Skip to comments.Romney backs away from gay adoptions [Friday night, after endorsing Thursday]
Posted on 05/12/2012 8:12:05 AM PDT by kevcol
(CBS News) Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Friday backed away from his support of adoptions by same-sex couples, saying that he simply "acknowledges" the legality of such adoptions in many states.
A day earlier, Romney, in an interview with Fox News' Neil Cavuto, had indicated that while he does not support same-sex marriage, he considers the adoption of children by same-sex couples a "right."
He said on Thursday: "And if two people of the same gender want to live together, want to have a loving relationship, or even to adopt a child -- in my state individuals of the same sex were able to adopt children. In my view, that's something that people have a right to do. But to call that marriage is something that in my view is a departure from the real meaning of that word."
But then on Friday, he was asked, in an interview with CBS' WBTV in Charlotte, N.C., how his opposition to same-sex marriage "squared" with his support for gay adoptions. Romney told anchor Paul Cameron, "Well actually I think all states but one allow gay adoption, so that's a position which has been decided by most of the state legislators, including the one in my state some time ago. So I simply acknowledge the fact that gay adoption is legal in all states but one."
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
In order to keep the welfare state going a little longer the Dems will continue to increase taxes and redistribute income even if it means eviscerating our national security. We have seen how the guns versus butter struggle turned out in Europe. Our entitlement programs are unsustainable. They will bankrupt us.
What do you think of this?
Reality Check: Why all RNC delegates are Free Agents and unbound
I had that same thought. The Romney-would-choose-better-SCOTUS-judges-than-Obama argument, though, only goes as far as Romney’s judicial pick history as Gov of Mass. I heard out of 36 judicial nominees Romney picked 9 Republicans and 27 Dems, and I think it’s a reasonably educated guess that the 9 Republicans were RINOs.
And since 1/3 of all (reported) child molestation is same sex, that gives you a clue.
I’m asking because the left argues that more hetros molest children then homos.
As is usually the case the left simply reclassifies or recatagorizes something to make it fit whatever twisted agenda it has.
Holding the nose? More like a gas mask.
Though there might be something to say that a vote for Paul in the CA Primary might enhance his delegate count at the convention, thus increasing the odds of a floor fight.
Romney is clearly a disaster in the waiting for conservatives.
And you know that he will disavow whatever it was he said at that moment in the next. You know this. If you do not know this, then please know this. Know it now.
Ha ha ha.. good one.
Romney's considering it a "right" for homosexual "couples" to adopt is tantamount to hiring a family of foxes to stand guard over the hen house.
Talk about "target marketing, a couple of gay guys playing "parent" to a little boy is child abuse.
Hey, I have an idea: Let's build a principled conservative party.
Two pedophiles who happen to share an address should be able to adopt??
What a freak
Romney is the worst possible candidate
Well, since homosexuals at at most 2% of the population, and commit (at least) 1/3 of all child molestion, that’s all anyone needs to know. So yes, 2/3 of all child molestation is opposite sex. But for 1/3 to be committed by less than 2% of the population - it’s clear which group of the population (divided into fag/non-fag) does much more molesting per capita.
Leftists cannot see reason, facts or truth because they refuse to. Their beliefs are based on lies, so to admit truth and facts means they’d have to not be a leftist any more.
Ron Paul is the one “Republican” who makes a RINO like Romney look good by comparison.
Do you seriously believe that Ron Paul would favor a law that prohibited gay adoption? Are you mad? Ron Paul is the most pro gay Republican in the nation.
Why do you think Romney should be immune to criticism on Free Republic?
This is a conservative site, not a Republican one. He will be criticized when he is not being conservative and when he flip flops and his liberal record will be exposed.
There is nothing wrong with any of that.
I may very well wind up voting against Obama by voting for Romney, but even if that is the case, that won’t stop me from criticizing him.
People can vote how they like. What makes me mad are the FReepers who think “our nominee” should be above repproach. The FReepers who think that any and all criticism of Romney is tantamount to endorsing Obama or something.
More and more it’s clear that in this election, it’s going to be a question of naming your poison.
Sadly, it is the law in some states. :(