Romney said he would stop public funds for Planned Parenthood "immediately" upon entering office.
Mitt Romney sought to reassure anti-abortion-rights groups that he is on their side on Wednesday as he vowed to be a "pro-life president" if elected.
"I'm a pro-life candidate. I'll be a pro-life president," Romney said Wednesday during a campaign appearance in Ohio.
Romney also promised to end public health funding for Planned Parenthood — a group conservatives oppose because it provides abortions — and to bar U.S. foreign aid from funding the procedures.
Originally posted by xuenchen
Romney vows to be 'pro-life president'
Romney is getting strong on some the issues and is making solid statements.
Many people have little or no real "problem" with PP and the general concept.
But they are concerned about all the theft and corruption surrounding them IMO.
Study: Free Birth Control Slashes Abortion Rates
By Olivia B. Waxman - October 5, 2012
What would happen if women at risk for unintended pregnancies received the birth control of their choice — especially the more effective kinds — at no cost?
The national abortion rate would plummet, according to a study conducted by researchers at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and published in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology on Thursday.
Originally posted by FissionSurplus
I've never met a person who said they were "pro-life" who was actually pro-life.
The same people who say that it is murder to kill a fetus, have no problem with pre-emptive wars, the collateral damage that occurs from them, or even the death penalty.
By the time you read this sentence, America will have passed a tragic, momentous, and most sobering milestone. Within a day or two of January 22, 2008, the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, baby number 50,000,000 will have been sacrificed on the altar of Roe v. Wade.
The magnitude of the killing is staggering. Fifty million represents a population greater than any state, greater than California (36 million), greater than the next two largest states—Texas and New York—combined (23 million and 19 million, respectively). In fact, if you combined the entire populations of all of the 25 states with the fewest people, it still would not equal 50 million.
Of course, the issue isn’t numbers. Each abortion represents at least one lost life and what may be a deeply wounded woman’s soul. Families, too, suffer, and society itself pays a dear price, with lost innovation, productivity, and creativity.
How many great books, symphonies, films have been lost? How many profitable businesses never came to be? What if we aborted the child who would have found the cure for cancer? How much love and laughter has the world been deprived of?
Fifty Million Lost Lives Since 1973
In United States today
US since 1973: Roe vs Wade
By Planned Parenthood since 1970
By Planned Parenthood this year
United States this Year
US this Year after
16 weeks gestation
US this Year due to rape
Worldwide since 1980
Worldwide this Year
Originally posted by Jeremiah65
More flip flopping. I found another article that has part of your content but also says more.
Romney risks base with an appeal to center on abortion.
"Romney’s remarks a day earlier to the Des Moines Register’s editorial board played into his efforts to moderate his positions as the Nov. 6 election approaches.
“There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda,” Romney told newspaper yesterday before an event in the swing state of Iowa.
Romney didn’t specify what he would do if a Republican- controlled Congress passed abortion legislation and sent it to him to sign into law. His running-mate, Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan, sponsored a bill during the last Congress that would deem a fetus a person and effectively criminalize abortion without exceptions, including for rape victims. "
And people still think they know who they are electing? Better check in election day...you might be voting for a liberal on that day.
Originally posted by Hefficide
Ssssoooo... the same guy who wants to slash social programs, in an already fatigued and depressed economy, also wants to make it more difficult for the poor to avoid bringing babies that they can't afford into the world.
I am not math major but this one seems like it is going to add up badly. I mean really? Seriously? In the next election cycle I predict that the slogan will be "Thanks for watching, and please spay or neuter your poor".
sure wish that was possible but since birth generates a new FR bond, it's a done deal.
how about we do not connect human life to the economy. Thanks