Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Romney does flip-flop and forces Catholic hospitals to distribute morning-after-pill [2005]
Lifesite News ^ | December 9, 2005 | Gudrun Schultz

Posted on 01/31/2008 11:37:43 AM PST by AFA-Michigan

BOSTON -– In a shocking turn-around, Massachusetts’s governor Mitt Romney announced yesterday that Roman Catholic and other private hospitals in the state will be forced to offer emergency contraception to sexual assault victims under new state legislation, regardless of the hospitals’ moral position on the issue.

The Republican governor had earlier defended the right of hospitals to avoid dispensing the “morning-after pill” on the grounds of moral dissent. The Boston Globe reported that Romney’s flip on the issue came after his legal counsel, Mark D. Nielsen, concluded Wednesday that the new law supersedes a preexisting statute related to the abortifacient pill.

The pill, a high dose of hormones, acts as an abortifacient by preventing a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterine wall, thereby causing the death of the child.

The Department of Public Health issued a statement earlier in the week allowing hospitals to dissent from the new law, under a previous statute that protects private hospitals from being forced to provide abortion services or contraceptives.

Daniel Avila, associate director for policy and research for the Massachusetts Catholic Conference, said yesterday in an interview with the Boston Globe that Catholic hospitals still have legal grounds to avoid providing the pill, despite the new legislation. The new bill did not expressly repeal the original law protecting the rights of Catholic facilities.

“As long as that statute was left standing, I think those who want to rely on that statute for protection for what they’re doing have legal grounds.” (Boston Globe)

The Conference has been fighting this new legislation for several years. In 2003, in a statement to the Joint Committee on Health Care, they outlined their concern over the proposed Emergency Contraception Access Act (ECAA), stating: “It will force Catholic medical personnel to distribute contraceptives even in cases involving the risk of early abortion. It also furthers a national strategy ultimately directed towards coercing Catholic facilities to provide insurance coverage for, and to perform, abortions.”

The governor’s turnaround is especially unexpected since Romney has been presenting himself as a conservative on social issues in anticipation of a possible run for the presidency in 2008. This decision will certainly undermine the credibility of his conservatism with Republican Party members that may have been inclined to support him up to now.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; catholic; catholichospitals; conscienceclause; massachusetts; morningafterpills; romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-247 next last
Note the date on the Lifesite News story above, coming one year AFTER the stem cell discussion during which Romney professes to have finally realized -- at age 57, after 40 million legal abortions in his adult lifetime -- that Roe v. Wade had cheapened respect for human life.
1 posted on 01/31/2008 11:37:46 AM PST by AFA-Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

WBUR Radio, December 9, 2005:

http://realserver.bu.edu:8080/ramgen/w/b/wbur/wburnews/2005/me_1209_2.rm

Two things to listen for:

1. Romney explaining what he believes “in my heart of hearts.”

2. The Massachusetts Citizens for Life spokesman publicly criticizing Romney, notable since only a year later — after receiving a $15,000 contribution from Romney — it was Mass Cits for Life who “saw the light” and thereafter signed a letter saying how “pro-life” Romney is.


2 posted on 01/31/2008 11:38:05 AM PST by AFA-Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

“The governor’s turnaround is especially unexpected since Romney has been presenting himself as a conservative on social issues in anticipation of a possible run for the presidency in 2008. This decision will certainly undermine the credibility of his conservatism with Republican Party members that may have been inclined to support him up to now.”


3 posted on 01/31/2008 11:38:30 AM PST by AFA-Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

Self bumping will put hair on your palms and make you go blind. (At least that is what I’ve heard.)


4 posted on 01/31/2008 11:39:26 AM PST by listenhillary (A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: listenhillary

LMAO!


5 posted on 01/31/2008 11:39:46 AM PST by Constitution Day (Ray Smuckles for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

Gee, I thought that Mr. Romney was a convinced pro-LIFER by the end of 2005.

Guess he’s just a convinced pro-ROMNEYER.

And folks want me to vote for this fraud?


6 posted on 01/31/2008 11:42:12 AM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan
The Boston Globe reported that Romney’s flip on the issue came after his legal counsel, Mark D. Nielsen, concluded Wednesday that the new law supersedes a preexisting statute related to the abortifacient pill.

So, Governor Romney's good-faith effort to comply with the law is somehow non-conservative??

Was he supposed to flaunt the law and impose his own beliefs on the state? I thought that we conservatives look down on such behavior, at least when a liberal does it.

Mitt consulted with his attorney and tried his best to follow the law. That's a trait I want in the President of the US.

7 posted on 01/31/2008 11:43:25 AM PST by TChris ("if somebody agrees with me 70% of the time, rather than 100%, that doesn’t make him my enemy." -RR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

As a Catholic I certainly wish the Catholic organizations would have been just as concerned about the born and the molestation they suffered at the hands of Boston area priests. The morning after pill seems to pale in comparison but the Catholic Church just rolled over on the rights of the born.


8 posted on 01/31/2008 11:44:24 AM PST by Abbeville Conservative (Voted for Fred but now for Mitt. Huck sucks and McCain's deranged.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

A long list of Mitt flip flops was posted on MSDNC this am.

It’s here:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/30/624574.aspx

Scroll down to the words: “No matter how much he spends Mitt can’t fun from his record. He is not honest and he is a conservative only in presidenbtial elections.”


9 posted on 01/31/2008 11:44:53 AM PST by freespirited (The worst Republican is far preferable to the best Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

He approved it for sexual assault victims, good for him.

Anyone knows how long it took for Reagan to change some of his democratic views to republican views?


10 posted on 01/31/2008 11:44:58 AM PST by psjones (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan
Didn't you read your own article? It says the new bill does not repeal the existing bill. Nothing was changed. Catholic hospitals can still opt out. Geez.
11 posted on 01/31/2008 11:46:07 AM PST by Deb (Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

No problem..........close down the hospitals. When the government tries to tell a business what they have to do, shut it down.


12 posted on 01/31/2008 11:46:18 AM PST by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

13 posted on 01/31/2008 11:46:21 AM PST by counterpunch (McCain/Kennedy '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TChris
So, Governor Romney's good-faith effort to comply with the law is somehow non-conservative??

It would see that some would equate his position to forcing abortion pills down the throats of expectant mothers. People get emotional and quit thinking sometimes.

He has clearly stated, over and over again, he IS prolife, but respects the law.

14 posted on 01/31/2008 11:46:34 AM PST by chaos_5 (The Republic is doomed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
This story is one of the prime examples of Romney caving when criticized by his liberal lieutenant governor and the Boston Globe.

He has no backbone and won't keep a promise if the media puts pressure on him.

15 posted on 01/31/2008 11:46:45 AM PST by JohnnyZ ("Make all the promises you have to" -- Mitt Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

Get educated. The “morning after pill” is not an abortion. It prevents pregnancy.


16 posted on 01/31/2008 11:47:27 AM PST by Saundra Duffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TChris

Sorry I can’t vote for someone that follows the law. (/sarcasm)

Good catch.


17 posted on 01/31/2008 11:47:30 AM PST by Domandred (McCain's 'R' is a typo that has never been corrected)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

It is also used in rape cases to protect the victims. Again, the “morning after pill” is not an abortion. This is sad.


18 posted on 01/31/2008 11:48:59 AM PST by Saundra Duffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: TChris

“Was he supposed to flaunt the law and impose his own beliefs on the state?”

This proves mitt will do nothing to work on abortion he will always use existing law as an excuse and does not care enough to spend any political capital on the issue..


20 posted on 01/31/2008 11:49:18 AM PST by N3WBI3 (Ah, arrogance and stupidity all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-247 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson