APNewsBreak: Romney rejects gay marriage pledge

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • cindyacre Shelley, ID
    July 14, 2011 10:00 p.m.

    Pledges like this are tantimount to coercion to candidates. No way should they have to sign them.

  • Cougar Blue N. Las Vegas, NV
    July 14, 2011 8:22 a.m.

    I'd better grab this chance while it presents itself to say, "good for you Mitt." I haven't often said it and don't anticipate breaking my arms writing it very often. But, give credit where credit is due.

  • A Guy With A Brain Enid, OK
    July 13, 2011 11:56 p.m.


    I'm a Romney fan but I'll have to keep on eye on this issue.

    I wonder what the "less than dignified" statements were in the position paper that caused Romney not to sign it.

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    July 13, 2011 8:54 p.m.

    @ JPL of Mich: "Planned Parenthood has a great many issues against it, including its consistent disregard for FDA rules that have lead to the deaths of many mothers."

    You got any facts to back that up?

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 13, 2011 8:52 p.m.

    @ worf: None of them rejected what they heard out of hand - they used multiple sources to verify (or challenge) the facts. None of them were alone - they all had support.

    Very few true champions - including your examples - have ever claimed to do it alone.

    The DesNews will not allow you to post links, so Pagan lists the titles of articles that contain facts that back up his assertions.

    Instead of posting counter stories or facts, you attack him for using sources.

    Do you have counter facts? Or is your arsenal limited to personal attacks?

  • George Bronx, NY
    July 13, 2011 8:46 p.m.

    @ MarieDevine Divine-Way: How does legislating gay marriage as legal violate the religion clause of the Constitution?

    To help you out, here is the religion clause: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...."

    Please provide specific examples of someone not being able to exercise their religion based on the legality of same-sex marriage.

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    July 13, 2011 8:40 p.m.

    Of course you can not refute my point that Romney has supported Planned Parenthood. That is the heart of why I will not support him. Planned Parenthood has a great many issues against it, including its consistent disregard for FDA rules that have lead to the deaths of many mothers.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    July 13, 2011 8:36 p.m.


    How about:

    1. Columbus
    2. Galileo
    3. Thomas Edison
    4. Amelia Earhart
    5. Mother Teresa

    Their individual ability to process facts and data made them champions. Seventy percent of what you hear and read are exaggerated or false. Only a fool would believe everything they hear or read. Do you think a Japanese history book on world war 11 would be the same as an American book?

  • Jared Gainesville, FL
    July 13, 2011 7:45 p.m.

    Re: John Pack Lambert of Michigan I hope you realize that Romney is opposed to same-sex marriages (he supports a U.S. Constitutional amendment supporting traditional marriage; he just did not want to sign this pledge because 1) it's meaningless and 2) it included other provisions in it that are ridiculous for someone to have to sign publicly (e.g., "Personal fidelity to my spouse" - of course that's important but why should anyone have to sign a political pledge stating that?). Signing this pledge is nothing but political; it does not have any bearing on the morals or moral stance of the candidates. The pledge covers everything from personal marriage fidelity to Islam to decreasing the deficit to military policy. Even assuming all of the points should be supported (I'm not saying they should be, necessarily), it's insulting to be expected to sign it.

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    July 13, 2011 7:17 p.m.

    And who appoints the federal judges? Oh yes, I almost forgot, the president. It is very important to have a president who supports these things, because if you have one like our current one who does not you get judges who will reflect his views in their rulings. Elections matter.

  • MarieDevine Divine-Way Kansas City, MO
    July 13, 2011 7:16 p.m.

    signing the pledge would require them to agree with all that is in them.

    "The points include the promise to be faithful to their spouses, enforce the federal Defense of Marriage Act and support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage."

    The wording and adding a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage would be sufficient to block signatures. That should not be used to denounce candidates. They can say clearly, I will not support gay rights, most can be dealt with without reference to the gay issue. Gay marriage is condemned in all holy books; we cannot legally legislate it as acceptable without violating our religion clause in the US Constitution.

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    July 13, 2011 7:05 p.m.

    I regret having ever voted for Romney. I already had decided a while ago that I could not vote for someone who had donated to Planned Parenthood. This just reconfirms that I was right in my assesment that I can not in good conscience support him.

  • Kimball Woodruff Salt Lake City, UT
    July 13, 2011 6:26 p.m.

    I'm shocked! For once Mitt didn't do the politically expedient thing.

  • Christy Beaverton, OR
    July 13, 2011 5:05 p.m.

    Anti Government | 9:29 p.m.

    Romney rejected because he is a liberal.


    No. He rejected because he's not crazy.

  • sid 6.7 Holladay, UT
    July 13, 2011 5:00 p.m.

    I am a fan of Huntsman and if I had to vote Repub he is the man I would go with. I have never cared for Mit but this situation has opened my eyes a little bit. I am impressed with Mit standing his ground and not letting these people threaten him into a signature.

    Good on ya Romney!

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 13, 2011 4:17 p.m.

    @ worf "'Pagan--you put to much trust in others (journalists). A champion thinks and forms opinions on there own.'"

    And on what does a champion base his or her opinions? Facts and data? Made up stuff from the ether? What? And how do you find these things on which you base your opinions?

    Don Quixote tilted at windmills. Was he a champion because he formed opinions on his own?

    Winston Churchill wrote for a newspaper and it can be assumed he read them as well. Was he not a champion?

    Just because information or a fact are printed in the newspaper, that does not make them false and something that should be ignored.

  • donn layton, UT
    July 13, 2011 4:06 p.m.

    Romney,supported rights for gay couples in Massachusetts, was criticized in Iowa by some Iowa social conservatives during his 2008 campaign, when he finished second in the caucuses after aggressively courting Christian conservatives. Mormons will support Romney no matter what,not Christians.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    July 13, 2011 3:23 p.m.

    'A champion thinks and forms opinions on there own.' - worf | 3:03 p.m. July 13, 2011

    I thought you said he was running?

    'A champion runs alone.' - worf | 12:31 p.m.

    Now I'm just confused. :)

    Sarcasm off.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    July 13, 2011 3:03 p.m.

    'Pagan--you put to much trust in others (journalists). A champion thinks and forms opinions on there own.'

  • greenman108 Petaluma, CA
    July 13, 2011 2:51 p.m.

    Lbone opines: Standards of Morality provided by the Judeo-Christian ethic are what holds our civilization together. When anything goes, chaos and ultimate self-destruction ensue." --
    1. its not the case, that anything goes. You want to take "freedom to marry a person of either sex" and turn it into "ANYTHING goes". Not really.
    2. we do have legal marriage of same sex intimates in some states, and gosh, there is no chaos to be found. You must be wrong on your chaos theory, based on the fact of a land in which - except for the occasional assassination of MDs willing to provide legal abortions, we are a land of laws and there is certainly no chaos anywhere in the USA.
    Stop exaggerating, extrapolating from same sex marriage to CHAOS. its a mean spirited form of propaganda, intended to scare the children. tut tut.
    3. PS. In China they have different standards of morality. life goes on, without the Judeo-Christian sky-father's commandments. They have Confucian rules to live by. And recently, the repression of the RED Army. I prefer freedom. Freedom from the Red Army and freedom from the Taliban, and freedom from reactionary bible thumpers.

  • FDRfan Sugar City, ID
    July 13, 2011 1:19 p.m.

    "stand up to those Christians who've confused our politics with sunday school"

    Main Street Plaza.
    I agree with you about the pledges but I get amused at people like you who somehow assume the moral high ground with statements like above. Are you saying we should keep what we learn in Sunday School out of politics? Should religion be kept out of business as well?

  • Mc West Jordan, UT
    July 13, 2011 12:47 p.m.

    @Lbone | 8:07 a.m. "Mitt Romney is not helping matters by endorsing same-sex marriage and the wanton killing of unborn children."

    Your post only shows that you read headlines and do no research of your own to know the candidates. If you tried doing some reading on the issues and candidates you would know how false the above statement is.

    I get tired of the ignorant rants that come from some people on here.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    July 13, 2011 12:31 p.m.

    Pagan--you put to much trust in others. A champion runs alone.

  • Montana Mormon Miles City, MT
    July 13, 2011 12:08 p.m.

    People were worried that the Pope would have his own hotline to the Oval Office if JFK was president. He didn't.

    People are worried that the LDS Church President would have a hotline to the Oval Office if a Mormon were president. He wouldn't.

    So why should Evangelicals deserve a hotline to the Oval Office--regardless of the President's religious background? My sense from this article is that that is what they are trying to accomplish.

    Mitt Romney did the right thing in not signing such a pledge, regardless of his personal beliefs on the issue.

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    July 13, 2011 11:57 a.m.

    Romney rejected because he is smart enough not to sign something that means nothing. These pledges are a cheap political ploy.

  • RantBully Bend, OR
    July 13, 2011 11:55 a.m.

    By not signing this pledge, Romney shows why he is a much smarter candidate than Bachman or Santorum.

  • Arm of Orion Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 13, 2011 10:42 a.m.

    True Obama may lead Romney in the polls but it is not by much. The RCP average is about a 4.6%. That number is a bit skewed due to an earlier outlier of 13 % form the Ipsos institution. The rest were 2s 3s 4s 5s and 6s. So to say Romney is getting whopped or trumped is wishful thinking at its best. Lying at its worst.

  • charlie91342 Sylmar, CA
    July 13, 2011 10:31 a.m.

    I'm amused by posters like "no fit in SG | 8:05 p.m" who stated "say bye, bye to any tea party and ultra right Republican votes".

    Romney is going to get a lot more votes from people like me, a socially liberal but fiscally conservative voter. He just broadened his base considerably!! anyone that caters to the tea party won't get any votes from the largest category of voters - the middle.

    Tea party is a bunch of whackos that wouldn't know how to run a country. They want to do away with the FDA?? I like my food clean, thank you very much.

  • greenman108 Petaluma, CA
    July 13, 2011 8:36 a.m.

    1. this article does not accurately represent the expressed point of view of candidate former MN Gov Pawlenty, who has asked for changes to be made before being willing to sign it.

    2. I do not support Pawlenty.

    3. I agree with KM of Cedar Hills UT who notes that there are issues of importance to our nation's survival and same sex marriage is not one of them. The military industrial complex succeeded this past week in getting Congress to approve a new defense budget INCREASE while the GOP simultaneously claimed they were going to reduce the debt.

    4. Getting out the vote by finding ways to divide the citizens by their sexual or religious preferences is low.
    Its none of our business whether homosexuals marry men. Its none of our business whether lesbians marry women.
    Live in peace and deal with your own lives in love and harmony.

  • My2Cents Kearns, UT
    July 13, 2011 8:33 a.m.

    Good for Romney. These activist should be arrested and ashamed of themselves trying to blackmail and threaten people in government.

  • Monsieur le prof Sandy, UT
    July 13, 2011 8:17 a.m.

    My first reaction was "What was he thinking?" Then I backed off and wondered what the other points of the pledge were. The writer of the article does his readers a disservice by not including other points of the pledge that might be offensive to Mitt (and the rest of us).

  • Lbone Salt Lake City, UT
    July 13, 2011 8:07 a.m.

    Romney is really a Democrat in Republican clothes. If you're a Republican, follow the Republican platform...which he does not do.

    I still cannot believe how society has degenerated so much to take seriously such a silly notion as same-sex marriage. It establishes a dangerous precedent where associations considered ridiculous today can become the norm tomorrow. Standards of Morality provided by the Judeo-Christian ethic are what holds our civilization together. When anything goes, chaos and ultimate self-destruction ensue. We are witnessing daily the "good is evil" and "evil is good."

    Mitt Romney is not helping matters by endorsing same-sex marriage and the wanton killing of unborn children.

  • Doug10 Roosevelt, UT
    July 13, 2011 7:48 a.m.

    It is a moot matter whether Mitt signs it or not.

    No president gets to choose if gay marriage is legal or not, or whether the country should have abortions. That is all decided in the courts.

    Case in point is shortly after Obama was elected they asked him his opinion on abortion and he said "every person should have counselling before recieving an abortion" Both parties lashed out at him, yet his opionion as president matters the same as the rest of the readers of this paper, and not much more. For this example and his current stance on the budget Obama has shown he is a moderate and is tolerable compared to past Dem presidents.

    The courts handle these matters without regard to feelings but in keeping with the laws of the land.

    Mitt may think he is the front runner but recent polls show him neck and neck with Palin and as far as I know she isn't even running yet, and there is a long time til the primaries.

  • Vince here San Diego, CA
    July 13, 2011 7:41 a.m.

    I applaud Romney's refusal to sign the pledge - however, still looking for

    a candidate to sign a pledge to support same-sex marriage.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 13, 2011 7:35 a.m.

    Romney did the right thing in this issue.

    The pledge is an affront to GLBT Americans and should be considered an affront to ALL Americans.

    I could never vote for a candidate willing to sign such a discriminatory document (and I still don't plan on voting for Romney).

  • FDRfan Sugar City, ID
    July 13, 2011 7:26 a.m.

    We need a president who has wisdom - the wisdom to get input from the wise.
    We don't necessarily need a president that has accumulated an abundance of wealth.
    We need a president who is not tied to pledges except to do his/her best.
    We need a president who considers all of the people.
    We need a president who has the courage to do what he thinks is right.
    We need a president that is not a puppet to special interests.
    We need a president that is not beholding to some loud mouth bullies.
    I thought we had a candidate like that with Mitt Romney but his no tax pledge says too much about what kind of president he would be.
    Greed and love of money still have adverse effects to society.
    Wealth should be used to promote good. God has it all. How does He use it?

  • milhouse Atlanta, GA
    July 13, 2011 7:21 a.m.

    I'm considerably more worried about Christian law than Islamic law. Not that one is worse than the other, but the Christians seem much more capable of actually implementing something.

  • ER in EUR Belgrade, Serbia
    July 13, 2011 3:02 a.m.

    Good for you Mitt. That there is some truth in the pledge does not make it all true. By not signing he has signaled he is not going to be "wagged", but will do the wagging. He is not the tail.

    These groups that want to set themselves up as Kingmakers would have no power if all of the candidates ignored them and set their own agenda. By signing these they are saying they are willing to enter agreements that preclude further discussion. Something the eveangelicals and Tea Partiers want.

    I am a conservitive and support marriage between a man and a woman, but what else was in the pledge?

    I say it again, Good for you Mitt.

  • morpunkt Glendora, CA
    July 12, 2011 11:28 p.m.

    (Cont.), However, there will be enough votes for him, coming from an even larger voting block, than that of the Evangelicals, the Independents. Mitt can win, even if many Evangelicals sit-out this election, due to disdain for a Mormon candidate. The Independent voting block it that big.

  • morpunkt Glendora, CA
    July 12, 2011 11:25 p.m.

    Mitt is smart and looking better, as time goes on.
    Even if Mitt signed the pledge, it wouldn't matter in Iowa. That state voted for Huckabee, last election and merely replaced him with Bachmann, this time around.
    It's not worth his effort, neither in South Carolina, for that matter.
    However, there will be

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    July 12, 2011 11:21 p.m.

    Just look at Romney's track record. During the last Presidential Election he was the only Republican Candidate that was still married to his first and only spouse, if I remember correctly. That should tell one louder than any words or signed pledge what he thinks constitutes a "marriage."

  • carambola MESA, AZ
    July 12, 2011 11:13 p.m.

    Still has my vote so far. I'm glad he didn't sign it, and I'm pretty conservative. Frankly those on the far right come across as nut jobs and embarrass me. I'm pretty sure Mitt Romney is still in favor of recognizing marriage as between one man and one woman. And I'm okay with him wanting homosexual partners to have some rights too. I may not agree with their lifestyle choices, but they still need to be treated with respect and dignity.

  • KM Cedar Hills, UT
    July 12, 2011 10:59 p.m.

    Who cares. I just want to know that the next president will pledge to not be a warmonger and get us out of immoral and unsustainable wars. I want to know that the next president will stop the insane spending of taxpayer money, of borrowing and of printing us into slavery. Who ever is willing to do this has my vote.

  • Lux et Veritas Draper, UT
    July 12, 2011 10:58 p.m.

    Romney's decision not to sign the ridiculous "pledge" is indicative of his standing as a legitimate candidate who is can actually beat President Obama.

    It's time for the GOP to stop catering to the loud, radical fringe of the party and get back to what really matters (and what voters actually care about) - fiscal restraint and economic growth.

    Those who did sign the pledge will be long forgotten come November 2012.

  • St Gorgeous SLC, UTAH
    July 12, 2011 10:52 p.m.

    Good on you Mitt, you made the right decision.

  • SL Rexburg, ID
    July 12, 2011 10:39 p.m.

    If he gets the nomination, this sort of thing (rejecting extremeists)will go very well with moderates and independents like myself. It will also help him in New Hampshire. The absolutism of the far right is getting scary.

  • Main Street Plaza Salt Lake City, UT
    July 12, 2011 10:30 p.m.

    Good for Romney. The GOP needs more candidates brave enough to stand up to those Christians who've confused our politics with sunday school. Iowa is going to become irrelevant to the GOP nomination process because of these dunderheaded litmus tests.

  • mecr Bountiful, UT
    July 12, 2011 10:28 p.m.

    One thing is believing marriage is between man and woman, and another one is what those tea partiers are trying to do: instill hate among citizens. I am glad Mitt didn't play their game. He has my vote.

  • IndeMak South Jordan, UT
    July 12, 2011 10:12 p.m.

    Allow Mitt to explain himself.

  • B Logan, UT
    July 12, 2011 10:10 p.m.


    He's getting trumped by Obama? Did I read that right? In what possible way?? I don't think ANYONE is getting trumped by Obama right now.

    I am generally in favor of what the Tea Party is doing and I don't know that this 'pledge' is necessarily a Tea Party centerpiece. Either way, it's a stupid and divisive pledge. Smart move by Romney.

  • gnightjohnboy PROVO, UT
    July 12, 2011 10:06 p.m.

    "We are standing firm that the 14 points of the marriage vow are right on target and we are creating higher standards for the presidential candidates," said Julie Summa, director of marketing and public outreach for The Family Leader. "We are not backing away from that at all."


    Romney's refusal to sign this stupid family leader pledge is finally something I can agree with him on. People running for the office of president should be subject to one pledge only, and that's the oath of office they take after winning. Anything else beforehand or after is trying to supplant the constitution.

  • junkgeek Agua Dulce, TX
    July 12, 2011 9:52 p.m.

    This is the first smart thing Romney's done. Romney isn't going to need Iowa to win the nomination. But he's still getting trumped by Obama.

  • TexasMom Flower Mound, TX
    July 12, 2011 9:49 p.m.

    I think these "pledges" are wrong the way they are. First of all, who made them the litmus test be being a viable candidate? Second, if someone agrees in general with the pledge but has a problem with one part or the wording or something like that then it gets blown out of proportion and they get labeled as being opposed to even the general idea of it. That is dishonest.

    I went to Austin to fight for the Defense of Marriage Act in Texas several years ago but I wouldn't have signed that pledge either. I'm getting really tired of all he strong armed tactic so prevelent in politics today. If there isn't even room for compromise between people who are "on the same side" (either side) then what hope is there for the nation as a whole??

  • Anti Government Alpine, UT
    July 12, 2011 9:29 p.m.

    Romney rejected because he is a liberal.

    He is the creator of obamacare by first introducing it in MA.

    Now gay marriage.

    This guy may be fiscally more conservative but he certainly is not a true conservative.

    He is a political chamelon who will do anything to get elected. That is the problem. They all sell-out to get elected.

    After this happens with every candidate we get, how do we expect anything but the perpetual failure of administration after adminstration.

    More of the same coming up regardless of who gets elected.

    How depressing.

    The choice is bad and then worse.

  • idablu Idaho Falls, ID
    July 12, 2011 9:29 p.m.

    I agree Mahem and nyca, there are too many other provisions in this pledge that tie up their hands. I think he is making the right decision here. Although Pagan's semi endorsement of Romney doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy about supporting Romney.

  • Laser Iowa City, IA
    July 12, 2011 9:26 p.m.

    Good for him. Romney is a strong, rock solid, supporter of traditional marriage. But there needs to be fine line drawn between same sex marriage and dignified treatment of an individual no matter what they do in their personal life.

    If you placed a document that said will you support that marriage is between a man and a women, he would sign it in a heartbeat.

  • MAYHEM MIKE Salt Lake City, UT
    July 12, 2011 9:02 p.m.

    I, too, support traditional marriage only between a man and a woman, but applaud Mitt's refusal to adhere to The Family Leader's pledge (or any other pledge by those who are not running or who are not our elected officials). I agree completely with nyca411, above. Who made this group the "leader?" They do not speak for me, although I consider myself a conservative Republican. I fear any candidate who absolutely pledges to follow a certain course of action, thus ruling out the flexibility required to make hard decisions as changing times demand. Most important, I support candidates who pledge to leave it to the individual states--not the federal government or the president-- to decide moral issues.

  • nyca411 Menlo Park, CA
    July 12, 2011 8:35 p.m.

    Why should this Family Leader group determine who the GOP's nominee is? Who gave the Family Leader group the authority to say that anyone who doesn't sign this "no gay marriage" pledge (which contains many more provisions beyond gay marriage) is therefore IN FAVOR OF gay marriage? This is not a cause-and-effect document. I hate these pledges that arise at every presidential campaign, forcing candidates to "sign them or else." Isn't that called BLACKMAIL? Mitt Romney does not support gay marriage, period.

  • FDRfan Sugar City, ID
    July 12, 2011 8:33 p.m.

    He should not have signed the no tax pledge. Who knows what will happen in the next few years?

  • Hellooo Salt Lake City, UT
    July 12, 2011 8:31 p.m.

    Say good bye to the nomination Mr. Romney's true ultra libral roots finally show themselves. Enought that the ultra-left commenter hereon offer their support.

  • no fit in SG St.George, Utah
    July 12, 2011 8:05 p.m.

    Mitt, say "bye, bye" to any tea party and ultra right Republican votes.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    July 12, 2011 7:44 p.m.

    '...signed the The Family Leader's 14-point pledge, which calls on the candidates to denounce same-sex marriage rights, pornography, same-sex military accommodations and forms of Islamic law.' - Article

    Because homosexuals who serve in it's US military...

    ALWAYS follow Islamic law.

    Sarcasm off.

    Despite what others have said:

    *'Gays greatest threat to America, Buttars says' - By Aaron Falk - DSnews - 02/19/09

    Huntsman and Romney truly are the best Republican canidates I have seen in quite some time.

    And while they are a fantastic example of people who adhere to the will of the PEOPLE...

    instead of party politics...

    Obama has done more than any other president for LGBT rights.

    *'Pentagon study dismisses risk of openly gay troops' - By Anne Flaherty - AP - Published by DSNews - 11/30/10

    While Obama gets my vote...

    this small gesture from Romney reminds me that there are good in the other side as well.