Romney’s strong record on religious liberty

John, I have to disagree with your analysis of the 2005 fight in Massachusetts over requiring all hospitals, including Catholic ones, to provide so-called “emergency contraception” pills, which are really abortion-inducing drugs.

The Boston Globe doesn’t normally like to interview pro-life Catholics. But they’ll make an exception if they attack Republican candidates like Mitt Romney. And that’s exactly what happened here. The Boston Globe is playing off the skepticism that pro-lifers over Governor Romney’s conversion on abortion.

Now, I think pro-lifers are justified in being skeptical and have a right to ask questions about his record. After all, by Romney’s own admission he once was a supporter of legal abortion in 2002. When he ran for governor, he said he would keep the law just as it is. But that wasn’t enough for a Legislature that is 75% Democratic. They passed a bill to force all hospitals, including Catholic hospitals, to provide drugs which are used to destroy human life.

The Globe story highlights Catholic activist C.J. Doyle’s complaint that Governor Romney decided he could no longer fight a new law requiring Catholic hospitals to provide these abortifacients. Romney’s legal counsel said the law provided absolutely no religious exemption at all, so fighting the Constitutionality of the law on these grounds would go nowhere. Now, perhaps the legal counsel’s analysis is wrong.

But you almost have to get to the second page of the Globe story before you realize this crucial fact: Governor Mitt Romney vetoed this legislation. That’s right. The Massachusetts legislature passed the bill. Romney vetoed it. Then the Legislature overrode his veto and the bill became law.

From the Globe in September 2005:

The Senate voted, 37 to 0, to reject Romney’s veto, and the House followed suit with a 139-to-16 tally. Supporters needed a two-thirds majority in each chamber to overrule the governor.

So Mitt Romney is not the bad guy in this story. Who is? How about 90% of the politicians in the State House? How every single State Senator. It is indeed a sad fact that well over two-thirds of the Massachusetts Legislature wanted this onerous legislation. But give credit where credit is due: Romney vetoed this bill.



5 thoughts on “Romney’s strong record on religious liberty

  1. GREG SMITH says:

    Jojo ~ Being “…for homosexual equality and non-discrimination.” is simply following Section 2358 of the CCC. ~ Greg

    1. G.J. says:

      There are two very different ways to be against homosexual discrimination:

      1. The Catholic Way: We do not hit them or burn down their houses because they commit grave sin while still not withdrawing from our minds the knowledge that what they are doing is gravely wrong and is sinful to support. (CCC 2480 – It is a grave sin to support someone else’s grave sin by flattery, willing compliance, or adulation. You become an accomplice if you do support it.) We can empathize with them though because we also have had sexual temptations and have fellowship in chastity.

      2. The “Whatever Floats Your Boat” Way: They support the active gay lifestyle instead of chastity for all questioning individuals as morally equal to heterosexual relationships in schools for young children. They rebuke people who say active homosexuals are happily skipping their way into hell and need to STOP acting on their temptation. They use the word LOVE on Catholic consciences when the sexual definition is a different thing than the theological virtue of love. It’s one word with two separate meanings like the animal bear and bear as in “bearing a gun”. (1 Cor 13:1-13 describes what love is. Especially notice: “love rejoices not in iniquity, but rejoices with the truth.” My sister loves my dad but she does not need to have sex with him to be a good Christian. [big difference in this last sentence if I was not talking about the theological virtue of love but of the sexual way the word’s used, isn’t it?]

  2. Jojo says:

    Romney also said in one of the earlier debates that he was for homosexual equality and non-discrimination though he’s against gay marriage. In Canada it is now hate speech to say stuff against the homosexual lifestyle (anti-gay expression) even a Pastor was arrested for preaching the biblical truth about the issue of homosexuality!
    I think we need Romney to clarify how much he is for homosexual equality. I wouldn’t want a President who wants our kids to be taught that hetero and homo lifestyles are equal in public schools. It is against Catholic teaching. CCC 2357 “Under no circumstances can they [homosexual acts] be approved.”

  3. Lynne says:

    What are you talking about?! It mentions in the second paragraph that he vetoed the legislation.

    THEN he turned around and said that Catholic hospitals had no conscience clause…

    A defining moment in Mitt Romney’s post-pro-life-conversion political career came in his third year as governor of Massachusetts, when he decided Catholic hospitals would be required under his interpretation of a new state law to give rape victims a drug that can induce abortions.

    Romney announced this decision — saying it was the “right thing for hospitals” to do — just two days after he had taken the opposite position.

    He is NOT pro-life.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>



Receive our updates via email.