Allow me to be political for a moment.
I remember in high school having serious debates over abortion back in 1984. Now it is 2012 and the abortion argument is still alive and well and rightfully so, for we are talking about the life of another human being.
A life…so why is this issue not at the front of Mitt Romney’s mind?
“Dannenfelser said she thinks Romney’s comment to the editorial board was nothing more than a slip — that he just has too much else on his mind to keep issues like abortion front and center.
“I think the simple truth of the matter is his head is in jobs and the economy almost all day long, almost every single day,” she said. “And of course we want at least a third of his focus to be on it all the time, but you don’t always get everything that you want.” (Read more below)
I know many Christians that refuse to vote for ANY democratic candidate because of the abortion issue (I can say with some confidence that some use this issue as just a smoke-screen). I certainly respect that decision and even agree with that stance, but my question is, “So what has your undying support for the Republican party really done, as the debate is still the same after 28 years?”
In the last few elections, many in the African-American community have questioned the undying loyalty of other African-Americans to the Democratic party. For many African-American’s, the democratic stance on civil rights is the swing-issue. The question gets raised to them, “So what have they actually done for you? Do they really need to have your interests in mind when they know you will not go and vote for the Republican candidate?”
That’s a good question to ask.
Now, it’s about time Christians start asking this same question of the Republican party.
Candidates seem to get away simply saying, “I’m Pro-Life!”, without any follow-up questions as to what they mean.
So ask Mitt Romney what being “Pro-Life” really means?
Read or listen to the story below and tell me what you think.
It sounds to me like Mr. Romney is a lot closer to the center than many Christians want to admit.
Secondly, what do we do about this statement in the article below,
“…just as it was no accident when Romney said in a CBS evening news interview in August that he supported abortions when the pregnant woman’s health — not just her life — was threatened. That position was also reversed later, quietly, by staff.”
Some have pointed to Romney’s past positions as well. “Running for the U.S. Senate in 1994, Romney insisted that “since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years […] we should sustain and support it.” And again in 2002, running for governor in Massachusetts, Romney insisted that he would “preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose” and vowed to “not change any provisions of Massachusetts’ pro-choice laws.”
So as someone who doesn’t have a dog in this race (no pun intended), I must call out the hypocrisy that I see on this all important issue. The double-talk done by the candidate and many of the Christian Pro-Life-is-the-only-issue supporters who will not hold him to task if he gets elected OR pin him down to take a firm position on the sanctity of life.
I listen to many commentators on Christian radio and the line continues to be drawn:
Obama – Baby Killer <————————————————————> Romney – Baby Advocate
I think an argument can be made that neither candidate will do anything to reduce abortion. I do not have the space or the time right now to debate the “except for rape and incest” clause that many Republicans always throw out, but just by adding “health of the mother” should tell us a lot about how he really feels right there.
Why does he view a life differently in his exception clause and exactly what does he mean by, “health”…if that’s what he meant…oh I can’t keep up…
Just like many African-American’s are sheep for the Democratic party, it’s about time Christians admit they are nothing but sheep for the Republican party.
… and the last I checked, God was the only Shepherd that we were commanded to follow.
And in my best Andy Rooney tone, “and I don’t think He is a Republican!”
Hebrews 13:20 Now may the God of peace who by the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead the great shepherd of the sheep, our Lord Jesus Christ, ©NET
“Just how many abortion positions does Mitt Romney have? Once again, that answer is unclear.
This time the confusion began Tuesday, during a meeting with the editorial board of the Des Moines Register.
“There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda,” Romney said.
He went on to add that he would use an executive order to reinstate the “Mexico City Policy,” which bars U.S. aid to international groups that lobby or pay for abortions.
But the comment about not pushing abortion-restricting legislation surprised those on both sides of the abortion debate.
“That’s quite a shock, coming from Mitt Romney, who has consistently called for the overturn of Roe v Wade; who said that he would appoint Supreme Court justices who would do just that; who has an extensive pro-life agenda on his website that anybody can access,” says Beth Shipp, political director of NARAL Pro-Choice America.
In addition to a terse statement from the campaign vowing that, if elected, Romney would “be a pro-life president,” the candidate himself tried to walk back some of his comments when asked by reporters at a campaign stop Wednesday.
“I think I’ve said time and again, I’m a pro-life candidate. I’ll be a pro-life president,” he said during a rope line in Ohio.
Even before Romney’s walk back, however, he was being defended, if somewhat weakly, by abortion opponents.
“No one likes to be caught flat-footed or see your hero flat-footed. But those moments do come,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List.
Dannenfelser said she thinks Romney’s comment to the editorial board was nothing more than a slip — that he just has too much else on his mind to keep issues like abortion front and center.
“I think the simple truth of the matter is his head is in jobs and the economy almost all day long, almost every single day,” she said. “And of course we want at least a third of his focus to be on it all the time, but you don’t always get everything that you want.”
NARAL’s Shipp, however, thinks it’s anything but an accident — just as it was no accident when Romney said in a CBS evening news interview in August that he supported abortions when the pregnant woman’s health — not just her life — was threatened. That position was also reversed later, quietly, by staff.
“I know Mitt Romney really wants women to vote for him,” Shipp says. But the way that he’s going about this, by lying to people about where he stands on the issues, is not going to serve him well come Nov. 6.”
Still, political scientist John Green of the University of Akron says what Romney is doing isn’t all that unusual.
“There’s a long tradition of candidates adopting one kind of position for a broad audience, maybe on television, then having a different position in direct mail or in smaller venues,” he says.
Green says Romney is running into trouble because in today’s world of Twitter and nonstop cable news, there’s no such thing as being able to deliver different messages to anyone anymore.
“We’ve discovered over the last couple of election cycles, and we’ve seen it in many examples this year, is that it’s hard to keep those different venues separate because of our communication technology today,” Green says.
With an issue as touchy as abortion, that can become even more hazardous, says Green.
“The people who really care about something like abortion, whether they’re in the Republican base or the Democratic base, have very firm convictions on where a candidate should stand,” he says. “And variation on those convictions can create very real problems.”
Those problems include both alienating one’s own voters, and mobilizing those on the other side.
At least for now, however, Romney seems to be making it work. There’s still nearly a month until Election Day, however, and two more debates to go.”