"I happen to believe that the best setting for raising a child is where this is the opportunity to a mom and a dad to be in the home," Romney said. "I know there are many circumstances where that is not possible, through death or divorce. I also know many gay couples are able to adopt children. That's fine."

'Mitt Romney walked back on his earlier comment that it's "fine" for gay couples to adopt, saying he will "simply acknowledge" that gay adoption is legal.

"Well actually I think all states but one allow gay adoption, so that's a position which has been decided by most of the state legislators, including the one in my state some time ago," Romney toldCharlotte, North Carolina's WBTV on Friday. "So I simply acknowledge the fact that gay adoption is legal in all states but one."

www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/12/mitt-r... 

So is gay adoption fine with him, or not?!  WTF?


2) And what is up on civil unions?

'During his tenure in office, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) of Massachusetts issued a ruling claiming that denial of marriage to same sex couples was not legal. Governor Romney supported the establishment of civil unions to satisfy the court decision that a legal alternative be available.'

So he supported civil unions as a legal alternative to marriage...

But on May 9th he said:

In other remarks, though, Romney made clear that his views in the subject haven’t softened a bit. He told one reporter “My view is the same as it has been since the beginning which is I don’t favor civil union if it is identical to marriage, and I don’t favor marriage between people of the same gender.”

www.nationalreview.com/corner/299488/rom... 

OK, so if he supports civil unions as an alternative to marriage, isn't that just an identical version of marriage in legal status how can he oppose civil unions if it is 'identical' to marriage?

WTF? I don't understand what that means.


And if he opposes civil unions but supports gay couples adopting children, isn't the result a huge increase in children growing up in households with unwed parents? How do the legal rights of adoptive parents work outside the legal structures around marriage?

Does anyone understand WTF Mitt Romney really thinks about any of this as policy?

Or does he just talk bs to everyone depending upon who he thinks is listening? 

Romney stands for nothing. He will say what ever he thinks will get him the power he wants. Other then that I doubt he cares. I doubt he has a real opinion in SS marriage or same sex couples adopting. He just wants to win, at any and at all costs.

May 13, 2012 -- 8:32AM, Kwinters wrote:

1) I thought Romney supported gay adoption, but then when I started to research it for this thread I found out his position has changed again.

First he said:

"I happen to believe that the best setting for raising a child is where this is the opportunity to a mom and a dad to be in the home," Romney said. "I know there are many circumstances where that is not possible, through death or divorce. I also know many gay couples are able to adopt children. That's fine."

THEN...

'Mitt Romney walked back on his earlier comment that it's "fine" for gay couples to adopt, saying he will "simply acknowledge" that gay adoption is legal.

"Well actually I think all states but one allow gay adoption, so that's a position which has been decided by most of the state legislators, including the one in my state some time ago," Romney toldCharlotte, North Carolina's WBTV on Friday. "So I simply acknowledge the fact that gay adoption is legal in all states but one."

www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/12/mitt-r... 

So is gay adoption fine with him, or not?!  WTF?


2) And what is up on civil unions?

'During his tenure in office, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) of Massachusetts issued a ruling claiming that denial of marriage to same sex couples was not legal. Governor Romney supported the establishment of civil unions to satisfy the court decision that a legal alternative be available.'

So he supported civil unions as a legal alternative to marriage...

But on May 9th he said:

In other remarks, though, Romney made clear that his views in the subject haven’t softened a bit. He told one reporter “My view is the same as it has been since the beginning which is I don’t favor civil union if it is identical to marriage, and I don’t favor marriage between people of the same gender.”

www.nationalreview.com/corner/299488/rom... 

OK, so if he supports civil unions as an alternative to marriage, isn't that just an identical version of marriage in legal status how can he oppose civil unions if it is 'identical' to marriage?

WTF? I don't understand what that means.


And if he opposes civil unions but supports gay couples adopting children, isn't the result a huge increase in children growing up in households with unwed parents? How do the legal rights of adoptive parents work outside the legal structures around marriage?

Does anyone understand WTF Mitt Romney really thinks about any of this as policy?

Or does he just talk bs to everyone depending upon who he thinks is listening? 

I am actually starting to feel for the guys dilemma.   talk about being caught  on the horns

I thought that I would never live to see Pigs Fly but they did this past week.   Romney was listened to with respect by the evangelicals of Liberty University.  I even read an article that Romney is considering Huckabee as a possible VP.     how can that be so when Huckabee thinks mormons have tails and horns and that they are not Christian.     what an upside down world Romney finds himself in.

Mormons love their gay children because they love their children,   they certainly do not approve or understand homosexuality and have made spectacles of themselves fighting ssm in Calif in a bid to get the evangelicals to "like" Romney.   I guess it worked.

Of course Romney will say anything but that is a common trait for politicians.         

It's odd that Gays can be trusted to look after children but can't be trusted to marry each other.

Some opponents( Like Psychologist Laura Schlessinger) consider same sex adoption to be sexual abuse of children.

May 13, 2012 -- 10:14PM, mecdukebec wrote:

May 13, 2012 -- 1:20PM, mainecaptain wrote:

Romney stands for nothing. He will say what ever he thinks will get him the power he wants. Other then that I doubt he cares. I doubt he has a real opinion in SS marriage or same sex couples adopting. He just wants to win, at any and at all costs.

I think that Mitt Witt the Etcha-Sketch is expressing the inconsistencies of apartheid against LGBT:  They "can" do this (adopt); they "can't" marry.  Wingoism will fall apart of its own weight on this issue, as much as South African apartheid did.  "A Wingo house divided against itself cannot stand."

You have a wonderful way of phrasing things