As a candidate whom many pro-lifers want to support, her actual abortion record and rhetoric is shocking to the conscience.
This is the actual headline describing Sarah Palin's pro-life bono-fides on a scarily radical site called Prolife Profiles.
Now recently I have started using the phrase "Oh yeah they are crazy. But they are not Sarah Palin crazy!" However I now recognize that using the Sarah Palin measuring tool for crazy does not even begin to measure how incredibly screwed up the thinking is for this group of zealots.
Here is just a sampling of their points of contention with Queen Ester.
Claims a Child's Right to Life comes from the Government: Palin undermines the God-given right to life of the unborn by wrongly indicating that a child's right to live comes from the government by the people rather than from the Creator. When the Anchorage Daily News asked, "to what extent should abortion be prohibited in Alaska?" Sarah should have answered correctly that Alaska should never allow a single innocent child to be put to death. Instead of providing leadership and teaching about the child's right to life, Palin passed the buck and wrote, "it would not be up to the governor... It would be up to the people of Alaska to discuss and decide..." The News did not ask Palin "how" but "should" abortion be prohibited. To see how wrong and destructive Palin's answer is, imagine an anti-slavery activist, or an opposition leader in NAZI Germany, when asked if blacks should be free, or if Jews should be protected by law, answered, "It would be up to the people to decide." When a Christian leader disregards the Creator as the source of human rights, in a populace appeal for power, such political cowardice further erodes the hope of the innocent.
The kind of convoluted thinking that goes into comparing a woman's right to control her own body to the persecution of the Jewish people in Nazi Germany, or the freeing of slaves in America, is a frightening thing to behold. No pro-choice person wants to promote abortion, but they also do not want to allow the government to force a young woman to give birth to a baby that may be very sick or the product of a rape or incest.
Have any of these people ever witnessed the heartbreak of a young mother who has to watch the life her newborn with Anencephaly slowly fade away as she stands on the other side of a plexiglass incubator powerless to save them? What compassionate person would condemn any parent to that?
Uses Liberal, Socialist Terminology: Palin's Facebook page uses liberal, pro-choice, socialist terminology even in a very politically sensitive context (trying to defend her pro-life credentials after appointing a Planned Parenthood board member to the Supreme Court). America is told that Palin believes in a culture of life "from cradle to grave." This is poor, even harmful, communication and shows a lack of political savvy. On the economic spectrum from freedom (capitalism) through socialism, to communism, Palin commits an economic faux pas by using a term that describes a socialist government which gives entitlements including health care, "from cradle to grave." Regarding abortion, using the phrase "cradle to grave" seems to betray a pretend ownership of pro-life values.
"Cradle to grave", or in other words "birth to death", is not a long enough span of time for these nut-jobs to have dominion over. They want to control what women do with their own bodies from the moment the fertilized egg first connects to their uterus and the very possibility for life exists. I am amazed they are not standing on a street corner waving signs condemning the menstrual cycle for killing "potential babies"or demanding that women in their late forties and early fifties take medication to delay Menopause so that they still retain the possibility of giving birth. If you want to bring up the term Nazism I think you have a found an appropriate application.
Thinks some Kids must be Killed: Palin promotes the egregious error that some abortions are medically necessary when she refers to non-elective child killing by writing, "I oppose the use of public funds for elective abortions." Abortion is always wrong because it's a baby; it's never right to intentionally kill a baby. Laws for "the life of the mother" are not meant to save the mother but to kill the baby.
This kind of black and white thinking is the very definition of intellectual lethargy. These people do not take the time to educate themselves, they simply listen to the propaganda that filters down from the pulpit, accept it as "revealed truth", and dare not commit the sin of questioning the validity of the information.
What they fail to realize is that if every potential human being were to be born on this tiny planet, the overcrowding and lack of resources would force us into the kind of war that would leave hundreds of millions dead and whole stretches of the planet burnt beyond recognition.
Creation Should Not be State Policy: Palin undermines the God-given right to life by advocating that evolution "should be taught as an accepted principle," and that God's hand in creation, "should not be part of state policy or a local curriculum..." But then, where do rights come from? Palin thus would keep from children the fundamental truth that even a deist like Thomas Jefferson acknowledged in our Declaration of Independence that people "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights [and] that among these are Life..."
Just in case you did not yet realize that this is a crowd with not much use for science.
And this is why they keep their children out of the public school system. Choosing instead to home school them or send them to Christian schools, where education is secondary to indoctrination. Remember, believing is more important than thinking. In other words the very thing that separates us from the animals we share this planet with, and the secret to our dominance, is deemed harmful to the furtherance of their agenda. Ponder that for a little while.
Summary: Sarah Palin claims to be personally pro-life but her words and actions prove that she is officially pro-choice and stands against the God-given right to life of the unborn. Even if Roe v Wade were reversed, Palin says she would still leave the decision to kill children to others. That's not leadership. Like the liberation of Germany in 1945, the road to protecting America's children might pass through fields of sacrifice. Whether or not she would see this as possibly costing her entire political future, ProlifeProfiles hopes that Mrs. Palin will take a new stand and make a true commitment to protect unborn children.
Wow! It is rare that I defend Sarah Palin, and I would not hurt yourself looking for instances on this blog, but this one time I have to applaud her for not COMPLETELY succumbing to this frightening mindset. These people are out of their freaking minds!
They are single issue fanatics who judge everybody through their very narrow pro-life prism. Surely NOBODY could pass their insane, anti-intellectual criteria!
Oops, I spoke too soon!
These are EXACTLY the kinds of people that Sarah Palin needs to support her in order to form a new political third party. But it is clear that if she wants to woo them she is going to have to get to a level of crazy even more crazy than "Sarah Palin crazy". So what do you think? Will she go there?
You know what? I think she is already on her way.
Update: Wow, it looks like Mother Jones wrote about the very same topic today. I had no idea.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Perhaps you're thinking of implantation, when the fertilized egg burrows into the uterine lining and a pregnancy is established, biologically-speaking. What these pious pricks are against is anything that interferes with that process, which is why they're anti-contraceptives too. True, they know nothing of science, or the fact that the body sheds most fertilized eggs - naturally and without fanfare - would give them pause.
ReplyDeletehttp://reason.com/archives/2004/12/22/is-heaven-populated-chiefly-by
Personally, I'd like to see some evidence that their deity exists and is creating humans. Barring that, they're simply trying to force their religion on everyone.
No matter how far right Sarah goes... there will always be other people and groups like this that will be further to the right.
ReplyDeleteDoes Sarah's church in Wasilla have a lightening rod on the steeple? Do they not have faith in God's protection?
Palin's statements about it "being up to the people of Alaska to decide," as well as her appointment of the "pro-choice" Alaska Supreme Court candidate (Morgan Christen), were both in keeping with the rule of law and following the Alaska Constitution -- even if they went against her own pro-life beliefs. In other words, she acted properly as governor by adhering to the constitution she had sworn an oath to abide by.
ReplyDeleteThe point is that the pro-life zealots don't give a damn about rule of law. In researching the series of blog posts I wrote at Henkimaa.com about the Miller v. Carpeneti case -- which is about conservative right-to-lifers trying to throw out AK Constitution provisions on how Alaska appoints its judges -- I came across a quote from a leader of Alaska Right to Life (or whatever its called) who literally stated that a judicial candidate's stand on abortion was the only thing she cared about.
So yes, the "Crazy Woman" (as our friend Phil calls her) is not quite as crazy as these people. She stayed within the rule of law in how she did her judicial appointments. Early in her term, she also stayed within the rule of law regarding an AK Supreme Court decision about benefits for same-sex partners of state workers. Republican legislators were urging her to defy that decision; she chose not to. Her decision there was one of the things that led me to believe, initially, that she might be okay as governor after all. (Another was that she appointed a good qualified person like Monegan to head up DPS. But we know what happened with that....)
Who knows, maybe one reason she quit her post was because she didn't want to be constrained any longer by her oath to uphold the Constitution. There's no doubt (e.g., Branchflower report on Troopergate) that she committed abuses of power while in office, but she didn't actually cause a constitutional crisis (as her predecessor Gov. Murkowski once nearly did with a judicial appointment).
I thought it interesting that she kept talking about "the situation" with respect to her pregnancy. I was half waiting for the pro-lifers to come out with the classic "It's not a "situation", it's a baaaaby."
ReplyDeleteWow - you are amazing. I didn't think it could be done. To find folks even crazier than the Palinbots. To think she is regarded as "too liberal" by some group is totally freaking weird.
ReplyDeleteI can imagine that these folks would even consider prosecuting women whose bodies reject fetuses which are abnormal because, after all, it must have been the woman's fault.
I wonder if these people would go after childless women, denigrating and stigmatizing them for being barren. After all, they must have decided not to bear precious bundles of joy.
I wonder if they even care that not all women are up to raising children. I guess raising them is somehow not related to giving birth to them.
Would these people make Down Syndrome girls give birth if they'd been molested?
Do they really think forcing a pregnancy on women whose bodies cannot bear childbirth good thing? What if the forced pregnancy kills the mother? Can we look to these people as the cause and prosecute them for being the reason behind the womn's death?
Do they really believe that severely deformed or brain-damaged babies have a hope at living a decent life? Do they not consider the pain and suffering forced pregnancies inflict upon the child itself if there are medical or mental problems?
Do they really believe "God" wants incest or rape? do they really believe "God" wants to double-victimize the girls or women upon whom these crimes are committed? What about the progeny created by incest? Do they not consider the genetic defects or how that affects the future offspring of those babies?
Goodness, where are these people getting their moral compass? Where are they getting their "vision?" Why is it that they have no compassion for the girls, women or children?
Who is behind the website you mentioned? Can it be traced so we can identify the morally bankrupt souls who are dishing out this cruel garbage?
Sorry, I meant to say "pregnancy", not pregnancy., I forgot the whole thing was fake there for a min.
ReplyDeleteDidn't think I would see people more extreme than she is on this subject, but there they are!
ReplyDeleteMight force her to defend herself, admit she made women pay for rape kits because of the Emergency contraception.
Andrea: I would also like to see proof of God, I have been searching all my life!!
ReplyDeleteReligious people need to acknowledge that no one knows anything for sure, so stop telling me you know and you know what this God wants!
Some people don't like to hear that god is the most prolific abortionist in the universe. Doctors say that about half of the fertilized eggs a woman has during her life are flushed out before implantation.
ReplyDeleteso, I would say that god knows this will happen and so, does not "zap" a soul into that embryo. If that is true, then god knows a woman will abort and so again, no soul for that embryo!
I apologize if I offend anyone but these head of the pin, fertilized egg arguments make me nuts.
yeah, she is on the way. Note that on Barb. Walters she didn't claim Abstinence only as a to prevent pregnancy, Bristol stint as an advocate for Candie's was not mention.
ReplyDeleteOn her book she is laying the foundation to discuss abortion in the family by claiming an error on a medical bill.
She is ready to be exposed and still prevale, it will be just a transformation.
and she continues to use colorfull language some Cristians would object, still she is willing to play a role on national politics, "if people will have me".
Teabaggers will have her.
To 11:12 Anonymous: great post. You made a great point and made us laugh at the same time. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteJust wait till they find out about her abortion.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing that is very disturbing about people who see the world in black and white, and would impose their values on others, is that they fail to recognize that a culture that tells a woman she must have a baby is equally capable of telling a woman she cannot have a baby. Equally authoritarian, equally evil.
ReplyDelete"They want to control what women do with their own bodies from the moment the fertilized egg first connects to their uterus and the very possibility for life exists."
ReplyDeleteHate to nit-pick but they want to start earlier than that. The "Life begins at Conception" thing means they want to control a woman's life 5 days before Pregnancy.
I don't know if this means they want all women of child bearing age to be treated as pregnant with the loss of freedoms that entails, or if they don't know biology. Pro-Life sites ban me when I ask that question.
What about the fact that she's talked about twice considering an abortion during the "pregnancy" with Trig. Considered it, but decided to have the baby. That's what we call "choice" honey, so I guess you really are pro-choice. Doesn't matter if it takes 5 seconds or 5 days to decide - it's ultimately that you consider your options and decide. Pro-choice does not mean choosing abortion, something the anti-abortion folks refuse to comprehend. Frankly, I'm a little surprised no one has called her on that yet.
ReplyDeleteI have just one question for any pro-life person:
ReplyDeleteHave you taken the same stand against war that the Quakers, Amish and Mennonites have?
If not, get outta my face, hypocrite.
Hmmm. I do believe that procreation is biology. Biology is a science. Ergo, one HAS to believe that science plays a major role in our being able to procreate.
ReplyDeleteAnd, I wonder how many of these pro-lifers (including Sarah Palin) would rush forward to adopt an unwanted child. Perhaps a child conceived through rape or incest? Let's see a show of hands, pro-lifers. How many of you will stand outside Planned Parenthood clinics and offer to take the child if the woman will carry it full term.
Any hands? Yeah, I thought not.