What is Wrong With The Right?
I was planning a scathing post on the epic fail that is the choice of Sarah Palin as Republican VP nominee, but after seeing that woefully unprepared, out-of-her-depth interview with Katie Couric I just can’t do it. Not right now anyway, seems unnecessarily cruel. She’s apparently going to have some more interviews before the VP debate; depending on how people perceive her performances afterwards, I may have to resurrect my original objections.
But I do want to address something that her supporters tout, that I have not heard her come out and say in so many words. Her saintly shouldering of the “burden” of a special-needs child. I actually heard a girl in line at the store say just how much she admires Palin for that. Look, having a child with special-needs doesn’t make you extraordinary, or a saint, or a martyr; it makes you a mom, just like every other mom in the world. No better, no worse. I’m sure Sarah Palin herself does not look on her child as a burden, so why this public saint-making?
Oh yes, she found out, through amniocentesis, that she was carrying a child with Downs Syndrome and made the choice to continue her pregnancy. So what.
Why is it so amazing to people on the right that she would have her baby. Would these same people choose to terminate if they found out they were having a special-needs child? Is that now an acceptable reason to compromise one’s personal convictions? Are these people against terminating pregnancies except if the baby isn’t “perfect” and then it’s fine and dandy? So I guess that’s what makes Palin so saintly for having her “imperfect” baby. Well then, it seems that lots of moms (and dads, too) should be up for sainthood, including lots of Democrats. Which, no doubt, comes as quite a surprise to Phyllis Schlafly.
On September 2, Phyllis Schlafly went on a radio show and spewed forth this hateful bile: “If Sarah Palin were a Democrat, she would have aborted the baby. That’s the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. And Sarah Palin demonstrated that she is pro-life in contra to all of the Democrats.”
She continued on with some statistics and the assertion that Democrats are full-on all about the abortions. Must be why none of us ever have any kids. Oh wait, we do. What do you know about that?
Before I move on let me set the record straight, (addendum) Shlafly-style. Contra to all of the Republicans, we (Democrats) believe that no one should be discriminated against because of race, religion, ethnic background, gender, age, ability, or sexual orientation (I think of it more as “sexual hard-wiring”); we believe that all people should have a living wage and affordable healthcare and enough to eat; we believe that quality education is the first step to a better life; we believe that concern for children does not stop at birth; we believe that families have value, all families of all configurations, not just some faux-50’s “ideal” family; we believe that hatred is not a family value; we believe the earth is not ours to destroy; we believe that waging preemptive war is a bad thing; we believe that religious beliefs are best taught in the church and in the home and should not be promoted in schools; we have respect for people of faith, different faiths, or no faith at all and are not so presumptuous to imagine that we can force others to our personal beliefs; and for the record, Phyllis, being pro-choice means that we respect each other enough to trust that each woman is capable of making her own medical choices, that we have absolutely no right to dictate what happens inside of someone else’s body.
So there, I’ve just schlaflied all Republicans. I have presented my personal beliefs as the beliefs of all Democrats, painting those high-minded ideals as the polar opposite of what all Republicans believe, regardless. I have vilified all Republicans, assuming that they all are greedy, selfish, bigoted, ignorant, fearful, hate-filled warmongers. (addendum)It isn’t right when I do it, and it is certainly wasn’t right when Schlafly did it. I know a lot of folks who vote republican because they mistakenly believe the lies put forth by people like Schlafly and others. (addendum)But I do not think they are evil, just deceived.
(addendum) But obviously many prominent right-wingers think all Democrats are evil, Schlafly, Dobson, Pat Robertson, too many to mention. And they have no problem spreading lies and hatred. (all addendums are dedicated to Bob.)
With such public figures proclaiming Democrats’ beliefs to be “evil”, is it any wonder that a delusional man walked into the UU church in Knoxville and opened fire? Is it any wonder that doctors have been murdered for providing legal, requested healthcare for women? Is it wonder that women still are at a wage disadvantage compare to men? Is it any wonder that people think single-payer healthcare is bad? Is it any wonder that gay people are still denied the right to marry the people they love in most states? Is it any wonder that synagogues and mosques are still targets of hatred? Is it any wonder that good stewardship of the earth has been rejected as weak? Is it any wonder that science and critical thinking have been thrown over in favor of superstition and denial? Is it any wonder children, and their care and their health and their education, are not our society’s first priority?
But children are generally a parent’s first priority. And even though I’m sure that Palin and I have very different parenting philosophies, I have no doubt she makes her children a priority and loves them to pieces. But she’s no saint for carrying a pregnancy to term.
And here’s why: If either of my children had had Downs, I too would’ve carried them to term, because I would have not found out until after they were born. I got kind of a late start on having babies and was offered amniocentesis for my daughter. The doctor told me there was a slight risk of miscarriage, and after having two miscarriages I really didn’t want to even slightly risk another. But my decision to forgo the amnio was cemented when the doctor asked both of us, “Would it make a difference?” He was asking us if we would terminate such a pregnancy. We both said, quite forcefully, “No!” And he told us not to take the chance.
That decision didn’t make me a saint. That decision made me a mom, just like every other woman who has a baby. And even if I had decided to go ahead with amnio and had gotten a diagnosis of Downs, I still would’ve had both my babies and not changed a thing! Hey, look at that, a Democrat who wouldn’t have terminated her pregnancies!
But I’m still not a saint, and neither is Sarah Palin.
September 29th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Well spoken, well written and well thought out. Democrat, Republican, Independent, Green, left, right or whatever- just because a woman finds out that her child will be a special needs child and decides to carry it to term and love, feed, clothe and care for them isn’t a political ideal. It’s a parenting ideal- some folks have it and some don’t. My wife and I don’t have children, and are still undecided right now. But I am pretty certain that it wouldn’t make a bit of difference if we were to find out that a child of ours would have Downs, CF, CP, or athletes foot. If we make that choice to have children, we will love them unconditionally. Period. Sarah Palin isn’t a saint, she’s a mom.
September 29th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
You know I have thought a lot about this issue and no one else has articulated by thoughts the way that you have. To me not only does it make Palin a saint they are encouraging the idea that someone who has Downs Syndrome is defective and less than. They can only construct that child as a burden if they already believe he is less than from birth. Of course this kind of thinking allows them to justify all the cutbacks they are continually trying to make to social programs.
September 29th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Let me say this first: I would certainly never consider myself a Democrat, not necessarily a republican either, but if I had to choose I would go with the GOP. Most importantly, I consider myself strongly pro-choice.
Now, this is the kind of article that really ticks me off. Not because of all the abortion stuff, but because you felt the need to put in the one paragraph proudly exclaiming that all republicans are evil. (The part that insinuates republicans discriminate against all types of classes, doesn’t care about education, the environment, children after birth, family value, etc)
I just have to ask: why did you feel the need to put this in there? This kind of thing is what turns people like me away - the placing of people into classes like this. Now, I can understand that you might be trying to make a point that there are people of other parties who do the same thing, but that doesn’t make me feel any less insulted from reading that paragraph.
Just a suggestion to stick to what you are debating, rather than turning every issue into us vs them.
September 29th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Dear Bob,
Reading comprehension is your friend. Please read the first sentence of this paragraph again.
“So there, I’ve just schlaflied all Republicans. I have presented my personal beliefs as the beliefs of all Democrats, painting those high-minded ideals as the polar opposite of what all Republicans believe, regardless. I have vilified all Republicans, assuming that they all are greedy, selfish, bigoted, ignorant, fearful, hate-filled warmongers. I know a lot of folks who vote republican because they mistakenly believe the lies put forth by people like Schlafly and others.”
Phyllis Schlafly painted every single Democrat as liable to abort a pregnancy because of Downs. Even though others tried to prove differently to her, she steadfastly maintained her small-minded bias. So I showed the effect of such assertions by “schlaflying” Republicans. Since I now have no confidence that others will practice reading comprehension, I will go make my point a little clearer.
September 30th, 2008 at 9:02 am
Very well spoken - I find myself frequently defending these charges against the Democratic Party. I run into quite a few conservatives who swear that it is the Dems who are ALWAYS vilifying them.
Why do you think that Palin hid this pregnancy for long? That seems out of character for her?
September 30th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
I love this post. Your succinct description of your progressive beliefs match mine perfectly.
I’ve linked you on Facebook and I’m hoping that many, many people read this. Thank you for writing it!
September 30th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
No, Sarah is not a saint because she kept her child, however, the reason that people think it is exceptional is because nowadays, it is. The vast majority of people who learn during the pregnancy that the child has Downs, aborts the child.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/65500197/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
My reading comprehension is good, so I know that is not really the center of your argument, but it is an important fact. Gov. Palin and (hypothetically) you are in the exceptional 10% of those who would make that decision.
September 30th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Jason-I get what you’re saying here, but for women like Sarah Palin, for whom termination is not an option under any circumstances, continuing with such a pregnancy is not unusual, exceptional or unexpected. She was simply adhering to her worldview. So my only question is: if she would have the child no matter what, why take the risk of amniocentesis?
October 1st, 2008 at 8:35 pm
BP
I now forgive you for OSU beating the tar out of TCU because of this post.
“That decision didn’t make me a saint. That decision made me a mom
Just like my Mom and my sisters who are mom’s.
Thank you for this post
October 1st, 2008 at 11:32 pm
Well, adhering to a consistent world view–especially in trying circumstances–is laudable. You know, “putting your money where your mouth is.” It is not, by default, saintly (though it is a prereq). As to why she got amniocentesis (I had to just cut-and-paste that): that is a good question. I put it to my wife, the hospital social worker, who speculates that it may simply have been standard operating procedure for someone her age. I would be interested in hearing a reporter ask the question. She might have to get back later with the answer, but we could hold her to it.
October 5th, 2008 at 6:41 am
A wonderful post.
October 5th, 2008 at 11:33 am
It is odd to me that so many on the very hard right (and probably something similar is true on the very hard left) don’t see “liberalism” as a merely a DIFFERENT approach to the ills of the nation but as absolute evil. They can’t acknowledge that there is another idea but that any idea but their own is impossible. This is coming from a man who was once an economic conservative (we’ve seen how well those policies worked). I have changed my politics over the years, having tried one way and seeing it be insufficient. I was open to considering a new way. So many people can’t make this leap.
John McCain is the man who can lead us into the 20th Century!