Romney's FlipFlop on Civil Unions

Here's a Romney flip-flop we need to revisit now: His position on "civil unions."

Romney is busy in New Hampshire bad-mouthing the newly legal civil unions there. (The NH Legislature actually voted for them, unlike the mythical "homosexual marriages" here.)

But while Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney worked for civil unions.

Check the news from late 2003 (just after the Goodridge marriage ruling) and early 2004 (during the Legislature's phony attempt to come up with a marriage amendment to send to the voters). Romney wanted to be able to say later that he fought for real marriage, and claimed that only a constitutional amendment could solve the problem. He joined Legislative leaders pushing an unrealistic, doomed compromise: the absurd Travaglini-Lees amendment (proposed in early 2004), which would have banned homosexual "marriage" while writing civil unions into the Mass. constitution!

Surely, Romney knew this proposal was doomed to failure. But it allowed him to take everyone's eyes off the real constitutional issues while he illegally implemented homosexual "marriage" behind the scenes. So in March 2004 (according to the Boston Globe), he twisted the arms of hesitant Republican legislators, and convinced them to vote for the phony amendment (which would have established civil unions)!

If that's not supporting civil unions, what is?

• AP (11-20-03), "Massachusetts governor urges gay civil unions, not marriage" -- ... Romney said Wednesday he believes the state could adopt civil unions similar to those allowed in Vermont -- then continue working toward a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages.... "I believe their [the Court's] decision indicates that a provision which provides that benefits, obligations, rights and responsibilities which are consistent with marriage but perhaps could be called by a different name would be in conformity with their decision," Romney said. "Under that opinion, I believe a civil-union type provision would be sufficient."
  
• Boston Globe (3-30-04), "In crucial shift, governor sways 15 in GOP to support measure" Through all the twists and shifts during the gay-marriage debate this year, there was one constant: 22 Republicans in the House of Representatives opposed every measure that would grant gay couples civil unions in the constitution. That all changed yesterday, however, when 15 of that 22-member bloc broke away at the urging of Governor Mitt Romney and voted in favor of a proposed amendment that would ban gay marriage but create Vermont-style civil unions. Those 15 members provided the margin of victory, observers from both camps said yesterday after the measure passed by just five votes.... it was clear that the Republican governor had a major effect on the fracturing of the 22-member bloc....


• Letter from Mitt Romney in April 2004, praising the Travaglini-Lees compromise amendment (which would have written civil unions into the Mass. constitution), reported on MassResistance blog (12-07).


• Boston Globe (2-25-05), "Romney's stance on civil unions draws fire; Activists accuse governor of 'flip-flopping' on issue" -- ... Yesterday the Log Cabin Republicans sharply rebuked the Massachusetts governor, saying his remarks indicate he is backsliding on his 2002 campaign commitment to support some benefits for gay couples. He had also urged GOP lawmakers to vote for a proposed constitutional amendment last spring that would ban same-sex marriage but allow gay couples to enter into civil unions.... A review of Romney's remarks shows that at an October 2002 campaign debate, he said: "Call me old fashioned, but I don't support gay marriage nor do I support civil union." Then, after the SJC decision legalizing same-sex marriage, he told WCVB on Dec. 17, 2003, that if he had to choose, he would favor civil unions over full-fledged gay marriage. However, he added: "But that is not my preference overall. My preference overall would be neither civil union or marriage." Last March, Romney's staff told House Republicans he supported the proposed constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage but allow civil unions....


• Chris Matthews, MSNBC "Hardball" (8-26-05): "Romney plays 'Hardball' on gay marriage; Mass. governor discusses civil unions..." [a must-read interview, as Romney is incoherent] -- ... MATTHEWS: Help me understand Massachusetts politics here.... Why doesn't the state of Massachusetts, through its elected officials, simply overrule the Supreme Court up there and say, there's not going to be any gay marriage; I don't care what some judge says about the Constitution written 200 years ago? Why don't they just do that?
  ROMNEY: Well, well, as you know, it's not that easy. When a court overreaches its bounds and decides to legislate from the bench, it's pretty hard to overturn that. In our case, we have to pass a constitutional amendment. And my legislature is in, some respects, liberal. It has a conservative wing as well. But the liberal wing is fighting very hard for same-sex marriage or its legal equivalent, civil union. And so, as this has gone before the legislature in the past, they've said that the people ought to decide. I agree with them. Let's let the people decide. So, we will have a constitutional convention this year. Hopefully, the decision of our legislature will be to let the people decide. And, specifically, I hope that people will be able to decide that neither civil union, nor same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts.... Of course, if we find ourselves in a setting where the only choice is between civil union and marriage, I will prefer civil union. But I would prefer neither. [This is right after he says same-sex marriage and civil unions are legally equivalent!]


• New York Sun, 4-27-07 --Mr. Giuliani's position on the New Hampshire law [to legalize civil unions] puts him in the company of the former governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney, the only other major presidential candidate from either party who opposes the New Hampshire law. "Governor Romney opposes the New Hampshire bill," Mr. Romney's campaign said yesterday. "He is a champion of traditional marriage. As governor of Massachusetts, he has a clear record opposing same sex marriage and civil unions."

Bishop Gene Robinson: "I always wanted to be a June bride!"

"I always wanted to be a June bride," gushed Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire recently at a speech in Florida. Robinson is going to be legally joined to his long-time sodomy partner next June. New Hampshire legalized "civil unions" there starting this January.

Unlike New Hampshire, Massachusetts has still not legalized either "civil unions" or "homosexual marriage." They're just a fiction of some GLBT activists, four judges, and a former Massachusetts governor named Romney. So Bishop Robinson must be thanking his god that he's in a state where he can legally become a bride this June.

(photo source: Nova Southeastern Shepard Broad Law Center)

Gay Episcopal Bishop Prepares for June Wedding

by Priscilla Greear

U/Miami News Service

Tuesday Dec 4, 2007

The nation’s first openly gay Episcopal bishop told a crowd of about 200 that come June he’s marching down the aisle with his longtime male partner Mark Andrew. "I always wanted to be a June bride," said Bishop Gene Robinson at a talk on Nov. 27 at Nova Southeastern University.

"It may take many years for religious institutions to add their blessing for same-sex marriages and no church, mosque or synagogue should be forced to do so. But that should not slow down progress for the full civil right to marry," Robinson said. "Because New Hampshire will have legal unions beginning in January, my partner of 20 years and I will enter into such a legal union next June." ...

Wearing a raspberry clergy shirt with a cleric collar and pectoral cross, Robinson characterized the "religious right" as close-minded, taking a literal interpretation of Bible condemnation of homosexuality."The greatest single hindrance to achievement of full rights for gays and lesbians can be laid at the doorstep of the three Abrahamic faiths-- Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It’s going to take people of faith to end discrimination," said Robinson, who was invested as the ninth bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire in 2004.... [emphasis added]

Now if an Episcopal Bishop slams the supposed foundation of his own faith ("the three Abrahamic faiths -- Judaism, Christianity and Islam"), to what faith does he now plan to appeal to bolster his belief in sodomy "marriage"?

Mass. Lesbian Extremists on Hillary Clinton's Campaign

Whether or not Hillary Clinton is a lesbian is probably of less importance than her choices for advisors. So pay close attention to these two GLBT extremists, on Hillary's campaign advisory staff (according to a homosexual newspaper source):

Mary Breslauer [left], principal at Communications Solutions, co-host of HRC’s XM radio show “The Agenda”; former co-chair, Kerry-Edwards 2004 LGBT Steering Committee.

Rebecca Haag [right], Executive Director of the AIDS Action Committee of Massachusetts.

Haag lied to Channel 7 news about MassResistance during the infamous incident of the Macy's transgender mannequins (during Pride 2006), and refused to set the record straight when we challenged her. (We assume her communications advisor Breslauer guided her.) Haag also said that the breasts on the Macy's mannequins were just "pecs" that fit men get from working out.

It seems Breslauer and Haag are partners. (This according to the Harvard University Gazette back in 1997.) Maybe they're "married" now? Who knows, maybe they've done a Goodridge split? Since we're not invited to their crowd's parties, we're not sure.

Hillary also has "trans friendly supporters," according to the TransAdvocate blog.

NY Times: Romney Kept Promise to Gays to Allow "Gay Marriage"

The New York Times is finally looking into Romney's "gay rights" record in Massachusetts. See "Romney’s tone on gay rights is seen as shift" (New York Times, 9-8-07). Romney doesn't want this to come out:

[I]n the aftermath of the Massachusetts court decision, Mr. Romney, though aligning himself with the supporters of a constitutional amendment [banning homosexual "marriage" but establishing civil unions], did order town clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Some members of Log Cabin Republicans say that in doing so, he ultimately fulfilled his promise to them despite his own moral objections.

In the year prior to the Court's marriage ruling, Romney promised homosexual activists he'd "keep his head low" and do whatever the Court ordered. From the Times:

Calling Mr. Romney a flip-flopper on gay rights would be overly simplistic, Mr. Spampinato [a homosexual activist and former aide) said. But he conceded that his old boss had promised the Log Cabin members that he would not champion a fight against same-sex marriage. ...

Mitt Romney seemed comfortable as a group of gay Republicans quizzed him over breakfast one morning in 2002. Running for governor of Massachusetts, he was at a gay bar in Boston to court members of Log Cabin Republicans. Mr. Romney explained to the group that his perspective on gay rights had been largely shaped by his experience in the private sector, where, he said, discrimination was frowned upon. When the discussion turned to a court case on same-sex marriage that was then wending its way through the state’s judicial system, he said he believed that marriage should be limited to the union of a man and a woman.

But, according to several people present, he promised to obey the courts’ ultimate ruling and not champion a fight on either side of the issue. “I’ll keep my head low,” he said, making a bobbing motion with his head like a boxer, one participant recalled.

Romney has never been an advocate for real marriage, but in fact a facilitator for the establishment of homosexual "marriage", or its twin, "civil unions." But the Times reports,"Mr. Romney bristles when he is accused of shifting on the issue, as he has on abortion, pointing out that he has been consistent in personally opposing both marriage and civil unions between people of the same sex." No -- Romney has NOT always opposed civil unions. Our Romney Report documents that he immediately went to work with legislative leaders after the Mass. court ruling (Fall 2003) to craft a civil-unions style law (Washington Post report, 11-20-03). Then in 2004 he strong-armed conservative Republican legislators into supporting a constitutional amendment that included civil unions, while banning homosexual "marriage." From the Boston Globe(3/30/2004):

Through all the twists and shifts during the gay-marriage debate this year, there was one constant: 22 Republicans in the House of Representatives opposed every measure that would grant gay couples civil unions in the constitution. That all changed yesterday, however, when 15 of that 22-member bloc broke away at the urging of Governor Mitt Romney and voted in favor of a proposed amendment that would ban gay marriage but create Vermont-style civil unions. Those 15 members provided the margin of victory, observers from both camps said yesterday after the measure passed by just five votes. In the end, the 15 agreed that approving a measure that they viewed as highly undesirable was preferable to the possibility that nothing would be sent to the state ballot for voters to weigh in on.

Also, Romney refused to support the original proposed Massachusetts marriage amendment in 2002, absolutely defining marriage as one man and one woman, apparently now wanting to ban domestic partnerships and civil unions. Bay Windows reported at the time (3-28-02):

"Romney was unaware his family members had signed the amendment petition, said [spokesman] Fehrnstrom, and he does not support the "Protection of Marriage" amendment. "He is opposed to gay marriage, but in the case of the 'defense of marriage' amendment Mitt believes it goes too far in that it would outlaw domestic partnership for non-traditional couples. That is something he is not prepared to accept."