-255x255.jpg "Marc Nozell via Flickr.com (CC BY 2.0)")
WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney reiterated his pro-life views after he made a statement in an interview that sparked concern about his dedication to protecting the unborn.
“I think I've said time and again that I'm a pro-life candidate, and I'll be a pro-life president,” Romney told reporters in Ohio, according to Politico.
The former Massachusetts governor said that he would immediately “remove funding for Planned Parenthood.”
“It will not be part of my budget,” he stated.
“And also, I've indicated that I will reverse the Mexico City position of the president,” he added. “I will reinstate the Mexico City Policy, which keeps us from using foreign aid for abortions overseas.”
The comments came one day after controversy was raised by reports that the GOP contender had contradicted his previous position on abortion.
In an Oct. 9 interview with the Des Moines Register, Romney said, “There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda.”
He explained that he would use an executive order rather than legislation to revive the Mexico City Policy, which President Barack Obama had removed. Recent presidents have used executive orders to either remove or reinstate the policy, according to their views on abortion.
The statements caused a stir among those who feared that the former governor was backing off of his commitment to the pro-life cause.
Some of Romney’s critics have been skeptical of his claim that he had a pro-life conversion in 2004, after he confronted the issue of embryonic stem-cell research and saw that it was wrong to create a human life simply to later destroy it.
However, Romney’s advocates say that he has maintained a solidly pro-life record since his conversion, even in difficult political situations. As governor, he supported abstinence education in schools and vetoed legislation that allowed the morning-after pill to be sold over the counter.
Spokeswoman Andrea Saul reiterated that Romney is “proudly pro-life” and “would of course support legislation aimed at providing greater protections for life.”
Romney has previously voiced support for the Hyde Amendment, which is already part of current law and largely prohibits the use of taxpayer money for abortion, as well as the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would prevent abortion from the point at which unborn children can feel pain.
He has also repeatedly promised to appoint judges who adhere to the Constitution rather than activist judges who seek to define it in alignment with their own views.
Comments
Post a Comment
At this point pro-lifers have a choice between Romney and Obama. Even if Romney isn’t 100% pro-life, and even if he will shake the Etch-a-Sketch regularly after he’s elected, Obama certainly doesn’t provide any kind of reasonable alternative on life issues. We will hope that Paul Ryan will have some influence, and maybe even that Rick Santorum will rise to a place of authority in the new administration. Beyond that, we must continue to protest the carnage and pray for an end to it.
We are compelled to vote for the candidate that supports Life more than the other candidate—ALL other issues (war/economy/Medicare) pale next to the issue of defending Life from the earliest of conception through all stages.
Ever since Our Lady said “YES” to Life Himself, we are called as Catholics to say “YES” to Life. To knowingly vote for a Pro-Death candidate, such as our current President, is to be an accomplice in the moral evil of killing fellow human beings. Until we support and defend all human life—from the moment of conception on, we will never get the other issues totally corrected. A society cannot stand truly firm, when it casts aside and actually murders it’s most defenseless.
May Our Mother Mary, Good Saint Joseph, and The Preborn Christ Defend and Help Us!
Not only has the current president allowed for late term abortions, but has even allowed for babies born after botched abortions to be left to die.
Why would anyone want to place their household at risk of receiving the wrath of our Lord after having placed political interests before those of the Lord of LIFE???
I am not at all surprised at the latest Romney reversal of opinion, he has done it many times before. I will vote for him only because Obama is an even worse choice.
@ioannes
I seriously doubt that your vote is going to determine whether you go to hell or not. There are many good reasons not to vote Obama, but also a lot of reasons not to vote Romney. I can see pro-life catholics voting for either or neither, and will not label them “good” or “evil” based on their choice. Actions, in the end, reveal little about a person, and only the Lord can see into people’s hearts. And anyway, abortion will not be outlawed even if Romney wins, and it’s an issue where we the ordinary people can make a difference by educating those around us not to choose abortion. Things like war and economics are areas where the state/president has a lot more say, so voting based on those things can make sense. After all, the lives of innocent civilians and the poor are just as precious as anyone else’s.
All that said, I agree that Obama’s stance on abortion is particularly discusting and inhuman. If I was an American I’d be unable to vote for either candidate in this election.
Without a doubt, we must vote for Romney and get Obama OUT. He is ruthless toward the unborn, wants to export all his anti-life values to the rest of the world, despises freedom of religion and will destroy marriage as intended by God.
Politics has become so polarized that the system is broken. Neither side is acceptable this election cycle. There is a dire need for both sides to tone down the rhetoric, stop the lies and really stand for something.
Catholics NEED to stand for “something”, as you put it: LIFE, MARRIAGE, FREEDOM OF RELIGION. Obama is AGAINST these, that means OBAMA MUST GO!
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.
The time period for commenting on this article has expired.