Friday, September 12, 2008

Something needs to be said...

I'm not a political person. Hell, by not voting in the past two elections, I'm part of a majority that should be held responsible for the past 8 years of my country. I'm not proud of this.

But this election is different. For the first time in my life, I care about voting. I'm passionate about a candidate and his policies. I'm ready for my country to change, and I believe Obama is the man to do it. More importantly, I'm terrified of the alternative. The Republican alternative.

Accordiing to the statistics, as a middle class white woman, I should be championing for Palin.

I should be opposed to Roe vs. Wade. Who CARES if it's my body? Who CARES if I'm raped and don't want to carry my attacker's child? Palin doesn't. She wants to reverse Roe vs. Wade and let individual states decide on what's best for my uterus. This might not be the most eloquent response, but are they fucking crazy? Why would I support the ideas that my body isn't in my control?

And another slap in the face - she wants an "abstinence only" sex ed policy. Does anyone honestly believe that just because you tell teens NOT to have sex they won't? Give me a break. Teach kids to be responsible. Teach kids to be safe. Teach kids to think for themselves instead of demonizing sex. Tell them the risks and what they can do to protect themselves. I guess if you're a teenage girl that chooses abstinence as your personal choice towards sex but then end up getting raped and get pregnant as a result, you can thank Mrs. Palin for your bastard child that reminds you every day of how you were violated in the most soul stealing way one can imagine. And not that I agree with the media scrutiny around her daughter's pregnancy, but I have to say that perhaps if this girl was given a proper dose of sex education, she would have at least made the father of her child wear a condom.

And what are her thoughts on homosexuality? Well, she can't say. She stutters a lot and dances around the question. But considering that she refers to the United States as a "Christian America," it looks a little bleak for all my LGBT friends. If Palin is in the White House, you better wave goodbye to any progress and civil rights you have fought hard for because I doubt a woman that believes in carrying a rapist's baby is going to champion any of your causes.

Gun control. She's against it. Duh. Surprisingly, I sit on the fence personally when it comes to this issue. HOWEVER, do i believe the average citizen needs a semi-automatic rifle? No. Palin does. And why does she believe this? She doesn't want to violate anyone's 2nd Amendment rights. The fact that this woman believes that everyone is entitled to own a gun but then turn around and say that women can't decide what to do with their own bodies is disgusting.

And now this Palin character is making it really personal. Rumors are swirling that she attempted to ban Harry Potter in her town's public library. She tried to ban the most beloved children's book of the past fifty years. She tried to ban a book that inspired a generation of readers. Don't mess with the Potter lady! Don't even go there!

Do I believe the book ban rumors? I know they are just that - rumors. Am I educating myself on Palin's policies? Yes. Does my further investigation of her make me even more enthusiastic about voting for Obama in November? You better believe it.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

"She wants to reverse Roe vs. Wade and let individual states decide on what's best for my uterus. This might not be the most eloquent response, but are they fucking crazy?"

Actually, even if elected, she cant reverse it. The Presidency, much less the VP cannot overturn a supreme court decision. There are only two ways of that happening: The supreme court reversing itself, or a two-third majority of both houses of congress voting to overturn it. So, Roe v Wade is pretty safe for say, the next 150 years or so. Even IF it was overturned, that does not mean that abortion will be banned. It means that it becomes a states right. You can look at the right to die for example, a state (I think it was wisconsin) decided to allow people to die by assisted suicide, and the courts upheld it.

"Why would I support the ideas that my body isn't in my control?"

Palin does not entertain that idea.

"And another slap in the face - she wants an "abstinence only" sex ed policy. Does anyone honestly believe that just because you tell teens NOT to have sex they won't?"

What with a pregnant teenaged daughter, she knows that better than most.

The importance in the policy is in the message you are delivering to the kids. Giving them the message that its better to wait for marriage to have sex is more smarter than giving them a condom, teaching them to use it, and telling them "here, have fun...oh, and be safe." You're practically telling them, giving them the green light to go out and have sex.

I agree with you that abstinence-ONLY education is a bad idea, if by that it is meant that the various methods of birth control are never covered or explained to the students. Consider this: There are many, MANY people who choose to use birth control WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THEIR MARRIAGE. Perhaps they have just gotten married and think they’d like to wait a year or three before the first baby, or would like to space their children out a bit, or many other reasons. Now, if these nice married people do not learn about methods of birth control in school, where will they learn them? From their parents? That is great, if parents are willing to cover the subject and also make sure they have good info on how things work (and what the rate of failure is, why one b/c method is better than another, etc.) but parents are busy and often, yes, too embarrassed to deal with it. If kids don’t get the info from either parents or schools, they will get it from less-reliable sources.

I wish schools would simply cover the bare bones of sex ed and b/c info and leave it at that. The REAL problem is that teachers have taken the mandate to teach kids the scientific aspects of sex ed, and turned it into a forum for why kids should experiment with every perversion under the sun, question their own sexual orientation (when they might never have thought of it on their own), and of course feel free to go out and have a good time without benefit of marriage. THAT is the real issue. It is not the scientific aspects of sex ed that’s the problem, it’s the baggage that has gotten attached to it.

"Give me a break. Teach kids to be responsible. Teach kids to be safe."

Thats what abstinence is about.

"but then end up getting raped and get pregnant as a result, you can thank Mrs. Palin for your bastard child that reminds you every day of how you were violated in the most soul stealing way one can imagine."

"And not that I agree with the media scrutiny around her daughter's pregnancy, but I have to say that perhaps if this girl was given a proper dose of sex education, she would have at least made the father of her child wear a condom."

Sure. Right. A good odes of the proper sex education would have prevented that. I mean since contraceptives are being passed out in the public schools, clinics, and everywhere else like free samples on the street the incidence of teen pregnancy has plummeted...OOPS!

You put down an abstinence only policy because you say that it wouldnt work to stop teen from having sex, correctly so. But then you turn around and say that if Palins daughter had the other kind of sex ed, her pregnancy wouldnt have happened. Teaching them about condoms, birth control pills, etc., how to use them, will not get them to use them same way teaching them abstinence only will not stop them from having sex.

"i believe the average citizen needs a semi-automatic rifle? No."

No one needs a "need" to own a semi-automatic weapon. If I want one, I buy one. I dont need to explain to anyone why I need to buy one anymore than why I should have to explain to anyone why I "need" to buy todays newspaper. I want one. Why I want one is none of your business.

"Palin does. And why does she believe this? She doesn't want to violate anyone's 2nd Amendment rights. The fact that this woman believes that everyone is entitled to own a gun but then turn around and say that women can't decide what to do with their own bodies is disgusting."

By the same token, you arbitrarily deciding that people dont have a "need" to own a semi-automatic gun, but should be able to do anything with their own bodies is hypocritical. And false. As there are already things women arent allowed to do with their own bodies, like prostitute themselves, ingest illegal drugs, smoke cigarettes (in certain places), etc.

"Rumors are swirling that she attempted to ban Harry Potter in her town's public library. She tried to ban the most beloved children's book of the past fifty years. She tried to ban a book that inspired a generation of readers. Don't mess with the Potter lady! Don't even go there!"

That "rumor" been proven to be a hoax:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html

http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bannedbooks.asp

"Do I believe the book ban rumors? I know they are just that - rumors. Am I educating myself on Palin's policies? Yes."

No.

Mary Ann said...

It's people like you that make me scared for my country.

I think if we've learned anything, the last 8 years has destroyed America. Obviously the ones supporting this political mindset aren't doing a very good job. Kudos on being part of that herd.

And let's be honest. The woman didn't even know what the Bush Doctrine was. If I was running for the VP office, I would make sure damn sure I was up to speed on such things...

McSteavenson said...

Wow - that guy anonymous certainly has big balls...the way he identifies himself before unveiling such strong convictions...well I'm impressed...