10 votes

Romney Flashback: Homosexuality is 'Perverse' and 'Reprehensible'

Throughout his campaign, Mitt Romney has struggled to deflect criticism that he is an unprincipled flip-flopper. But of all the issues on which Romney has taken a stance, few have been subject to more contortions than homosexuality and marriage equality. What has been largely overlooked is that prior to Romney’s unsuccessful senatorial run in '94, his beliefs about gays were, to put it kindly, not so magnanimous. According to several articles in the Boston Globe in the mid ’90s, just before launching his senate run, Romney told an audience of Mormon Church members that homosexuality was “perverse” and “reprehensible.” From the Boston Globe, July 15, 1994:

Speaking last fall to a Mormon Church gathering, Mitt Romney, then on the verge of launching a bid for a US Senate seat, expressed dismay at reports of homosexual behavior in the group and denounced homosexuality as “perverse,” according to several people present at the meeting.

“He said he was appalled at the incidence of homosexuals in the congregation,” said Rick Rawlins, a 32-year-old Mormon who had previously served as a counselor to the ward’s bishop. “He went on to say that he found homosexuality both perverse and reprehensible."

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/11/16/368369/romney-flash...

So, Mr. Romney feels that homosexuality is 'perverse' and 'reprehensible', but yet now says that the Boy Scouts should admit homosexuals. Is there anything that this Liar HASN'T flip-flopped on?
http://www.dailypaul.com/248322/romney-says-boy-scouts-shoul...

Not to mention Mr. Romney also stated that he supports the NDAA "as written". The NDAA has a provision that specifically prohibits gay marriage on military installations: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R41874.pdf

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Yeah and so what if he did.say it ...

"Romney Flashback: Homosexuality is 'Perverse' and 'Reprehensible'"

He has his right to his opinion ...

I think Anal sex is nasty period ... no matter if its done between a boy and a boy or a boy and a girl. Am I bad for saying the above?

I don't really give a crap what people do or think or say ... just don't do it to me.

Patriot News
http://redpillpost.com
*
Stand up For your Civil Rights
http://SueBadCops.com

.

'He thinks they should be allowed in the boyscouts, but not in his church.' Thats not really a change of view, it's a change of context. Though I do think he is one of the biggest flip floppers and I wouldn't trust him to do anything he says.

I don't believe anything...

...that comes out of a politicians mouth unless they have a record to back up what they speak and live as Ron Paul does...period!

Up until now I didnt think that the Romulan and I agreed on

anything.

Homosexuality is perverse and it is reprehensible.

But then, So is Mitt.

Too bad he didn't stick to his original

conclusion on homosexuality.

Too bad this thread wasn't created to

discuss whether or not homosexuality is "wrong" or "right", simply to point out another major Flip-flop on Romneys part. I'm straight and have no problem with someone being homosexual. To each his/her own. It's unfortunate you feel the way you do, but I guess I should of assumed there would be at least one person to try and turn this into a wrong/right topic.

De criminalize Liberty!

No, I wasn't trying to turn it into a "wrong or right" topic.

I was pointing out that it's too bad Romney flip-flopped on his original position.

I

Dixie just expressed their point of view the sentence was something like: "Too bad Romney did not stick to his original beliefs".
What is the problem with that? Evey time there is someone who has the very least hint on not approving and agreeing with a certain lifestyle there is a number of people trying to discredit their comments.
Let's allow everyone to express there beliefs. I for one agree with Dixie's post.

Excuse me, where exactly did I say there was a problem?

Where exactly did I "discredit" Dixies comment?

Where exactly did I say someone wasn't allowed to express their beliefs?

First of all, Dixies comment wasn't much of one to begin with. Second, my opinion is that the bogus comment deserves a follow up as to why. Third, mind your own business. This is no first amendment situation. We're all "on" private property right now. As you said: "Let's allow everyone to express there* (it's *their*) beliefs"...Except for me, right? I know how your type works..Move along.

De criminalize Liberty!

Roar Out Loud!

"Second, my opinion is that the bogus comment deserves a follow up as to why."

"bogus comment?" - How so?

"deserves a follow up as to why." - Fine. Because I, the one and only Dixie-Paleocon believe it is too bad that Romney flip-flopped from his original conclusion on homosexuality. Then again, he might not have. He could just be toning it down for political reasons.