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.
Although this IS a fair issue (for Romney’s recent “conversions” on social issues are suspicious),
this is a News thread, it the article NOT news — unless “News” includes articles published 26 months ago.
You're ignoring the facts and the timing.
Romney supported exempting the Catholic hospitals until he was criticized for it by his Lt Gov and the Boston Globe.
Only after the criticism did Romney come up with a legal opinion reversing his earlier promise.
Despite defending the Health Department regulations as late as Wednesday, Romney opened a news conference yesterday by declaring that a fresh analysis by his legal counsel concluded the new law supersedes the old law, and that all hospitals must be required to offer the so-called morning-after pill.
As a woman, I’d rather see the abortion issue be laid to rest. I don’t think you can go back on this issue, you’d set women back.
Educate yourself.
As a birth control agent, the pill has three modes of operation:
As a birth control agent TAKEN ONE OR MORE DAYS AFTER SEX the pill has one mode of operation:
Ergo, it's an abortifacient. Yes it "prevents pregnancy" - but after conception, and by forcing rejection of the child from the mother's body.
And that is EXACTLY what a pro-life governor would have done.
Yikes!
Who did he "sell down the river"? The law he was complying with was passed by legislators. That's what they do. It's juvenile and absurd of you to try and lay blame on Governor Romney for what was done by a large number of Democrat state legislators.
Mitt Romney has done what he could do in the situation he was given. He made progress in a conservative direction in Massachusetts. The fact that he wasn't able to magically convert it into a conservative haven during his tenure as governor is no reason to label him a failure.
Also, to label Mitt Romney as one who would "sell you down the river" on border security is asinine! Romney is one of the few governors who have actually done something about illegals!
He had the state troopers trained to investigate and arrest illegals.
He endorsed a referendum to end bilingual education in Massachusetts.
He vetoed in-state tuition for illegals.
Oh, and Tom Tancredo endorses Mitt Romney.
That should put to rest any fears anyone may have about Mitt Romney and illegal immigration.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view. But while the nation remains so divided over abortion, I believe that the states, through the democratic process, should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate." (Governor Mitt Romney, Boston Globe, Op-Ed, 7/26/05)
So what about Judges?
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "If a judge substitutes his or her values for those values that were placed in the constitution, they do so at great peril to the culture of our entire land." (Scott Helman, "Romney Rips SJC's Justices On Values," The Boston Globe, 11/11/05)
Now you can say he didn't fight hard enough, and he could have, should have, would have done x, y, z but what are our options here. The Democrats gleefully support abortion on demand. At least Romney has the right ideas about effecting real change, and will advance the right to life movement.
His position, as stated now, are in my opinion reasonable and right minded. I do not think his past is perfect, but I am not willing to throw my vote away over this issue.
If you are convinced he is pro-abortion and is the wrong choice for America, there is nothing I can do to change your mind. Personally, I think he is the best we have right now, and his current platform is an effective one that deals with the realities we face.
I'm not ignoring anything.
Do you think it would have been wiser for Governor Romney to fight with the overwhelmingly Democrat state legislature, his Lt. Gov and a big chunk of his constituency? It's a fight he knew he could never win.
I know you Mitt-bashers want to blame every bad thing that happened during his watch onto him, but there are honestly things a Republican governor in Massachusetts just can't change.
If anything, your post proves that Mitt was pro-life at that point! Your own quote shows that he wanted to exempt the Catholic hospitals. Then, a huge wave of opposition put a screeching halt to his position. That, combined with the opinion of his attorney that the law wouldn't allow it either, meant that Mitt would have been foolish to waste time and energy on a sure loser, and would have been supporting the violation of a law created by a liberal legislature.
Morning After Pill (MAP): within 72 hours of sexual intercourse:
Also known as “Emergency Contraception,” this procedure consists of a pregnancy test and two doses of pills. The woman first must take a pregnancy test and receive a negative test result before taking the pills. If a negative test result occurs from the pregnancy test, then the woman is instructed to take the first dose of the Morning After Pill. Note: a negative result indicates that the woman is probably not pregnant from intercourse during her previous monthly cycle, but it will not show whether or not she just became pregnant (from intercourse the “night before”). She is instructed to take this first dose as soon as possible, but not more than 72 hours after intercourse. The woman takes a second dose 12 hours after the first dose. If conception already occurred within the 72 hour time frame (that is the “night before”), the life is expelled. This is an early abortion.
RU486, Mifepristone: within 4 to 7 weeks after LMP
Also known as the Abortion Pill, this medical abortion is used for women who are within 28 to 49 days after their last menstrual period. This procedure usually requires three office visits. The RU 486 or mifepristone pills are given to the woman who returns two days later for a second medication called misoprostol. The combination of these medications causes the uterus to expel the fetus.
So you’re sitting this election out I assume.
:)~
Do you know what a law is ?
Do we cave to laws or obey laws, hmmm ?
Do you know what is is?
So he should disobey the law until the legislature changes it, or should he obey the law until he could get it changed in the legislature ?
People are so blinded by their preconceived notions. How long does it take to change a law ?
Never met a lawyer who wouldn't give up somebody else's life, limb or property to protect his own employment.
They did shut up - when tey were covering for the molesting priests.
If they hadn’t done that, they might have a bit more moral authority in Boston. Besides, any Cardinal who is a supporter of Ted Kennedy cannot be applying Catholic beliefs.
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.