afford full legal protection to unborn children.
"You know, I do support the Republican platform, and I support that being part of the Republican platform and I'm pro-life," he told ABC.
But Romney came under criticism for apparently flip-flopping and saying he backs a human life amendment at the same time he says the best approach is to overturn Roe v. Wade and let states make the law on abortion.
Romney advisor Jim Bopp, a leading pro-life lawyer who serves as the top attorney for National Right to Life and other pro-life groups, tells LifeNews.com Romney's two positions go hand in hand.
Bopp, who wrote the amendment that appears in the Republican Party platform, said Romney "views the Human Life Amendment as an aspirational goal, which we hope and pray we eventually can achieve."
"In the meantime, the first important step toward that goal is reversal of Roe v. Wade, and thereby returning the matter to the states, through appointment of strict constructionist judges," Bopp added.
Bopp said Romney's approach is not an "either/or" but rather a "two-step process" of toppling Roe followed by a full move to amend the Constitution.
"The reversal of Roe be an important step in that direction," Bopp explained.
He told LifeNews.com the two-pronged strategy is necessary because there aren't enough votes for an amendment in Congress while overturning Roe could be one vote away on the Supreme Court.
It would allow for the protection of as many unborn children as possible in the short term while a human life amendment is pursued.
That squares with the pro-life movement's long-stated goals of protecting as many unborn children as possible as soon as possible -- first through getting judges on the Supreme Court to overturn Roe and also through a federal amendment for long-term legal protection. Mitt Romney Says Americans Ready to Overturn Roe v. Wade
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
October 15, 2007j
• Send FReep Mail to Unmarked Package to get [ON] or [OFF] the Mitt Romney Ping List •
And Kelo
Which would just throw the abortion issue back to the States. Right?
What a terrible disappointment for him, what with his recent pro-abortion oath to the Abortion Industry.
Hear, Hear!
Especially if you’re Rudy911........
Americans don’t have a clue what Roe v. Wade means, as evidenced by the fact that most support Roe v. Wade, but feel that abortion should be regulated. They don’t seem to comprehend that Roe v. Wade stands for the proposition that abortion CAN’T be regulated.
Romney is the ultimate dictator NEVER allowing a vote
whether gay marriage, HillaryCARE=RomneyCARE, or apparently anything else.
He should just run as Hillary's VP, or buy his own island.
Yep, still flipping and flopping.
Perhaps. I know they’re getting worn out and tired of killing their babies and pretending it’s just like removing a hangnail.
Flippity floppity, Willard’s on his way!
He will win the women vote in the general elections, and once this is done it is an impossibility for the democrat candidate to win because for sure the men vote will go largely to the Republican candidate as usual.
Bill
If ever there was a need for constitutional amendment that protects human life from conception to natural death, now is the time. Romney is a Country Club Republican twit who wants it both ways -- overturn Roe v. Wade so the states individually can decide on life or murder, but not outlaw the barbaric procedure outright (along with its siblings euthanasia and assisted suicide).
Title should be:
“This week Mitt Romney says...”
That’s not what Roe stands for, hence, that’s why abortion has been regulated since Roe. (parental notification, 24 hr waiting period, etc.).
“most laws against abortion in the United States violated a constitutional right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Notice, most, not all.
Most importantly, there is a late term exclusion inherent in its holding. “The central holding of Roe v. Wade was that abortions are permissible for any reason a woman chooses, up until the “point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable,’ that is, potentially able to live outside the mother’s uterus, albeit with artificial aid.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v_wade
Your main point though, “Americans don’t have a clue what Roe v. Wade means” was proven right by your post, no offense.
Read the case. Parental notification was considered to be such a pitifully minor “regulation” that it did not count. But any significant regulation of the “right” of abortion is prohibited. And I would also point out that the courts have even been very prolific in striking down even parental notification laws.
“Mitt Romney Says Americans Ready to Overturn Roe v. Wade”
Mitts’ best and probably ONLY shot is to hit Rudy on the social issues and not let up. Pound him at every turn.
And hope to God(s?) that no one looks into Mitts’ own past record on the same issues.
I’ve read the case a number of times. You’re statement that abortion cannot be regualted is 100% incorrect. Read the case law after Rvw. Finally, again, the express language of the holding permits state/federal action at the point of viability, which as Justice O’Connor wrote about in a later case, is getting sooner and sooner during pregnancy. This is how and why we’re able to ban late term abortion, which, by the way, is regulating abortion. If abortion was not regulated, women would be able to abort up to 8 months. Seriously, you misstated the holding and it’s impossible to argue otherwise. Please don’t make me waste my time by pulling up the case and copy/paste the language that refutes your post. It should be simple enough to know you’re wrong and accept that by looking at the post-Roe case law and the partial birth abortion.
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.