Santorum slams Romney for refusing to sign pro-life pledge
This past Monday night at the Republican presidential debate, I was asked about Gov. Romney’s pro-life conversion, and I gave him the benefit of the doubt. I apparently spoke too soon. It is incredibly disappointing that Gov. Romney chose not to defend those who cannot defend themselves.
~ Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, responding to the news that fellow contender Mitt Romney has refused to sign a presidential pledge by the Susan B. Anthony List to only nominate judges to the federal bench or U.S. Supreme Court who are constitutional originalists, to only select cabinet and executive branch members who are pro-life, to advance legislation to permanently end domestic and foreign funding of abortion and to defund Planned Parenthood, and to advance the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.
Also not signing the pledge were Herman Cain and Gary Johnson.
Signing the pledge so far are Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty, and Rick Santorum.
[Photo via Reuters]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Rick also had this to say: P.S., please don’t run a Google search on my last name.
Joan, there is no limit to how low you will sink. A perverted man plays computer tricks with Google in order to malign and destroy Santorum, and you think it’s funny or that it actually reflects on Santorum. It doesn’t. It reveals the evil character and viciousness of the jackass who did it.
SANTORUM 2012
The point of this article is not about the skeletons in Rick Santorum’s closet, but about Romney and why Romney won’t sign the pledge. It’s a red herring/distraction to turn the argument around to be about Santorum; Santorum’s problems are and should be a separate topic of discussion.
Wow, Joan. You’re immaturity is astonishing.
:( I was kinda interested in voting for Herman Cain…. but not if he won’t protect the preborn! Not to mention the Constitution! Too bad :( I guess I’ll take a longer look at Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann!
I dunno, I thought that Romney was pro-life. One article I read said that he thought the legislation called for in the pledge was overreaching and would restrict his choices on Cabinet members far too much, and de-fund too many institutions like VA hospitals.
Claire, your lack of a dictionary is showing
Ron Paul is a poor choice in hoping for protection for the unborn. His legislation is weak in that regard, as it would allow states to be independent in the decision on whether they choose to continue to allow the killing of the unborn. This doesn’t sound like someone who has very strong convictions about the (im)morality of what abortion really is. He may be a conservative in the fiscal sense, but he should not be called a conservative in regards to social issues.
Santorum 2012!
Sure sounds like the “small [federal] government” types and social conservatives aren’t exactly on the same page, huh?
Jane, I typed that on an iPad. Typing as quickly on a touch screen as I normally do on a physical keyboard often results in typos which the iPad autocorrects to the closest word. Were my spelling errors somehow offensive or are you just nit picking out of pettiness?
Joan, they often aren’t. People are here because of the issue of life. They’re not required to agree on how much power the government should have,
Thanks Kris! I’ll look into that info and research further :)
Joan, it has nothing to do with “small [federal] government” vs. social conservatives vs. big government. That’s a moot argument. It’s about what is true liberty, and the government (big or small) protecting liberty from being perverted to kill innocent human life.
Not being American, I don’t really have a say in this but this:
<i> to only select cabinet and executive branch members who are pro-life,</i>
sounds awfully counter-productive to my ears. Are you going to pass someone over as Secretary of State because they are pro-choice even if they have fantastic foreign experience and would be great at it?
I remember there were some angry internet comments from pro-choicers when Obama appointed a pro-life person to the department for health and human services in 2009. Insane!
“to only select cabinet and executive branch members who are pro-life,sounds awfully counter-productive to my ears. Are you going to pass someone over as Secretary of State because they are pro-choice even if they have fantastic foreign experience and would be great at it?”
I don’t think you are asking the right question, Kristina. The questions should be “Are you going to pass someone over as Secretary of State who tolerates the murder of 46 million people worldwide per year?”
You see, it is not that they call themselves “pro-choice.” It is their intolerance for the dignity of the human person. If said Secretary of State does not have the basic foundation for respect of human life from the beginning, then can you really trust the integrity of their foreign policy experience? All other life issues, human rights issues, foreign policy issues etc.-will be weak-without that basic foundation.
How effective can you be as a Secretary of State when tolerating the worldwide murder of 46 million people a year?
Actually, Herman Cain had a good reason for not signing. Lemmie go get that quote.
Here it is. “I support right-to-life issues unequivocally and I adamantly support the first three aspects of the Susan B. Anthony pledge involving appointing pro-life judges, choosing pro-life cabinet members, and ending taxpayer-funded abortions. However, the fourth requirement demands that I ‘advance’ the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. As president, I would sign it, but Congress must advance the legislation.
“I have been a consistent and unwavering champion of pro life issues. In no way does this singular instance of clarification denote an abandonment of the pro-life movement, but instead, is a testament to my respect for the balance of power and the role of the presidency.”
While this answer may seem to be splitting hairs, after we’ve had Obama practically throwing temper tantrums because Israel–a totally other, sovereign nation–didn’t do what he told them to, I can really respect a guy who gets nit-picky about the division of powers.
Alice – he has a point.
Alice, I can see what you’re getting at, and I don’t disagree. On the other hand, there’s a thing called leadership. The President certainly can lead on the issue and be instrumental in “advancing” the process of getting such legislation passed. I think that’s what the pledge meant.
@Jen: I agree that the pledge was probably aiming for more of an “influence” sort of advancement than a “get this bill moved through congress” sort of advancement. However, since this an issue that is important, both in terms of whether Cain is pro-life and in terms of where exactly he stands on how the president is involved in governing and defending the unborn, I felt it was important his reasoning for not signing this pledge be part of the discussion.
It’s official: I’ve converted. Ron Paul is now my go-to guy for 2012. Can we get a Palin/Paul or Paul/Palin please?
Actually as it now happens, the candidates that didn’t sign the pledge are the only ones who read it. When they read it there were red flags as to language and nuance. Law professors were contacted and now it SBA List is under inns scrutiny for promoting allege that legally speaking, has some real problems. I understand that the spirit and intention was good, but I respect MR. Cain for his reasons in not signing it. I am proud to support him and proud that he had the good sense enough to read the fine print – which could have gotten him into trouble had he signed it and should he become President. Personally I think its silly to spend so much energy talking about a pledge when really all we have to do is look at the Candidates’ records and consistency. Cain, Bachmann, and Santorum have always been undeniably pro-life. Romney says he “converted” and Ron Paul is Pro-Life but would never overstep states who made abortion legal. I am saddened that the portrayal of Romney and Cain was so negative on this site – they are smart men who actually have sound reasons for not signing – and none of them have to do with being in favor of abortion – because they are not. I would suggest looking up what Mr Cain has had to say about Planned Parenthood lately…(I’ll give you a hint – it involves defunding and black genocide…)
so sorry for the typos – my keyboard is dying a slow death!
Don’t make me add names to the sign, y’all…
Exactly who is a troll here? Does troll now mean anyone you disagree with?
I like what I’m hearing about Cain!!! <3