Posted on 05/10/2012 6:38:57 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (R) said Thursday that he believes gay couples should be allowed to adopt children, even as he reiterated his view that marriage is defined as a relationship between a man and a woman.
In an interview with Neil Cavuto of Fox Business Network, Romney was asked whether he believes the gay marriage debate is a new civil rights movement, as some Democrats have framed the issue.
“I don’t see it in that light,” Romney responded. “I believe my record as a person who has supported civil rights is strong and powerful. At the same time, I believe that marriage has been defined the same way for literally thousands of years by virtually every civilization in history and that marriage is by its definition a relationship between a man and woman.”
He added that “if two people of the same gender want to live together, want to have a loving relationship, even want to adopt a child — in my state, individuals of the same sex are able to adopt children. In my view, that’s something which people have the right to do, but to call that marriage is, in my view, a departure from the real meaning of the word.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
One third of all child molestation is same sex. A huge majority of homosexuals were molested when young by an older person of the same sex; one study said 80% of homosexual respondents were molested.
This alone should tell you something.
You are either extremely ill-informed (and being on FR means you have no excuse) or you think the homo-agenda is a fine thing. Or maybe you’re a liberaltarian.
I hate child abuse, I hate the homo agenda because it destroys constiutional freedoms of speech, association and religion, destroys lives, destroys children, and their goal is total dominance and tyranny.
You think all that is fine and I’m just a “hater”. You sound like a leftist.
“Hatred? No. Anger? Yes. Stop projecting...”
Sorry, all this time I thought it was hatred, and it turned out to be anger. My mistake.
Where’d this guy WILLIALAL come from? For an old signup date he’s pretty weird and I don’t remember seeing his screen name before (not that I would remember everyone of course).
I am very intolerant of leftist destruction and tyranny, yes. You seem to be swallowing it whole, otoh.
well its late and I have to get to bed, my 5 year old adopted daughter will be up early. Been nice talking to everyone.
WILLIALAL: “...don’t want to debate theology, just wondering where all the hatred comes from.”
Hatred? I think you’re confused. Hatred is turning your back while children are adopted by dysfunctional couples. Homosexuality is abnormal. It’s dysfunctional. That’s not hatred. It’s speaking truth. We are made male and female, and males are not designed to mate with each other. Same thing with two females. Again. That’s fact, not hate. All they can do is engage in mutual masturbation. That is not the same thing as heterosexual union and can never be.
Some dysfunctions are less harmful than others, but that doesn’t mean we should put the government seal of approval on them. Plus, this is gay adoption thing is just a small step in a much larger agenda. Do you honestly think it’s going to stop here? No. The homosexuals want to eliminate all dissent. I’m content to let them choose to practice their dysfunction, but they are not content to let me raise my children how I see fit.
WILLIALAL: “I’m not a proponent of gay adoption, but I feel all guilt or blame can’t be placed just upon gay people because they are gay.”
How is preventing gays from adopting putting guilt or blame on them? Guilting or blaming them for what? I’m sorry. I’m just not getting your point.
rscully: “There are bad people everywhere, gay or straight.”
That’s true but completely beside the point. This isn’t just about gay adoption. It’s about mandating gay adoption. It’s a religious liberty issue.
Have you forgotten the Catholic adoption agencies that were put out of business because they wouldn’t let gays adopt? You or I might agree adoption agencies should operate as they see fit, but the left will have none of that.
So the fact that some homosexual couples might make good parents is missing the larger point that no agency, in spite of their religious beliefs, will be permitted to treat homosexual couples any differently from heterosexual ones.
The gays are not saving any lives. They are ruining lives. So let us just get this clear. You are fine with the mentally deranged raising other people’s children?!
No that isn't quite correct and I'm calling your hand on it. Most kids in foster care CAN NOT BE ADOPTED BECAUSE JUDGE LIBERAL AND THE LIBERAL CPS WILL NOT PUSH TO TERMINATE PARENTAL RIGHTS IN BAD ABUSE CASES. They age in foster care solely because of that reason. Parents who are abusers play the system for years on end. That is the real problem and you are falling for the Liberal Lie hook line and sinker.
Thankfully, there are decent homosexual couples stepping up to the plate left empty by the heteros.
You means like the women I saw who basically sat on their big F.A.'s while the kids served them? They even bragged in class the kids did their work for them.
Kids who have been taken into the state foster care system have suffered severe emotional trauma. The last thing they need is Gays wanting too play house at their expense. If a couple wants to be gay so be it. Leave the kids out of it. Most kids who end up gay are RECRUITED into the lifestyle by an adult. IOW molested and told being gay is great. Some have been sexually assaulted once, twice, a dozen times or more by and adult they trusted and you want another social experiment? I'll fight that tooth and nail.
I've seen decent couples some were professionals who could help the kids sitting in classes wanting to adopt kids and are told the odds of it happening are low inside the state system because Reunification is the sole agenda of CPS and the courts. They end up having to go to private agencies. No the Liberals don't care how many times they must remove kids from their abusive parents. You ignore the fact as qwell most CPS departments are ran by the ultra liberals. Yes of course they believe gay is great. They also believe mother who let boyfriends rape their daughters are poor confused victims. I've had enough.
There are many straight couples wanting too adopt and you know it.
I could go on. Do you remember Paula Poundstone molesting her adopted daughter?
The fact is that gays are attracted to underaged sex. They can’t reproduce. So they have to get their hands on someone else’s child. Before 8 or it’s too late, NAMBLA (the North American Man Boy Love Association) is a clear cut example of that. Any person who identifies themselves by a sexual act has something wrong with their brains. The Bible talks about it. Gays are said to have reprobate minds, minds that do not function properly, minds that are not like normal people’s minds. Yet, you want to allow them to take other people’s children into their homes and attempt to raise them.
I refuse to support placing a child in their care and subjecting them to the possibility of exposure to every kind of abuse so gays can feel good about themselves and their deviant behavior.
RomneyCare.
Only if they can sell them, and so far they can't. They can go to China or Africa like everyone else, I guess.
Are you demonstrating in front of abortion clinics to stop abortion? You are not trying to save anyone, you are trying to help yourself.
Romney is a homosexualist chameleon.
But, yet, we are supposed to, according to many FReepers, ignore this and vote for this chameleon because otherwise we'll be responsible for re-electing Øbama?
I have yet to have somebody convince me how Willard is at all better than Barry Soetoro.
The most convincing argument I've heard is about the permanence of SCOTUS appointments. Naturally, they forget about Harry Blackmun and John Paul Stevens when they make that argument, but...
No Gov. Romney, they should not.
Mitt has this problem ~ he simply can’t feel your pain. He’s not like other men
Maybe Mitt doesn’t love his children and grandchilden like we do ours.
A clue ~ you know how there are Catholic politicians who don't ever want to be accused of being anti-protestant, although they probably are, so to compensate they bend over backwards to let what they view as the Protestant majority have its way on some issues ~ e.g. abortion and reproduction technology.
They ignore what their own church tells them is right and wrong when it comes to legislation and the courts.
We call them CINOs or Catholics in Name Only.
Catholics on Free Republic, where they are free to voice Catholic and traditional Christian viewpoints, never praise the CINO crowd for cowtowing to the imaginary Protestant Leftwingtard majority. The Protestants don't praise those people either (For long).
What we have with Romney is someone who is bending over backwards to let that same imaginary Protestant Leftwingtard majority know that he is "not like them" ~ the folks in Utah!
He's also bowing to the crowd in the New York media establishment who aren't even Christians ~ certainly not Protestants.
This is a delusion these guys have. They simply don't believe that in the rest of America ~ the real America, including "Flyover Country' ~ you don't have to bend over for these people.
Romney, Pelosi, Biden, even Giuliani and others operate under a very mistaken notion. MItt's so bad he's telling us to adopt out our babies to homosexuals now even before he's gotten the Convention's approval.
As the campaign moves along he'll find more reasons why he has to give into his imaginary majority and he'll come up with other silliness ~ maybe selling organs.
Doesn't he have any campaign advisors who can inform him all this homosexual cr*p is not going down well with the electorate?
Is that ignorance or self-pity in which he is indulging?
You know some of his good buds from his primary campaign 4 years ago ended up working with McCain and they fought Sarah Palin harder than they did Obama.
It's not any different this time ~ Romney is in a cluster of people who hate Conservatives ~ they don't let him think any other way.
Anyone have any information on that topic?
Anyone know if this guy ever said he loved his wife in public? He refers to his many years of marriage, but that's just a Mormon thing ~ kind of a cultural tic ~ but how married does he view himself.
There is currently no surplus of legally adoptable children in this country.
She wasn't gay ~ she was simply not sexually inclined, interested, or apparently structured. That's a good 5% of any human population like that (about 50 times as many of them as there are gays BTW).
These folks frequently show up in public legislative hearings on the subject of foster care and adoption.
The 7 RINO candidates shared the vote in general and helped him hide out until he could target the 3 lifelong Republican Conservatives state by state with negative ads aimed just at them.
In the same chapter of Matthew, just a few lines down you find "6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."
In this case it's far more relevant for our discussion. After all we aren't focusing on gaydom with our gaydar but on adoption of young chillun' by professional homosexual activists.
Romney and his Mittbots appear to be unfamiliar with the Bible and Jesus' words.
But, it wasn't fatal and my trusty channel changer was right there to do an instant flip. Half a minute tops, and she'd be gone.
Then one day my eldest (who was about 4 at the time) lost the changer. We tore this house up until we could find it.
Never found it ~ but Carl Rowan was on another channel at the same time so we'd watch him instead so I wouldn't suffer from that woman's screeching. My big black cat, Agnew, just loved Carl too.
There are not hundreds of heterosexuals who do that.
No, those people are not straight.
You might start reporting them to the cops also.
Well said. As it stands, no reply to the facts mentioned in your post.
Anyone who condones homo adoption must also condone the secularization of adoption. In other words, I am right here claiming that you want more government control of adoption. Government control is what leads to there being a large supply of unadopted children, even though there is a surplus of willing parents. I read that a prospective adoptive parent is 12 times more likely to adopt in San Jose than in Miami, for example. Government adoption has gone wild in Miami.
Please rethink your opinion.
God Bless you and your expanding family!
Same here, Mark. There is nothing I've seen that says Romney is worthy of the presidency. Nothing I've seen that says Obama is worth of the presidency, either. My best answer is to rebel against the establishment republocrats and work to institute/strengthen an alternative.
The very best answer is to pray for the survival of the nation. I believe we will lose this republic no matter which of those socialists would sit in the president's chair.
Romney is a social corporatist and Obama is a socialist.
Goode is a conservative.
I haven't investigated Gary Johnson beyond his "Limited Pro-Choice" position, as they call it. I reject that, though, so he's not my man. I'm betting, though, that he is not a socialist.
Romney's former acceptance of gay marriage, gay unions, and gay agenda is brought back to the fore by his saying that gay couples should be allowed to adopt.
Is there a quote that actually uses the expression "gay couples"? Any discerning American can see that he's got a shoulder in the door of gay marriage with that comment. He's trying to keep it wide open to reassure the log cabin types that he (wink, wink) supports "gay couples".
Anyone who would agree to give another person's children to gays is so deep in the cesspool that he cannot possibly be a PRAYING MAN TO THE ONE TRUE GOD!
Is anybody really surprised?
Even if it’s destructively confusing for kids Mitt?
22
Romney’s idiocy is painful to watch. It is precisely adoption of children where so-called gay “marriage” violates rights.
Shows 1999 in the fact sheet about me, but some of us lost our first entry point. It was through a software problem if I remember correctly.
What can w as conservatives do to get another candidate nominated? Can we storm the convention and demand Newt? At this point, I'm ready to file in behind crazy Ron Paul and I never believed that would ever happen!
If a child is stuck in an orphanage with only a gay couple available to adopt him, yes, adoption by a single gay person is preferable, and failing even that, adoption by a practicing group of perverts, -- whether that group is said to be in a "marriage" or not, -- is also, perhaps, an option to be considered by the orphanage, a judge, and a child's next of kin.
But this is not the reality. The reality is that plenty of normal, normally married people pay thousand of dollars and adopt from Ukraine and China, because there is not enough children offered for adoption even for them.
Further, when the advocates for the homosexuals such as Romney speak of "gay couples right to adopt" they presume an equal right alongside the straight and married couples, not right to adopt a child in a theoretical emergency.
This is a good reason not to vote for Romney. The presidency we cannot save, but maybe we can teach the GOP mucks a lesson that will last a few election cycles.
I will vote for Virgil Goode. I will live with the result of the next election but if it is Romney, then I fear that any hope for a conservative President in my lifetime will be dashed. Romney will be our Jimmy Carter and the first shot at a conservative executive branch will be no sooner than 2020.
This just about sums up my point of view as well. Those professing an 4 years of Obamao gloom and doom scenario if we don’t vote for Willard fail to understand that the deeper threat is moving the [R] party light years to the left and marginalizing Conservatives. We can survive 4 years of gridlock while resisting socialism tooth and nail, not 4 years of redefining the party to a point where its socialist itself. If Willard is elected, the GOP-e will have the “mandate” its always wanted: telling Conservatives to sit down, shut up, and “evolve”.
Thank you both, dear brothers in Christ, for sharing your insights!
WHAT? They can’t marry but they can RAISE CHILDREN? That’s even WORSE than letting the perverts marry!
Throwing the Homosexuals a bone at the expense of irritating those who may hold their nose and vote for him.
Wake up Mitt! they’ll still hate you.
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.