Writer: Mitt Romney’s Pro-Life Conversion Was Legitimate

Politics   |   Steven Ertelt   |   Nov 30, 2011   |   11:59AM   |   Washington, DC

When Mitt Romney converted to the pro-life position in 2005 as the governor of Massachusetts, some pro-life advocates questioned the legitimacy of that conversion and whether it was done for political expediency in preparation for a run for the GOP nomination for president in 2008.

In a new column today in the Washington Post, conservative writer Kathleen Parker tackles that question and says she believes his decision to become pro-life on abortion is a heartfelt one.

“So how does a person change from one position to the polar opposite on such a core issue as abortion? Easy. Countless women have changed their minds, thanks to pregnancy and birth. Countless others have suffered the agony of revelation too late following an abortion. Men overjoyed by fatherhood, or crushed by the loss of a child through abortion, have also changed their minds,” Parker writes.

“So how does a person change from one position to the polar opposite on such a core issue as abortion? Easy. Countless women have changed their minds, thanks to pregnancy and birth. Countless others have suffered the agony of revelation too late following an abortion. Men overjoyed by fatherhood, or crushed by the loss of a child through abortion, have also changed their minds,” Parker continues. “As governor at the time, Romney was under intense pressure to help flip a state law that protected embryos from stem-cell research. Some of that pressure came from Harvard University, Romney’s alma mater, where scientists hoped to assume a leading role in stem-cell research.”

“The politically expedient choice was obvious, but Romney took a more thoughtful approach and sought to educate himself before staking out a position. Enter William Hurlbut, a physician and professor of biomedical ethics at Stanford University Medical School. For several hours, Hurlbut and Romney met in the governor’s office and went through the dynamics of conception, embryonic development and the repercussions of research that targets nascent human life. It was not a light lunch,” Parker writes.

“The politically expedient choice was obvious, but Romney took a more thoughtful approach and sought to educate himself before staking out a position. Enter William Hurlbut, a physician and professor of biomedical ethics at Stanford University Medical School. For several hours, Hurlbut and Romney met in the governor’s office and went through the dynamics of conception, embryonic development and the repercussions of research that targets nascent human life. It was not a light lunch,” she continues.

Hurlbut talked with Parker for the column and told her Romney’s conversations with him is still a vivid memory.

He said Romney “clearly recognized the significance of the issue, not just as a current controversy but as a matter that would define the character of our culture way into the future.”

“Second, it was obvious that he had put in a real effort to understand both the scientific prospects and the broader social implications. Finally, I was impressed by both his clarity of mind and sincerity of heart. He recognized that this was not a matter of purely abstract theory or merely pragmatic governance, but a crucial moment in how we are to regard nascent human life and the broader meaning of medicine in the service of life,” Hurlbut said.

Other pro-life advocates have come away convinced Romney is pro-life.

Mary Ann Glendon, former U.S. ambassador to the Holy See and a Harvard University law professor, defended Romney in a national Catholic Register interview:

“After participating in a searching no-holds-barred conversation among Mitt, his wife, Anne, and a group of pro-life activists in March 2007,” Glendon said, “I was completely convinced of his sincerity on the life issues. The pro-life movement has staked so much on the confidence that people’s minds can be changed that it would be strange to accuse a person of ‘flip-flopping’ when, as in Mitt’s case, his mind and heart have brought him to respect the dignity of human life from conception to natural death.”

Romney has his pro-life supporters:  people like National Right to Life legal counsel James Bopp and Dr. Jack Willke, considered the father of the modern pro-life movement, endorsed him in 2008. Jordan Sekulow of the ACLJ is another prominent pro-life advocate who has been in the Romney camp.

“I don’t think Romney will go back on his pro-life commitment,” Willke said.

But Phil Lawler of Catholic World News told NCR “I don’t trust him. He’s made it clear that the life issues don’t count for much with him. They’re not his issues.”

Still, Romney understands one of the top priorities for the pro-life movement at current, de-funding Planned Parenthood. He has repeatedly called for de-funding in recent weeks and that has earned him attacks from the abortion business.