Posted on 07/14/2007 10:30:57 AM PDT by wagglebee
therefore he is in violation of the constitution, yes?
PJ, your DU columns are often excellent.
However, in post 17 your comment completely fails to address the substance of the stated concerns. The good news is, no doubt you want the truth about all candidates known. We’re all Conservatives here.
Let’s focus on the issues—including character issues—and may the most conservative best candidate of character win.
If Romney lied about this, he lied. If he didn’t lie, he didn’t lie. This discussion should have very little to do with his stated religion or the WND source—and very much to do with his actual track record and what we can discover from that about his true character and intentions.
“Truth needs no defense...It is a lion that simply needs to be let out of its cage” — Charles Spurgeon
Cheers.
TSOA
This true piece (backed up by historical fact) REALLY must hae hit a “nerve” with the romniacs they’re up in arms that we are truthfully pointing out to oneof his weak point-That very well should and probably will cost him Christian support
The damage he did to America with his cowardice is incalculable.
Of course, it was totally in keeping with his long record of support for the radical agenda of the "Log Cabin" homosexuals whose support he courted assiduously when he ran for the U.S. Senate and when he ran for Governor.
Romney wrote this letter to the homosexual "Log Cabin Republicans" on Oct 6, 1994.
Keep in mind that his opponent was none other than ultra-liberal Senator Ted Kennedy:
“I am writing to thank the Log Cabin Club of Massachusetts for the advice and support you have given to me during my campaign for the US Senate and to seek the Club’s formal endorsement of my election. …Your endorsement is important to me because it will provide further confirmation that my campaign and approach to government is consistent with the values and vision of government we share.
“…As a result of our discussions and other interactions with gay and lesbian voters across the state, I am more convinced than ever before that as we seek to establish full equality for America’s gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent.
” I am not unaware of my opponents considerable record in the area of civil rights… For some voters it might be enough for me to simply match my opponent’s record in this area. But I believe we can and must do better. If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern. My opponent cannot do this. I can and will.
“We have discussed a number of important issues such as the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which I have agreed to co-sponsor, and if possible broaden to include housing and credit, and a bill to create a federal panel to find ways to reduce gay and lesbian youth suicide, which I also support. One issue I want to clarify concerns [grammar in context] President Clinton’s “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue” military policy. I believe that the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction. I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share…” - Mitt Romney
Bob Unruh hits it out of the park.
Romney has always opposed same-sex marriage. He diligently lobbied Congress in favor of a Federal Marriage Amendment to the U.S. Constitution defining marriage to be between one man and one woman. Romney testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on the Federal Marriage Amendment, and sent a letter to all 100 U.S. Senators on June 2, 2006 asking them to vote for the Amendment. Sen. John McCain and Rudy Giuliani opposed the FMA.
Governor Romney: "A lot of people get confused that gay marriage is about treating gay people the same as treating heterosexual people, and that's not the issue involved here.""This is about the development and nurturing of children. Marriage is primarily an institution to help develop children, and children's development, I believe, is greatly enhanced by access to a mom and a dad."
"I think every child deserves a mom and a dad, and that's why I'm so consistent and vehement in my view that we should have a federal amendment which defines marriage in that way."
(ABC News This Week interview with Mitt Romney on Feb 18, 2007) (Mitt TV Clip)Governor Romney: "I oppose discrimination against gay people. I am not anti-gay. I know there are some Republicans, or some people in the country who are looking for someone who is anti-gay and that's not me."
(Romney: I'm Not Intolerant of Gays, Associated Press, May 25, 2007)When the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling in the case of Goodridge v. Department of Public Health legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, Gov. Romney identified and enforced a little-known 1913 state law that forbids nonresidents from marrying in Massachusetts if their marriage would not be recognized in their home state. This prevented gay couples living outside Massachusetts from flocking to MA to be married and then returning to their home states to demand the marriages be recognized, thus opening the door for nationwide same-sex marriage. Implementation of the 1913 law was contested in court by same-sex couples from outside MA, but the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in March, 2006 to uphold the application of the law.
(Mass. high court says nonresident gays cannot marry in state, Boston Globe, March 30, 2006)Gov. Romney provided active support for a citizen petition drive in 2005 that collected 170,000+ signatures for a state constitutional amendment protecting marriage. He rallied citizens to place pressure on the Legislature for failing, through repeated delays, to fulfill their constitutional obligation to vote on placing the marriage amendment on the ballot. Gov. Romney filed suit in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) asking the court to clarify the legislators’ duty to vote on the issue of the amendment, or place the amendment on the ballot if the Legislature failed to act. The SJC declared that legislators had a constitutional duty to vote on the petition in a ruling handed down on Dec. 27, 2006. The suit was successful in pressuring the Legislature to vote on the issue of the amendment. A vote was taken on January 2, 2007 and the measure passed. Through Governor Romney’s considerable efforts and leadership, a state constitutional amendment defining marriage to be between one man and one woman passed a critical hurdle to get it placed on the 2008 ballot where voters in Massachusetts would have the power to restore traditional marriage in their state.
Update: Democrat Governor Deval Patrick, a proponent of gay marriage, lobbied Massachusetts lawmakers to kill the proposed constitutional amendment. In a vote of the Legislature on June 14, 2007 the amendment received 45 votes, failing to get the required 50 votes necessary to place the amendment on the 2008 ballot. The measure needed 50 votes in two consecutive legislative sessions to advance to the ballot, and it had passed with 62 votes at the end of the last session in January. Commenting on the latest vote, former Gov. Mitt Romney said, "Today's vote by the State Legislature is a regrettable setback in our efforts to defend traditional marriage. Unfortunately, our elected representatives decided that the voice of the people did not need to be heard in this debate. It is now even more important that we pass a Constitutional amendment protecting traditional marriage. Marriage is an institution that goes to the heart of our society, and our leaders can no longer abdicate their responsibility."Mitt Romney does not favor action at the national level to sanction civil unions and would leave it to the several states to define the permissible contractual relationships between two people. Romney would not seek to impose, at the national level, a prohibition on contractual relationships between two people.
(No Gay Marriage Vote for Massachusetts, Associated Press, June 14, 2007)
(ABC News This Week interview with Mitt Romney on Feb 18, 2007)Governor Romney strongly defended the right of Catholic Charities in Massachusetts to deny placing adoptive children in the homes of gay couples; saying it was unjust to require a religious agency to violate the tenets of its faith in order to satisfy a special-interest group. Romney filed "An Act Protecting Religious Freedom" in the Legislature, a bill to exempt Catholic Charities of Boston and other religious groups from the state anti-discrimination law.
(Romney files 'religious freedom' bill on church and gay adoption, Boston Globe, March 15, 2006)Whereas Mitt Romney believes sexual orientation should not preclude joining the Boy Scouts, he supports the right of local Councils of the Boy Scouts of America to decide and enforce their policy regarding homosexuals in their organization and leadership. Romney served on the Boy Scouts of America’s National Executive Board from 1993 to 2002.
Governor Romney responded to a question about the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) and gays in the military during an NRO interview with Kathryn Jean Lopez in December, 2006:
Lopez: And what about the 1994 letter to the Log Cabin Republicans where you indicated you would support the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) and seemed open to changing the "don’t ask, don’t tell" policy in the military? Are those your positions today?Gov. Romney: "No. I don’t see the need for new or special legislation. My experience over the past several years as governor has convinced me that ENDA would be an overly broad law that would open a litigation floodgate and unfairly penalize employers at the hands of activist judges."
"As for military policy and the "don’t ask, don’t tell" policy, I trust the counsel of those in uniform who have set these policies over a dozen years ago. I agree with President Bush’s decision to maintain this policy and I would do the same."
(A Primary Factor, NRO, December 14, 2006)
Thanks. The recent articles you cite do make it sound like he is more firmly committed at present to traditional gender roles than he seems to have been in the past. I must say, though, that I’m quite disappointed to read that he expressed concern about a law creating too much litigation—when that litigation would be of a wrongful and bullying nature and he was in a position, frankly, to stand as Governor and speak out about it.
You just don’t understand the LDS when possible practice what Jesus taught.
It may appear we aren’t standing firmly, but we are and also know that “Charity Never Faileth” when done in the spirit of the Lord.
I think America should try more prayer and draw down the power of Heaven man has done enough his way, how about trying faith and prayer?
Do you support perversion?
Just asking.
Aside from the first line, that post was, by far, the best on this thread. Congrats.
“Indeed, this report will demonstrate that Romney was probably the most pro-abortion and pro-gay rights Republican official in the nation for the last decade. The idea that he has suddenly become a conservative after a decade of liberal actions and statements would be merely amusing were it not for the fact that he’s running for the presidency and that many conservatives are falling for this act.
Top 10 RINOs (Republicans in Name Only)
Human Events 12/27/05 - (Mitt Romney is ranked #8)
On the other hand, it’s particularly interesting to note that Bay Windows, Boston’s major homosexual newspaper, has reviewed Romney favorably. That same newspaper regularly prints extremely vicious and even obscene attacks on all conservative politicians, the “Christian Right” and even parents who challenge the liberal political agenda.”
excerpt http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/record/
Ignore Romney actions when pen was put to paper!
Truth mean little to you Sun as revealed by your actions!
That said, I still like the man Duncan Hunter, even if a few distorters are among his supporter!
Can you please explain why homosexuality should be advocated through use of our tax dollars?
Please clarify your question where is this coming from?
It’s coming from a sincere desire to know why you would think tax dollars should be spent on homosexuality.
But I still am not familar with what you are talking about!
What right does the government have to use my hard earned tax dollars to fund homosexuality in the name of charity?
OK since I have no clue what you are talking sorry can’t talk on something I have no knowledge of?
I know I would not like it!
In post #28 are you implying that if someone does not wish to promote, validate, or normalize homosexuality through use of tax dollars, that they are not being charitable?
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.