Friday, August 29, 2008

McCain's pick: A Pro-Life Feminist. Go Sarah!

I'm jazzed! I heard about the choice when I was driving home from work. I don't have time to make my own comments, so I'll just pass along the Feminists For Life press release.

("Madam Vice President" -- I like the sound of that!)

FFL Member Nominated for Vice President of the United States

Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, has been selected by Republican presidential nominee Senator John McCain as his running mate.

According to The Anchorage Daily News published August 6, 2006, "Palin said last month that no woman should have to choose between her career, education and her child." The article went onto say that "she's a member of a pro-woman but anti-abortion group called Feminists for Life." "I believe in the strength and the power of women, and the potential of every human life,' she said."

Feminists for Life's policy is that all memberships are confidential. However, since Governor Palin has been public about her membership, we can confirm that Palin became a member in 2006.

Earlier this week Feminists for Life reacted to the inclusion of woman-centered solutions in the Democratic Party platform, and the inclusion of FFL's trademarked message, "Women deserve better® than abortion,©" in the Republican Party platform.

FFL President Serrin Foster said "It is unprecedented to see the platforms of both major U.S. political parties incorporate key pieces of FFL's unique message."

"Of course there is a certain excitement about the recent movement toward FFL's woman-centered solutions and message by the parties, and now the selection of a pro-life feminist as the Vice Presidential nominee. But as a nonpartisan organization, we cannot endorse any candidates," Foster said.

“FFL members represent a broad political as well as religious spectrum, and we remain both nonpartisan and nonsectarian. There are many issues outside Feminists for Life’s mission. Feminists for Life is dedicated to systematically eliminating the root causes that drive women to abortion—primarily lack of practical resources and support—through holistic, woman-centered solutions. We recognize that abortion is a reflection that our society has failed to meet the needs of women and that too often women have settled for less. Women deserve better than abortion,” said Foster.

As each party takes steps to acknowledge and meet the needs of women, Feminists for Life is prepared to work with our elected leaders on behalf of girls and women who deserve far better than abortion. FFL has a long track record of working with both sides of the political aisle on major legislation such as the Violence Against Women Act, Child Support Enforcement Act, and much more. Many members of Congress have already stepped forward to cosponsor the FFL-inspired bill with bipartisan support, the Elizabeth Cady Stanton Pregnant and Parenting Student Services Act.

"We invite all parties, all public servants, and all people to join us on the bridge of woman-centered solutions," Foster said.

And I have to add a collection of links.

I'm so jazzed! Why does this have to come down the pike when I'm about to go spend a three day weekend with no internet!?

  • McCain/Palen For Life

  • Jill Stanek: McCain picks Palin!

  • Dawn Patrol: Obama, Face Down - Quotes an email from Jill Stanek: "Palin chose life for her baby with Down syndrome. Obama relegated these babies to death despite testimony that at least one aborted-alive Down's baby had been abandoned to die in a hospital soiled-utility room."

  • Neocon Express: OK! I'm on board!

  • My Domestic Church: I Support Sarah Palin!

  • MommyLife: (The pot calling the kettle black.)

  • Wisconsin Right to Life Praises Palin

  • Issues Statement Supporting Palin Pick

  • Constitutionally Right: Obama’s Campaign Attacks Sarah Palin For Inexperience

  • Right Wing News: The Hillary Clinton Forum: We're Voting McCain/Palin Now

  • Stop the ACLU: More On the Wisdom of Choosing Palin

  • Stop the ACLU again: Fred on Sarah

  • The Anchoress: Palin brings GOP Flavor in ‘08

  • Viewpoint Journal: Governor Palin Could Be A ‘Heartbeat Away’

  • Susan B. Anthony List: It is true!! Sarah Palin for Vice President!

  • Christian News WireShe's Perfect

    I'll try to get myself and my Mac to a McDonald's tomorrow to blog some more.


    Just some more excellent links (from Vital Signs Blog:

  • Dennis Prager :: Columnist
    Dobson: "I would pull that lever" for John McCain - Sarah Palin

  • The Corner at NRO: The hostess with the moosest -- Governor Palin has run a state and a town and a commercial fishing operation, whereas .... Senator Obama ain't run nothin' but his mouth. .... Post-partisan? She took on her own party's corrupt political culture directly while Obama was sucking up to Wright and Ayers and being just another get-along Chicago machine pol .... Likewise, on abortion, we're often told it's easy to be against it in principle but what if you were a woman facing a difficult birth or a handicapped child? Been there, done that.

  • Weekly Standard: What Palin Does - 4. Revs up the base AND excites independents, which no one else in the party, or perhaps in the world, could have accomplished.

  • The Corner at NRO: McCain-Palin? - From a purely tactical aspect, Palin would knock the legs out from under Obama's monopoly hold on "change."

  • USA Today: Friends: VP choice has 'very strong' values -- Actually this piece isn't just what her friends say. It's what her critics say and a look at specifics, such as the allegations of overstepping her bounds to call for her ex-brother-in-law's head on a pike.

  • The Corner at NRO: Palin Pros & Cons - Today, I go from from an ambivalent McCain supporter driven more by fear of Obama to someone who can feel good about the prospects of a McCain administration. Amen to that!

  • Wall Street Journal: Profile of Alaska's Sarah Palin: Governor, Reformer, Mother -- Adds a lot of info, not just another "Hip, hip -- HOORAY!"

  • Power Line Blog: Talk about an outsider!

    Not to mention, as Craig Ferguson points out, she's got a "naughty librarian" vibe to her:

    Hate to disappoint you, Craig, but she's married.

    RS said...

    This is why violence against women has become a particularly difficult issue politically.

    Women want safety, but informed women oppose the injustice in the Violence against Women Act.

    Senator Joe Biden proudly proclaims that he was regularly and severely beaten by his older sister as a child and as an adolescent. This is the same sister that raised his two sons after his wife and daughter were killed in an auto accident.

    Biden has often claimed that the Violence against Women Act is the greatest achievement of his career. He also claims that a woman cannot be a perpetrator of domestic violence, despite the fact that hundreds of studies show that women commit acts of domestic violence as often as, or more often than men. Many studies also show that lesbian women physically attack their intimate partners at least as often as heterosexual men.

    As a result of Biden's Violence against Women Act, the federal government pays states to create laws effectively requiring that men be removed from their homes and families without even an allegation of violence, with no legitimate standards of evidence, when a woman makes a claim that she is afraid.

    Elaine Epstein, president of the Massachusetts Bar Association (1999), has said "the facts have become irrelevant... restraining orders are granted to virtually all who apply. Regarding divorce cases, she states "allegations of abuse are now used for tactical advantage". According to Epstein, who is also a former president of the Massachusetts Women’s Bar Association, restraining orders are doled out "like candy" and "in virtually all cases, no notice, meaningful hearing, or impartial weighing of evidence is to be had."

    State restraining order laws are starting to fall because they're unconstitutional. The federal law behind them, written by Joe Biden, is likely to fall as well, not because it isn’t popular, but because it is clearly unconstitutional.

    Supporting Documentation

    Here are some of the facts regarding Biden's abuse at the hand of his sister. During senate hearings held on December 11, 1990, Biden testified to the abuse.

    This recent CDC study indicates that women between the ages of 18 and 28 initiate reciprocal violence against their intimate partners about as often as men. It also indicates that women initiate non-reciprocal violence against their intimate partners more than twice as often as men.

    Here is a link to a bibliography of over 200 studies indicating that women are as violent as men in their intimate relationships:

    According to the US Department of Justice, women also abuse, neglect and kill their children at significantly higher rates than men. Here’s some of the data on child homicides.

    Research clearly indicates that lesbian battery is at least as common as heterosexual battery.

    Cathy Young reports on the Elaine Epstein quote and the broader issue at here:

    and provides in depth analysis here:

    Anonymous said...

    How surprising is this!

    Go Christina!!


    Christina Dunigan said...

    Thanx for the info, RS.

    Anonymous said...

    ha ha crazy Glaswegian like my grandmother.


    David Veksler said...

    Whereas previously, a Down’s child could be born without the prior knowledge of the mother, going forward, a parent with a Down’s child will likely have made a conscious choice to have that child. As prenatal testing for trisomy 21 becomes ubiquitous, Down’s children (and eventually those with other genetic disorders) will increasingly become symbols of faith – a freak show meant to communicate the “family values” of their parents. The children will become public sacrifices made by their parents for their faith. They will be a symbol of religious reverence in the same way as the scarred backs of Catholics who flagellate themselves, or Buddhist monks who set themselves on fire, or Sunni Muslims who mutilate their girl’s genitals or Shiites who bloody their children’s heads with swords.

    Genuine moral virtues – such as integrity, honesty, and productivity are not useful as evidence of religious virtue. To the extent that their practical benefit is visible to everyone, they do not represent the special domain of religion. To demonstrate religious virtue, it is necessary to sacrifice authentic moral values in favor of “religious” values. The particular object of the sacrifice is not important – there is nothing particularly “biblical” about being prolife (the Christian bible just as easily supports the opposite position.) If Christian fundamentalists decided that cutting of one’s hand sufficed as proof of moral virtue, they would be wrong to do so, but not much more so than the numerous other ways that people find to be self-destructive.

    What is really vicious about fundamentalists in America is that the prey on the most vulnerable –poor pregnant young girls and women, those dying from painful terminal illnesses, the loved ones of brain-dead patients, — and children afflicted with terrible genetic illnesses. One can at least grasp the moral indifference with which a fundamentalist can force a single young mother to abandon her goals and dreams and condemn her and her child to poverty. But what can we say about a parent that chooses a life of suffering upon their child? If we are morally outraged by child rapists, how should we judge a parent who chooses a lifetime of suffering on their own child?

    Anonymous said...

    There are no words to express my complete bafflement at statements like the one above.My only recourse it to continue to pray for the conversion of hearts for people who believe like this. That the only life worth living is a "perfect" life. How unutterably selfish a position to take. I'm sorry that you feel harmed or violated in someway by having to view these "freak shows". Thank God their parents and all who meet them and get to know them see past their physical and mental limitations to the core of unadulterated love and kindness that they show to everyone...

    Christina Dunigan said...

    Down’s children (and eventually those with other genetic disorders) will increasingly become symbols of faith – a freak show meant to communicate the “family values” of their parents.

    In other words, you don't believe that those children have any inherent worth as human beings, that the only reason to give birth to them is as a means of doing some sort of penance.

    You're not bigoted, are you?