Posted on 08/08/2008 7:58:45 AM PDT by WilliamReading
I cannot argue with you there. One of my best friends is LDS, after all. She and I have had many discussions and I would put her up against many Baptists... It is higher up and deeper in that the doctrine changes.
If she accepted the VP nod, she’d be a poster child for pro-choicers’ (of which I am one) claims that anti-abortion people don’t give a cr*p about babies after they’re born — only about getting them born. While there’s some truth to that, it’s not fair as a blanket accusation, but Palin as VP candidate would certainly lend a lot of credence to it. The notion that children are a minor nuisance or accessory that shouldn’t have any impact on a woman’s career, should be left to the lunatic fringe of radical feminism, not championed by example by a Republican VP candidate.
It’s others that are happy to support Cantor but refuse to support Romney because he isn’t a Christian.
True. I would like to see the reasoning behind choosing a Jewish candidate or even pro-choice Catholic ahead of a Mormon candidate. To me it is immaterial.
Ping!
She brought her baby with her...she has a cradle for him in her office.
But I don’t think she should be VP right now. I like Cantor.
I may be wrong, but I think that the least controversial VP candidate at this time may indeed by Eric Cantor.
Plus the media will have to respect him because of his intelligence and background.
Name me another Governor who instituted gay marriage, homosexualized state government and the public schools, pushed through socialized medicine complete with taxpayer-funded abortions,and signed a permanent "assault" weapons ban.
In fairness to Mitt Romney . . .
it is a lot easier to be a “check-list” Conservative in a very conservative Virginia district than it is when you are running in ultra-liberal Massachusetts.
I kind of like the way Romney needles Obama on the stump. He would be a good pick too.
If you can’t show me another Governor whose record meets or exceeds the “checklist” in post #68, then my identification of him as the most liberal Governor in the history of the republic stands.
If you think that’s acceptable, that’s your problem, not mine.
Just picking one since we’ve discussed them all, the “assault weapons ban” he signed was actually a pro-gun legislation backed by the NRA and the local GOA. It gave the people of Mass. MORE access to guns, not less.
Of course, states are required by federal law to include abortion in medical plans. Further, almost everybody, including pro-lifers, support SOME abortions (I know that there are some avid pro-lifers who would require a mother to die rather than allow an abortion, but they are a distinct minority).
I would expect that for those pro-lifers who would allow abortion to save a mother’s life, they would expect medical insurance paid for by the mother to cover that procedure — if the mother wanted to purchase such insurance.
the Mass. court instituted gay marriage, and the legislature refused to overturn that ruling, and now the legislature has gone even further. Short of simply resigning so the next governor could institute the law, there was nothing Romney could do on that he didn’t do to stop gay marriage.
“Name me another Governor who instituted gay marriage, homosexualized state government and the public schools”
No governor did that, the state SC combined with the state legislature did that. You probably already know that better than I.
“pushed through socialized medicine”
Which I disagree with as much as you do.
“complete with taxpayer-funded abortions”
Was that in the bill that Mitt signed or was it added later?
“and signed a permanent “assault” weapons ban.”
I disagree with that as well. WTF is an assault weapon? I mean if I assault someone with ANY weapon, is that NOT then an “assault” weapon?
You’re wrong on gay marriage. The court issued an opinion, one that was based on nothing and binding on no one. They admitted nothing could happen unless and until the legislature acted, which they never did.
Romney then enacted gay marriage on his own authority.
There never has been any constitutional provision or law that allowed him to act in this manner. Still isn’t to this day.
Taxpayer-funded abortions are part of RomneyCare.
Pony up fifty bucks and you too can have a dead child.
It’s all part of the Romney legacy.
Good question. I like Cantor over Romney, but not because of religious reasons (I’m a Christian BTW). Cantor has solid conservative credentials, Romney ..... doesn’t.
Romney sure thought he was banning "assault" weapons. Here's his public statement from the day he signed the bill:
"Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts. These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people." - Mitt Romney, July 01, 2004
Richard Land: Well, how about the grievous health of the fetus?
A good retort.
If I remember, the GOA was pretty upset with Romney because, after passing a great bill, his signing ceremony made it sound like the other side had won.
That was certainly odd. But better than saying you are doing something good for guns while screwing gun owners.
Romney would certainly look better if he had been Governor of Utah, where he wouldn’t have had to spend his time finessing things through a strongly liberal legislature.
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.