Feb 7, 2012 3:44pm

GOP Rivals Pounce on Romney’s ‘Assault on Religion’ Line

JOHNSTOWN, Colo. - Mitt Romney’s Republican rivals pounced today on his accusations that President Obama has an “assault on religion” by forcing Catholic institutions to provide contraceptives and abortion services, suggesting it was a hypocritical statement.

Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum charged that Romney  made the same demands on Catholic facilities when he was the governor of Massachusetts and implemented his health care plan.

Romney kept up his attack on Obama’s policies and Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul dismissed the remarks by Gingrich and Santorum.

“We expect these attacks from President Obama and his liberal friends. But from Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, it’s a clear indication of desperation from their campaigns,” said Saul.

In an oped today posted on Politico’s website, Santorum wrote of Romney, “He said then that he believed ‘in his heart of hearts’ that receiving these contraceptives – free of charge – trumped employees’ religious consciences. Now, a few years later and running for president, his heart is strategically aligned with religious voters opposing this federal mandate.”

On the stump in Ohio, Gingrich also went after Romney.  ”There’s been a lot of talk about the Obama administration’s attack on the Catholic church,” said Gingrich. “Well the fact is Gov. Romney insisted that Catholic hospitals give out abortion pills against their religious belief when he was governor. So you have a very similar pattern again. Over and over you get the same pattern.”

Mitt Romney continued his criticism of the Obama administration’s mandate to require institutions – including those with church-affiliations – to provide contraception under their health care plans.

“Governor Romney stands with the Catholic Bishops and all religious organizations in their strenuous objection to this liberty- and conscience-stifling regulation,” Saul said. “He is committed to repealing Obamacare entirely. On his first day in office, Mitt Romney will eliminate the Obama administration rule that compels religious institutions to violate the tenets of their own faith.”

Romney kept up the assault on Obama at RV America Inc., where idle recreational vehicles sat outside, snow covered in the parking lot, waiting to be purchased.

“Remarkably, under this president’s administration, there is an assault on religion, an assault on the conviction and the religious beliefs of members of our society,” he said.

Romney said there have been several things the president has done that he finds “extraordinary,” including his suggestions that the government, and not the church, should “be able to determine who their ministers were and who qualifies for the ministerial exception from certain laws.”

 

Romney was referencing the case from earlier this year involving a religious school teacher who the Obama administration argued had a protected status because she had a disability. The Supreme Court later ruled that a religious school – and not the government – “must be free to choose those who will guide it on its way.”

“It tells you something about the agenda of this administration,” said Romney.

“And then a real blow, and particularly to our friends in the Catholic faith, which just in the last several days the administration has said that under Obamacare, that religious organizations… have to provide for free contraceptives and free ‘morning-after’ pills, abortive pills for all of their employees, in violation of the religious conscience of those organizations,” he said.

Romney was referring to the decision by the Obama administration that would require employers at institutions, even those affiliated with a church, to include coverage for birth control and emergency contraceptives. The plan was pushed forward in January and is set to go into effect in August.

The issue was brought up again when leaders in Catholic churches across America read letters from the church’s leadership on Sunday, Jan. 29, condemning the administration’s policy.

“This kind of assault on religion will end if I’m president of the United States,” said Romney.

 

SHOWS:

User Comments

One might have thought that former Gov. of Massachusetts Mitt Romney would by now have learned that the God of Christianity does not reliably ordain winners and losers and that not all of His followers are of like mind. To wit, the most conspicuous Christian pro football player, Tim Tebow, didn’t appear to have the Holy Ghost whispering the right plays in his ear when they played the Patriots. And then, victorious QB Brady got let down and the Patriots lost to the boys from . . . oh my . . . Gotham City.

But you know, if Mitt were to put on tights, a cape, a mask with ears, and assume Tebow’s gargoyle crouch—Holy Batman! Thus empowered and with two Robins at his side, the robin’ Koch brothers, Mitt wouldn’t need any inconsistent godly favoritism.

It could give Caped Crusader Mitt the edge that some of the earlier followers of his faith could have used when they were being persecuted because of their beliefs by folks who considered themselves real Christians and Americans. Maybe they would not have suffered the Mormon War of 1838, the murder of their founding prophet, Joseph Smith whose 5 assailants were acquitted by a sympathetic jury, and continued assault during their long flight west.

Posted by: Sam Osborne | February 7, 2012, 4:05 pm 4:05 pm

The flip-flopping Romney rattles and says anything that pops into his head–all because he wants to be president. Keep dreaming buddy. The problem is Romney keeps contradicting himself all the time.

Posted by: NoFlyZone2 | February 7, 2012, 4:20 pm 4:20 pm

Romney is running as a conservative, but doesn’t really understand it, in his ‘heart of hearts.’

It’s something to see, really- that he plain doesn’t get it, and is trying to voice what his advisers are saying – he kind of gets the idea he should take advice from people who do get it, but he’s like a puppet.

The choices are so lame. I have chosen Ron Paul, and frankly I find nothing wrong with his voting record, even the claim that he didn’t partner enough with other congresspersons to get more spending bills passed – don’t care…I’m glad he just voted no all the time.

But, the one thing that does bother me, is that he profited from fringe elements, and – frankly nothing need to be fringe about upholding the constitution and believing in individual rights.

So – can’t wait for a libertarian without Paul’s baggage – maybe it’ll be Rand Paul.

Posted by: RockoT | February 7, 2012, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm

Catholic hospitals treat and take money from non Catholics patients. Who has more religious rights the Catholic hospital or the pro-abortion patient being charge for his/her care? If the Catholic hospital is taking money from a non Catholic patients it would seem they would void the merit of religious freedom. People that are pro-abortion should be judge by God not the Catholic Church, the GOP, or Mitt Romney. Anyone remember how the Catholic Church got started? By forcing people to accept their beliefs or be put to death (living abortions). But now that people want to find God in their own way we have the Catholic Church, the GOP, and Mitt Romney telling us what and how we should believe and trust in God. God doesn’t condemn people, the Catholic Church, the GOP, and Mitt Romney condemns people.

Posted by: WTF | February 7, 2012, 4:53 pm 4:53 pm

The flip-flopping Romney rattles and says anything that pops into his head–all because he wants to be president. Keep dreaming buddy. The problem is Romney keeps contradicting himself all the time.

Posted by: NoFlyZone2
______________
People have moved from left to right before without being hypocrites. Even Norma McCorvey, the very Jane Doe in the Roe vs. Wade case moved from being pro-choice to pro-life on abortion. It’s actually not that unusual at all.

What IS rare is if a person moves from the right to the left. There haven’t been very many, if any, people who used to be pro-life who changed to be pro-choice.

Posted by: ivan | February 7, 2012, 5:01 pm 5:01 pm

lets not forget that obama is no bargain.

Posted by: david | February 7, 2012, 5:21 pm 5:21 pm

Barnum & Bailey is envious of the circus act aka the Republican Primaries.

Posted by: mitch Eisenman | February 7, 2012, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm

Catholics have a right to do whatever they choose in their churches and hospitals. Unless they are taking federal funds. If they take one dollar of taxpayer money that changes everything. At that point they have to follow federal regulations. If they don’t wish to follow federal regulations, don’t take the money. Pretty simple.

There is no “attack on Christianity”. Most Americans identify themselves as Christian. Attack on Christianity? About the same as Custer attacking Indians. Ain’t gonna work. Attack on Christianity is all in the head of people who want others to rally behind them.

This is the biggest problem I have with the Republican party. If they ever learn to seperate their religion from their politics, they might get a lot more votes.

Posted by: oonogil7 | February 7, 2012, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm

romney needs to start explicitly reversing some of his previous policy positions.

i believed he has evolved. but he’s resistance to admit errors in the past. it’s hurting him, opening him up to the charge he’s *without* values, not just one who’s updated his beliefs based on experience and seasoning.

Posted by: apetra | February 7, 2012, 7:20 pm 7:20 pm

I really, really don’t get it. NO EMPLOYEE of a religious organization is required to take contraceptives. THERE is your religious freedom. It’s still intact, thank God and Country.

Does an Amish charity have a right to forbid payment of medical bills for employes who have an automobile accident? Does a Mosque have a right to enforce Sharia law above the wishes of the government? What kind of religiously-dominated cultulre does Romney want to enslave me with? I just can’t figure this one out.

Posted by: JohnJay60 | February 7, 2012, 9:24 pm 9:24 pm

JohnJya60, I agree with your comment. We can’t pick and choose which religion’s beliefs should get a break from our laws. If we give Catholics the right to withhold birth control because of their religious beliefs then we have to give Muslims a pass if it goes against their Sharia law, etc.
Thus the need for separation of our laws from any religion. In our country, with its many religions it is the only logical way to have cohesiveness and civil rights.

Posted by: Librarian53 | February 8, 2012, 9:38 am 9:38 am

Oonogil7, no Catholics don’t have a right in their business dealings to make the rules. We have civil rights in this country which trump religious rights, as they should.
Think about how messed up our country would be if we allowed any religious organization to run businesses according to their religious rules, rather than our nation’s laws. Think of the severity of Sharia law, for instance. Do those Muslims have the right to impose their law on you, just because they believe it, if we give Catholics a pass on the birth control issue? Where would it end?

Posted by: Librarian53 | February 8, 2012, 9:45 am 9:45 am

Contrary to ABC Obama’s decision does not require anyone to give abortions. It only requires that employees received contraceptive services. Am I wrong about that? Really folks,

Posted by: bruce oakley | February 8, 2012, 9:59 am 9:59 am

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.