Deal Hudson has posted one of the NY Times articles quoting various prolife leaders who are beginning to see the tip of the Romney duplicitous iceberg.
The emails I've been sending out:
Many Roman Catholic prolife activists are deeply concerned about the traction Mitt Romney seems to be getting with our conservative prolife leadership.
While we'd all love to believe that he has had a miraculous conversion in the last four months, few of us here in
Massachusetts are on board with it.
When Catholics asked Romney to use his executive office to protect Roman Catholic Hospitals from being forced to give out emergency contraception, he instead took the side of prochoice feminists. Our Catholic hospitals, our doctors, nurses, staff pharmacists are being forced against their will and conscience to hand out abortifacients.
When Catholic activists placed pressure on our Cardinal to get Catholic Charities out of the gay adoption business, (after an exhausting ten years of bombarding the Chancery with various misdeeds) Cardinal O’Malley agreed to align our adoption services with our Catholic mission. Homosexual lobbyists reacted by threatening “civil rights” and “discrimination” litigious actions. When their momentum put Catholics in a position to act against the will and conscience of our religion in order to continue our adoption services, Catholic activists again went to Mitt Romney. Romney sided with homosexual lobby. (The Massachusetts Bishops, thank God, shut down Catholic adoption services rather than accept the edict.)
When Margaret Marshall and the MA SJC illicitly used their power to declare the current laws of Massachusetts unconstitutional because they forbade homosexuals marriage, they gave the Legislature 180 days to create the law. Mitt Romney subverted the process and gave the immediate order for towns to give out marriage licenses to homosexuals. Here we are three years later, and the Legislature has still not acted upon the SJC’s order. The current laws of Massachusetts still forbid gay marriage. Yet, gay marriages are being performed thanks to Mitt Romney’s misuse of his executive authority. Under Romney’s leadership, or lack thereof, there is constructive permission for legislative, judicial and executive anarchy. It is hardly edifying to imagine this is the kind of leadership Republican leaders are going to ask the religious right to embrace for President of the United States.
Romney has been the grand marshal of immoral, amoral public education and during those years he opposed and had a downright aversion to parents trying to sustain the moral compass we give our children inside of our homes. Parents are being bullied & threatened if they resist the educational agenda and in one case, arrested. Despite our attempts to engage him, Mitt Romney has shown no sign of interest in our plight. It’s impossible to believe that after all the years Romney has supported gay marriage, gay activists, the infusion of the gay agenda into our schools, that his current spin isn’t duplicitous.
His most recent absurdity of petitioning the same court of judicial thugs who subverted democracy themselves, to stop the legislature from subverting democracy, when he is a party of the first part in the subversions of democratic process in the gay marriage debacle, rises to the level of a publicity stunt.
Several Catholic activists from
Massachusetts are going to be courting our prolife Catholic and evangelical leaders, our conservative journalists with Romney's paper trail (which I have barely touched upon) and ask them to withhold their support from Romney. We are also in the process of building a Catholic Blog that will have the mission of opposing Romney for President. I hope we can count on your support.
Should the RNC make the egregious error of backing Romney as their candidate – I believe an enormous division in our values based voters lies ahead in the 2008 election that will make Harriet Meirs look like child’s play.
We certainly wish Romney well, and hope that his spiritual epiphany is genuine. God Bless him. Unfortunately, with his record of opposition right up until he made the decision to run for president and hired advisors to appeal to the religious right, I’m afraid it just doesn’t give us anything we can base our trust upon.
Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. When our Mitt Romney Executive Report is done, I’ll be sure to send you a copy.
Catholic Pundit Watch
Brian Canemaker has done a phenomenal job rounding up quotes and sources of Romney's record in Massachusetts.
'I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.' "
When [during their debate] Kennedy called him 'multiple choice,' Romney demanded an extra rebuttal. He revealed that a close relative died of an illegal abortion years ago and said, 'Since that time, my mother and my family have been committed to the belief that we can believe as we want, but we will not force our beliefs on others on that matter, and you will not see my wavering on that.' "
- Boston Globe, 3/2/2006
On a questionnaire Planned Parenthood gave to the gubernatorial candidates in 2002, Romney answered ''yes" to the question, 'Do you support the substance of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade?' Romney also professed support for state funding of abortion services for low-income women, [Erin] Rowland [spokeswoman for the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts] said."
Other important quotes:
- "Romney, a Republican and the former Winter Olympics chief, was endorsed by the New York-based Republican Pro-Choice Coalition. He mentioned his mother, Lenore Romney, who favored abortion rights when she ran for the U.S. Senate in 1970, even before the 1973 Roe v. Wade case affirmed women's constitutional right to abortions. . . . Lynn Grefe, director of the Republican Pro-Choice Coalition, applauded Romney's 'commitment to family planning and protecting a woman's right to choose' in a letter on Wednesday."
- Associated Press / New Bedford Standard-Times 10/3/2002
- "Gubernatorial candidates Shannon O'Brien and Mitt Romney sparred yesterday over who was the strongest abortion rights supporter by touting endorsements from abortion rights groups and challenging each other's records on the issue . . . O'Brien and Romney both say that if elected they'll uphold state and federal laws protecting abortion rights. 'There isn't a dime of difference between Mitt Romney's position on choice and Shannon O'Brien,' said Kerry Healey, Romney's running mate."
- Associated Press / New Bedford Standard-Times 10/3/2002
- In 2002, Romney responded to the National Abortion Rights Action League's candidate survey: ''I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's. The truth is, no candidate in the governor's race in either party would deny women abortion rights." Notably, Romney refused to answer the candidate questionnaire sent to him by Massachusetts Citizens for Life.
- Boston Globe, 7/3/2005
- During the 2002 governor's race, Romney's platform stated, "As Governor, Mitt Romney would protect the current pro-choice status quo in Massachusetts. No law would change. The choice to have an abortion is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not the government's."
- Romney's 2002 campaign website
Romney is willing to support some embryonic stem cell research
- "Romney has decided to support experimentation on surplus frozen embryos from in-vitro fertilization procedures."
- National Review Online 2/11/2005
Romney Approves of Abortion Pill and Supports the Legalization of RU-486
- "When he ran for governor in 2002, Romney said he supported expanding access to the emergency contraception pill, a high dose of hormones that women can take to prevent pregnancy up to five days after sex . . . On a questionnaire Planned Parenthood gave to the gubernatorial candidates in 2002, Romney answered 'yes' to the question, 'Do you support efforts to increase access to emergency con-traception?' "
- Boston Globe 7/7/2005
- In 2002, the Boston Globe reported Romney's positions from his1994 campaign as follows: "ABORTION: Favored basic Roe v. Wade abortion rights, though would not endorse a specific version of the Freedom of Choice Act, which would codify those court-established rights as federal law . . . Said he would leave the matter of Medicaid funding for abortion to individual states . . . Endorsed legalization of RU-486, the abortion-inducing drug."
- Boston Globe, 3/19/2002
- "I don't really understand how it works or when it works but my understanding is it's an effective morning after pill and I think it would be a positive thing to have women have the choice of taking morning-after pills….I would favor having it available."
- Boston Herald, 5/19/1994
- "A new law to make emergency contraception more available in Massachusetts continues to be a political rollercoaster for Governor Mitt Romney. He supported expanded access when campaigning for governor, but vetoed a bill expanding access, earlier this year. The bill then passed over his veto. Earlier this week, the governor sought to exempt Catholic and other private hospitals from having to offer 'morning after pills' to rape victims. Then yesterday, he reversed his position."
- WBUR Radio, Boston, 12/9/2005
Romney signs "Right to Privacy" Proclamation celebrating birth control availability
- In March, 2005, Romney signed an annual proclamation establishing a ''Right to Privacy Day" to mark the anniversary of Baird v. Eisenstadt, a 1972 Supreme Court ruling legalizing birth control for unmarried people. Interestingly, Romney's staff deleted references to Roe v. Wade from the previous year's proclamation.
- Boston Globe, 3/25/2005
One of the articles in the NY Times quotes prolife hero Paul Weyrich who said unless Romney repudiates his statements, there is hypocrisy going on, and if he does repudiated it, one wonders on what basis.
I think "a hurdle" is an understatement.