January 22, 2013 – Washington, D.C.
President Romney steps up to the podium, surrounded by tens of thousands of pro-life activists who have come to the nation’s capital to participate in the annual “March for Life.” It is the first time a president has been physically present to address the crowd:
“I want to thank all of you for coming to Washington, D.C. to fight for the unborn. I look forward to meeting with your leadership later this afternoon and I relish the prospect of working with all of you in outlawing abortion throughout the country. It is time for the killing to stop!
As many of you know, within hours of being sworn in as your President I signed an Executive Order re-instating the Mexico City policy which requires that all non-governmental organizations that receive federal funding refrain from performing or promoting abortion services as a method of family planning. And I was thrilled that several of you could join me and Ann in the Oval Office when I signed that document.
I am pleased to report that my Deputy for Congressional Affairs has already met with members of the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus to discuss an ambitious legislative agenda designed to reduce the number of abortions in this country. Of course, the first item that we will pursue is the insertion of language in the HHS Appropriations bill cutting off all federal funding for Planned Parenthood clinics. I was very clear during the campaign that this would be a priority and I’m pleased that we are pursuing this important measure.
Meanwhile, while we prepare for votes to repeal Obamacare, as a contingency we will pass a law as soon as possible making it extremely clear that NO federal funds may be used for abortions. The lawyers at the National Right to Life Committee are working feverishly to provide me with the exact language necessary to accomplish this important goal.
Of course, if the Congress decides to pursue a constitutional amendment banning abortion I will use my bully pulpit to get that measure passed in the House and Senate. Then, if it passes, I will criss-cross the country to ensure that we garner the requisite number of states to ratify the amendment. That battle will not be easy, but you can rest assured that I will work extremely hard to reverse the disastrous Roe v. Wade decision.
I will also instruct the Department of Justice to aggressively review the reports of violence against pro-life sidewalk counselors. These saints are out there exercising their right to free speech, saving lives every day and they deserve the protection of the federal government against those that would thwart their efforts through intimidation or violence.
As you know, in several states the legislatures have enacted laws imposing stricter regulations on abortion clinics in an effort to protect women from unscrupulous practitioners who are just interested in making money. Just recall the horrors that took place in Doctor Gosnell’s clinic in Pennsylvania. This should not be a state-by-state effort, we must pass national regulations on abortion clinics so all women are protected!
I mentioned earlier a possible constitutional amendment banning abortion. As I said, that is a tough task but there’s another way to go about reaching the same goal. And that is the Supreme Court. At this point, constitutional scholars suggest that the Court is only two and maybe even one vote away from overturning Roe v Wade. While I wish no ill upon any sitting justice, it is quite possible that during my first administration – and certainly my second – I will have the opportunity to appoint several new justices to the court and I pledge to you today that those justices will strictly interpret the Constitution and work to overturn that most heinous case of judicial activism that has caused the death of millions of babies – Roe V. Wade.
So, we have our work cut out for us. But you have my word that my door will always be open to you and I will put the full weight of the Oval Office behind any initiative that is designed to stop the slaughter. God Bless You and God Bless the United States of America.”
Related articles
- Should Romney decide Roe v. Wade’s fate? (current.com)
- Could Romney Overturn Roe v. Wade? (news.yahoo.com)
- Fox’s Guilfoyle Covers Up Romney’s Support For Overturning Roe V. Wade (mediamatters.org)
- Romney: Abortion is not ‘part of my agenda.’ Romney campaign: Oh yes it is. (dailykos.com)
- Romney: I Want the Supreme Court to Overturn Roe v. Wade via Life News.com (loopyloo305.com)
- Canadian pro-life fueled by U.S. lobbyists (vancouverobserver.com)




October 29, 2012 at 3:41 am
Women’s rights vs. children’s rights…what more can I say?
LikeLike
October 29, 2012 at 7:48 am
Friendly, what do you mean?
LikeLike
October 29, 2012 at 7:49 am
I don’t understand either.
Friendly, what does abortion rights have to do with children?
LikeLike
October 29, 2012 at 9:52 am
Friendly, obviously you mistake the fetus for a child. You meant, “women’s rights vs. fetal rights.”
Can you explain to me what rights a fetus has?
LikeLike
October 30, 2012 at 1:16 pm
Finally “digging out” from Hurricane Sandy…As for the Friendly guy….it never ceases to amaze me how so many antis (I assume he is an anti) love to jump onto this blog, make an inane comment then disappear. They’re like hit and run drivers.
Meanwhile, how about that Supreme Court refusing to consider the Oklahoma “personhood” case? I seem to recall that it takes only 5 justices to accept a case so I’m figuring one of the anti justices refused to accept it (Roberts?) Very interesting development that did not get a lot of media attention!
LikeLike
November 1, 2012 at 10:58 am
A fetus is not a child. When it is cut from the umbilical cord and breathing on its own, then it has rights. Until then, it is a fetus–which is an extention of a woman’s body, much like an arm or a leg or her appendix. If it is removed for some reason, it can be very sad, but certainly isn’t murder!
LikeLike
November 1, 2012 at 11:46 am
My own stand, Sherry, is that society does not have the right to call a fetus a child until it is born, but before then the primary caretaker has that right, which society has to respect. The primary caretaker is the one who nurtures the fetus– either the woman who is pregnant or the technician handling the Petri dish. So-called “pro-lifers” could become primary caretakers by becoming surrogate pregnants and then exercise all due protections they’d want for their fetus– but they don’t.
LikeLike
November 1, 2012 at 4:46 pm
Using your logic, CG, could they not then argue that since they have nurtured their already born child, they have the “right” to kill their two year old?
LikeLike
November 1, 2012 at 4:44 pm
Ah, Sherry, if only the pro-lifers understood that! I can hear them now expressing outrage that you compared that BABY to your appendix. Yikes. And of course they think it is murder.
LikeLike
October 31, 2012 at 1:12 pm
Women certainly have more rights than fetuses. At least they would if this world made any sense
LikeLike
November 1, 2012 at 4:48 pm
Well, Laura, at this point clearly women do have more rights than their fetus! So, in that way I guess the world (or at least this country) does make some sense. But it is very scary to see how women are treated in this country. Dont get me started on those “legitimate rape” comments! And, Romney, forget it. If he wins it will be a nightmare for women (again)….
LikeLike