ROMNEY INCREASES OVERTURES TO DISENCHANTED EVANGELICALS

Evangelicals for Mitt ^ | 10/07/07 | Charles Mitchell

[CharlesWayneCT]

Alan Colmes beat Ann Coulter mercilessly on this issue, and Ann just kept saying (not an exact quote): “Mitt may be a flip-flopper, but so long as he’s flopped my way, and isn’t flipping back, that’s the way I like it”.

If there was a candidate that didn’t flip-flop who had a chance, that would be one thing. But since there isn’t, good conservatives have taken to denying the facts about some candidate’s previous positions just so they can pretend their candidate hasn’t changed.

That does nobody any good.

Dobson doesn’t command my vote, and Ann isn’t always my cup of tea. But if both Dobson and Coulter see something disqualifying about some people, and are open to Mitt, that tells me something.

It’s just a data point, but something all Evangelicals, and all Conservatives, ought to consider. Neither of these two are known for selling their principles.

[pby]

...you begin to realise why some people really hate us.

No...I still don't realise why.

Just explain to them that this gay man broke his marital vows before God and is currently involved in another sin which disqualifies him from being a moral example in an organization that stresses morality.

[Grunthor]

“Dobson doesn’t command my vote, and Ann isn’t always my cup of tea. But if both Dobson and Coulter see something disqualifying about some people, and are open to Mitt, that tells me something.”

Mitt is my number two. Number one is Thompson. Rudy can go to hell.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Just explain to them that this gay man broke his marital vows before God and is currently involved in another sin which disqualifies him from being a moral example in an organization that stresses morality.

That would be an easier sell if they specifically excluded men who were divorced and living with a new girlfriend.

[Nav_Mom]

I concede that I will vote for ANY REPUBLICAN who gets the nomination! Do you honestly believe that after radical leftest have majority power in the government conservatism will ever recover? 1. The fairness Doctrine
2. The leftest judges who will be placed around the country to push forward the leftest agenda from the bench.
3. Illegal Mexicans getting the vote.
4. A leftest Democrat being in charge of the next USSC appointees. 5. Felons getting the vote 6. Democrats using our tax money to fund future voters with entitlement programs. I could go on for pages! If the LEFTEST Democrats, i.e. ALL OF THEM, gain power they have one agenda:::TO ASSURE THEY NEVER LOSE POWER AGAIN! I understand your frustration with the RINOs, they make me sick. However I repeat...It is mind spinning to me that you think allowing criminal Democrats to gain power will help our cause.Democrats in power will simply eradicate Christian Conservatives (symbolically and literally) from the public dialog. In short they will use illegals, felons and judges to drive us out of having ANY say in Americas next generation.

[SeaHawkFan]

The Log Cabin Republican ad I just saw on FNC is not going to help Mitt Romney.

[TommyDale]

Oh, I might vote for Romney in the unlikely event that he gets the GOP nomination. But only then.

[pby]

It would be an easier sell...

Only if you put homosexual relationships on par with heterosexual relationships.

Divorced men who are living with a new girlfriend should not be considered for a position in leadership either.

If people don't like moral standards, then choose a different club to be a part of.

[pby]

And if that doesn’t help the haters...show them the statistics relative to abuse.

[CharlesWayneCT]

I don’t personally try to rate one relationship over another.

The Bible tells me what is sin, and what is not. It doesn’t tell me that some sins are acceptable, and others are not.

I agree that all should be treated equally. It’s why I always bristled when we fought the “immorality” of gays in the military, but said nothing about service people getting “serviced” by hookers.

[pby]

I don’t personally try to rate one relationship over another.

Well...The Bible does and a homosexual relationship is sin (immoral by nature) and not equal with a heterosexual relationship.

So you advocate gay Boy Scout leaders and gays in the military?

[Reaganesque]

I saw the ad and I think it is likely to backfire. A pro-homosexual group attacks Mitt Romney, who, according to some, is "pro-gay". Surely they would have better things to say about him if he were as supportive of the "radical gay agenda" as some here on FR would have you believe. But they don't have anything nice to say. They do, however, have plenty of nice things to say about Rudy Giuliani. In fact, the Log Cabin Republicans have endorsed Rudy Giuliani.

Which brings up a few questions. Just where does the Giuliani campaign fit into this ad? Did they urge this group to put out the ad? Did they pay them for it? Was it their idea?

[SeaHawkFan]

I don’t think the ad is going to backfire. I think it was the intent of the Log Cabin Republicans to pay for the ad in order to decrease support for Romney; and it will work. The only probem for the Log Cabin Republicans is that those awayed by the ad are not going to go to Guiliani. They will mostly go to Thompson and some, to others.

[CharlesWayneCT]

No the bible says homosexuality is a sin, and adultery is a sin. We were discussing a man who lived with a woman having divorced his wife, comparing that to a man who divorced his wife because he was gay.

BTW, if a gay man chooses to be abstinent in order to not sin, he still would not be allowed to be a scoutmaster. Again, I agree with the restriction, but at that point it is no longer about an act of sin.

BTW, I call you on your selective quoting. It's not nice to dissemble and attempt to deceive your fellow freepers to make a point.

My full quote:

I don’t personally try to rate one relationship over another.

The Bible tells me what is sin, and what is not. It doesn’t tell me that some sins are acceptable, and others are not.

So when you only quoted my first sentence, and then added your 'Well, the bible does", you were only saying exactly what I said in my quote. Except as I stated, adultery is a sin, and the Bible doesn't distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable sins.

BTW, not that I adhere to a ranking of sin, but if you did, Adultery is one of the big 10, while Homosexuality is not.

Also, we are all sinners.

[pby]

...but at that point it is no longer about an act of sin.

Wrong.

According to Romans 1:24 and 26, abstinence doesn't cut it either because homosexual desires are sinful and homosexual lusts are shameful.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Which is why I point out that all of us are sinners. Because lusting after another woman is also a sin.

[redgirlinabluestate]

I do think that the LCR ad will back-fire. The base knows about his switch from pro-choice to pro-life, and this just accentuates the fact that the LCRs are not in Romney's corner. To the base, that is a good thing.

The statement from Romney's camp also points out that the Log Cabin Republicans are playing favorites for his opponent, Mayor Rudy Giuliani (or I guess it could be McCain or Fred since they don't support the Federal Marriage Amendment either):

“This personal, negative attack was launched and paid for by a group recognized as having Mayor Giuliani as their ‘favorite’ candidate," Madden said. "Governor Romney supports a federal marriage amendment and so it makes sense that a national gay rights group would attack him. The advertisement misrepresents Governor Romney’s courage to admit that he had been wrong on this issue and the fact that he is proud of his strong record of defending the sanctity of life.”

The gay Republicans attack against Romney could turn out to be a positive for the candidate, according to speculation by some political pundits. A New York Times blog post by Jim Rutenerg theorized that "even those conservatives who will buy into the flip-flop claim may take heart that he has 'flip flopped' to their way of seeing things."