Ambassadors to Holy See Endorse Mitt Romney

MittRomney.com ^ | 1/7/12 | Five Vatican Ambassadors

[SoFloFreeper]

Mitt Romney today announced the support of five former U.S. Ambassadors to the Holy See. The Ambassadors wrote the following letter in support of Mitt Romney:

“We the undersigned former U.S. Ambassadors to the Holy See...are united in our wholehearted support for the candidacy of Mitt Romney for the Presidency of the United States because of his commitment to and support of the values that we feel are critical in a national leader...We also know that Mitt Romney is a staunch defender of the principle that every human being should be welcomed in life and protected by law from conception to natural death.

Thomas Patrick Melady (U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See 1989-1993)

Raymond L. Flynn (U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See 1993-1997)

James Nicholson (U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See 2001-2005)

Francis Rooney (U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See 2005-2008)

Mary Ann Glendon (U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See 2008-2009)

[norwaypinesavage]

"because of his active support for abortion, even dismissing anything else, voting for Willard is literally an evil act"

Romney is not actively supporting abortion. This makes your whole argument very odd. It's difficult to discuss things with people who don't deal with current facts.

[stpio]

“Romney is not actively supporting abortion,”

~ ~ ~

This is the catch, the excuse!!!! ...not actively...

Wake up dear friend. Romney has never legislated for life,
show me one action on his part for life?

Voting for Mitt, you are supporting his actions.

[sayuncledave]

Shall I say, Romneycare? Shall we discuss it’s similarity to a certain on-the-books-about-to-be-reviewed law which, like Romneycare, supports abortion? I deal in facts. I just looked here: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care. Mitt’s arguments against obamacare revolve exclusively around money, control, and replacing the federal plan with state-chosen plans, still termed “health reform.” In no way, anywhere, does the website for Willard for President 2012 repudiate his previous much-vaunted support for in-utero baby murder.

I deal with current facts. One of them appears to be that you favor Willard, and another is that we disagree strenuously about the fact that a Catholic may not vote for any candidate for public office who in any way supports abortion, without committing a mortal sin.

Catholics hold life to be very precious. Abortion is murder in all cases where it is performed. No matter the circumstances of conception, the baby still dies.

Here’s a statement of Willard’s from a Piers Morgan interview,. in response to a question on whether Willard views homosexuality as sinful: “Romney : I separate quite distinctly matters of personal faith from the leadership that one has in a political sense.”

If you are in favor of voting for him, you have the ability to do so. If you are Catholic, I would very strongly urge you to discuss the matter with your priest. Willard has done and said enough to cast strong doubt on his being anything but an opportunist without a moral compass. Catholics may not vote for him without committing mortal sin. Or does allowing abortion in cases of incest, rape, and hypothetical cases to save the life of the mother NOT kill the baby?

Also, Romney believes states should be able to have their own abortion laws, which implicitly adds that he believes in abortion, or else why allow a patchwork of state laws? That’s a canard, thrown to be able to claims that he’s “pro-life” while feeding those who are pro-abortion.

[EternalVigilance]

We also know that Mitt Romney is a staunch defender of the principle that every human being should be welcomed in life and protected by law from conception to natural death.

They're just flat out lying.

Even if one was foolish enough to believe that Mitt Romney had "changed" in any way, his stated position, on his campaign website, to this day, is:

1) Judicial supremacist, anti-republican, anti-Constitution. His default position is the abortion on demand status quo, because he still thinks the courts make our laws, just like he always has.

2) Pro-choice democrat, by definition. He openly asserts that God-given, unalienable rights can be/should be decided/alienated by a democratic vote.

3) Pro-choice for states. He thinks that States can alienate the right to life if they want to, in spite of the fact that the Constitution explicitly and imperatively requires every State to equally protect the right to life of every individual person.

[EternalVigilance]

[daisy mae for the usa]

I am not Catholic, so unfortunately I am ignorant as to what an ambassador is. I don’t understand why a woman would be in such a high position of authority. It seems as if this contradicts what I do know of Catholicism.

It is extremely encouraging to me to see so many posters say clearly that it would be a sin to vote for Romney on the fact of his pro-abortion legislation. There is one question that has been asked, that deserves an answer:

Please state and reference the pro-life legislation Romney has signed his name to.

An embezzler could have a change of heart, but would I put him in charge of millions of dollars? Why tempt him!

Romney may have had a change of heart...he does so frequently. What’s to say he won’t have another change of heart when influences change? Is a constantly changing heart really what we need leading the executive branch of our government?

It is time to quit playing silly little word games. There is yes and there is no. There is right and there is wrong. There is light and there is dark. A person either chooses to walk in the light or walk in the dark. There is no “half-light”.

Romney thinks there is a “half-light” position. As a Mormon he has been taught to practice this. He is a Bishop in the Mormon church. He is not an “in name only” Mormon. Just the other day, the epic “I DARE...” thread presumed to tell me and everyone at FR that our grandchildren would one day be Mormon thanks to Mitt!

Can we say, “hidden agenda” boys and girls?????? That’s the very definition of “half-light.”

Let your “yea be yea, and your nay be nay.” I fear God. I will not vote for Romney. Nor will I vote for Obama.

Anyone want to shout, “TREASON!!!!!!!” at me?

Fine. Get a rope. I will gladly die for God.

[SoFloFreeper]

No you didn’t. See ya.

[SoFloFreeper]

Thanks for at least answering the questions. :) You have more fortitude and honesty than another on the thread.

(btw, I don’t agree with your conclusions but I am very glad you took the time to think about this and provide a clear response to direct inquiries! You ought to go into electoral politics—we need more people who just answer the questions!)

God bless.

[SoFloFreeper]

I have a theory. Some people hate Mitt Romney soooo much that IF becomes President,
declares abortion to be forbidden by executive order,
sent the FBI out to round up all abortionists and the top dogs of all 50 Planned Parenthood state organizations,
have them publicly beheaded,
and puts their heads on pikes in the capitals of the states as a warning to any future abortionists....

there would STILL be people on this board who would say:
“He didn’t do enough.”

Note to any bed-wetters who think I am proposing the above action as a solution to abortion: TRY AND REALIZE THIS IS EXAGERRATION TO MAKE A POINT. I AM NOT PROPOSING THIS AS A SOLUTION.

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

[afraidfortherepublic]

There is gap in that list of former Ambassadors, so I looked it up. The missing Ambassador is Lindy Boggs — widow of hale Boggs and mother of Cokie Roberts.

[afraidfortherepublic]

And Ronald Reagan signed the first abortion Bill in the country when he was Governor of CA — way before Roe v Wade was decided. Later he said that it was the biggest mistake of his life, and he regretted it.

Don’t you believe that a man can change his mind and mean it?

I remember the Sunday morning that we were all asked from the pulpit to send a telegram to RR protesting the upcoming Bill signing. I sent the telegram, but he signed it anyway. He still turned out to be the best President of the 20th Century.

[Cicero]

Yes, of course a change of heart is possible. I voted for Ronald Reagan gladly, because in his case I was persuaded, before he became President, that he meant what he said. And I was right. Part of this was due to some of his close friends and advisers. Reagan was not a conservative Catholic, but he was much influenced by an adviser who was. He was not a regular church goer, but his values were far more Christian than, say, those of Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton, who regularly waved Bibles and attended Church and even taught Sunday School.

The Bible directs, “Judge not, lest ye be judged.” But you have to judge those who will be put into positions of power in government. That’s different from judging your neighbor, because it is necessary for the welfare of many. And absolutely everything I have seen, and continue to see, about Mitt Romney says that he is an opportunistic liar, willing to say just about anything that will gain him political power.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Very good comments, and I am in accord with all your pro-life, proGod convictions.

Mary Ann Glendon is not a Vatican official. She was U.S. Ambassador TO the Vatican. In other words, she was appointed BY the U.S. and represented the U.S. to the Vatican, and not the other way around.

Also, even if she were a Vatican ambassador, that's not against Catholic doctrine. Ambassadors aren't necessarily priests or bishops, i.e. ordained clergy. Ambassador isn't a priestly position, it's a diplomatic position.

However, I think nuncios (Vatican ambassadors) are usually archbishops, because they play a role of being liaisons between the national bishops' conference and the government of whatever country. Also they play a role in recommending bishop appointments. They nominate them, so to speak.

[daisy mae for the usa]

Thank you for helping me understand! :-) I admit to being lost sometimes in reference to many Catholic practices. Thank you for taking the time to explain.

[Rome2000]

All I see is a list of pathetic douchebags.

I wonder how much cash the Bishop from Kolob paid these degenerates for their pathetic "endorsement"

[stpio]

“So you believe these Catholics are lying or are deceived?

And you believe Mitt has not changed his heart and mind on abortion?”

stpio: Catholics are lying or are deceived. “Mitt” only has to say I’ve changed again on abortion with no proof of a change of heart since his actions in Massachusetts.

~ ~ ~

You can say I didn’t.

I answered your questions above. Explain your reason for posting this thread? Please, tell me, knowing Romney’s
history why you would ask the second question?

As a “Pro-family” Republican Candidate: by his undeniable record fully documented below, Mitt Romney:
- created RomneyCare which is terribly similar to ObamaCare but even worse for it openly funds abortion
- put Planned Parenthood on the so-called “independent” board he created that offers $50 co-pay abortions
- thereby instituted tax-funded abortion on demand two years after his orchestrated “pro-life” conversion
- as late as summer 2011 continues to defend aborting tens of thousands of kids (denying their God-given right to life)
- supported destructive embryonic research after his false 2004 pro-life conversion
- put a pro-abortion Democratic judge on the bench after Romney had claimed a pro-life conversion
- fabricates a claim that a court ordered him to institute same-sex marriage, a travesty he committed on his own
- single-handedly instituted same-sex marriage and later fabricated a claim that a court ordered him to do so
- bragged that he would continue to defend abortion “rights” after he claimed a pro-life conversion
- denies responsibility for the 10-member board that funds abortion even though his executive branch filled 7 seats
- pro-choice in ‘94; pro-life in ‘01; choice ‘02; pro-life ‘04; choice ‘05; life in ‘06; then funded abortion in ‘06

[sockmonkey]

Not trying to get booted, and don't know if the mods will let this stay, but I wonder if it will convince anyone that these pro-lifers, ones who represented this nation to the Pope himself, that Mitt has changed his mind and heart on this issue.

I would assume that Romney has met with various high profile Catholics, and played "let's make a deal". I don't mean that as a denigration of him, or to any Catholics. I think it means that being pragmatic, both sides came to an accord, and Romney agreed. Only the future will tell if he keeps his side of the bargain.

We already know that Obama did not keep his side of the bargain with Catholics per Cardinal Dolan's statements on the hhs contraception mandate.

Whether Romney had a Saul/St Paul moment, I can't say. Time will tell, but if for no other reason, a Romney Presidency would give time to regroup, not retreat from the downward spiral of the Republic, most Catholics I personally know will vote for him.

[stpio]

“I would ASSUME that Romney has met with various high profile Catholics, and played “let’s make a deal”.

We already know that Obama did not keep his side of the bargain with Catholics per Cardinal Dolan’s statements on the hhs contraception mandate.

Whether Romney had a Saul/St Paul moment, I can’t say. Time will tell, but if for no other reason, a Romney Presidency would give time to regroup, not retreat from the downward spiral of the Republic, most Catholics I personally know will vote for him.”

~ ~ ~

Do not fall for the con again. Our country needs a Godly leader NOW not time to regroup. Pray, God can bring about a miracle. God has asked for prayer and fasting for this intention in the prophetic.

Romney’s record for life:
- pro-choice in ‘94; pro-life in ‘01; choice ‘02; pro-life ‘04; choice ‘05; life in ‘06; then funded abortion in ‘06

And pray for Romney’s conversion, Mormons are not Christian.
Mitt needs God’s grace in his soul.

[BlackElk]

You are welcome. I often wonder why people participate on a site like FR but either fail to state their principles or refuse to defend them. That we disagree on some conclusions is what makes FR the interesting place that it is.

As to running for office: I am too old, too poor, too disabled to seek office. I did run as a GOP nominee for Congress in 1974 but the electorate had the good sense to say no. Now, I join former NYC Mayor Ed Koch who always responds to pleas that he run again after he lost in a third term bid to David Dinkins: They had their chance. NOW, they will have to suffer. In any event, you are too kind.

God bless you and yours!