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

To: avacado

In all fairness, the abortion inclusion package was added to the bill after Romney as I recall.


30 posted on 03/08/2010 1:35:05 PM PST by mentor2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: mentor2k
"the abortion inclusion package was added to the bill after Romney as I recall".

An oldie but a goodie. Doesn't matter if it was or not. In fact, just last July Mitt gave Romneycare an "A", in its current form! (that means with abortion coverage).

And not only that ... Mitt also commissioned a $30,000 portrait around the same time to commemorate his "greatest achievement" (three guesses what that was!) ....


The portrait depicts the governor seated at the front edge of his desk wearing his trademark business suit. Beside him is a small framed photo of his wife, Ann, and ... [wait for it] ... a copy of the health care reform law he called his greatest achievement. [note to mittbots; since this was June, 2009, this means he claims credit and praises the disaster of a healthcare plan the MASS Dems produced; which includes abortion coverage]

36 posted on 03/08/2010 1:47:33 PM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

To: mentor2k
mentor2k: In all fairness, the abortion inclusion package
was added to the bill after Romney as I recall.
"

In all fairness, the fascist carpetbagger Mitt RomneyCARE
(of Utah, Mass. NH, Mi. CA) does not care about fairness,
citizens' votes,citizens' lives, or any Constitution, does he?

Mitt RomneyCARE used improper executive authority
While acting as a carpetbagger to impose HIS whim
rather than the peoples' will as he micturated upon on the Mass. Constitution
by Romney’s use of improper executive authority. [The Romney Way™]

"Experts: Credit Romney for homosexual marriage"
"What he (Governor Bishop Mitt Romney) did was exercise illegal legislative authority'

"While former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney claims he did everything possible to throttle homosexual marriage in his state – his campaign now saying he took "every conceivable step within the law to defend traditional marriage" – several constitutional experts say that just isn't so.

"What Romney did [was] he exercised illegal legislative authority," Herb Titus said of the governor's actions after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court released its opinion in the Goodridge case in 2003. "He was bound by what? There was no order. There wasn't even any order to the Department of Public Health to do anything."

Titus, a Harvard law graduate, was founding dean of Pat Robertson's Regent University Law School. He also worked with former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, ...

Romney's aides have told WND that after four of the seven court members reinterpreted the definition of marriage, he believed he had no choice but to direct clerks and others to change state marriage forms and begin registering same-sex couples.

Some opponents contend that with those actions, Romney did no more or less than create the first homosexual marriages recognized in the nation. And Titus agrees."

"....But the court's decision conflicts with the constitutional philosophy of three co-equal branches of government: executive, legislative and judicial, Titus said. It also violates with the Massachusetts Constitution, which states: "The power of suspending the laws, or (suspending) the execution of the laws, ought never to be exercised but by the legislature..."

And it cannot even be derived from the opinion itself, asserts the pro-family activist group Mass Resistance, which says the decision did four things:

* First, it acknowledged that the current law does not permit same-sex marriage.

"The only reasonable explanation is that the Legislature did not intend that same-sex couples be licensed to marry. We conclude, as did the judge, that G.L. c. 207 may not be construed to permit same-sex couples to marry."

* Second, it said it is NOT striking down the marriage laws (among other things, the Massachusetts Constitution forbids a court to change laws)

"Here, no one argues that striking down the marriage laws is an appropriate form of relief."

* Third, it declared that not allowing same-sex marriages is a violation of the Massachusetts Constitution.

"We declare that barring an individual from the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts Constitution."

* And fourth, given that the court is not changing any laws, the SJC gave the Legislature 180 days to "take such action as it may deem appropriate."

"We vacate the summary judgment for the department. We remand this case to the Superior Court for entry of judgment consistent with this opinion. Entry of judgment shall be stayed for 180 days to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of this opinion."

After the Legislature did nothing during the 180 days, Romney then took action "on his own," the group said.

"Gov. Romney's legal counsel issued a directive to the Justices of the Peace that they must perform same-sex marriages when requested or 'face personal liability' or be fired," the group said."

39 posted on 03/08/2010 2:00:24 PM PST by Diogenesis ("Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God." --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

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