The Political Voices of Women

What did you think when John McCain showed nothing short of total disdain for women’s rights and health, during Wednesday night’s debate? Personally, I think he may have lost many women who might have been ‘on the fence’ about a McCain/Palin ticket. Take a look at what other bloggers are saying, and let me know what you think in comments.

From Crooks and Liars…

Clearly, in all his debate prep, no one thought to coach McCain not to go to the third rail of the abortion issue. Boy, was that an oversight. Because not only did McCain go there, he jumped right on to it. In trying to paint Obama as being for the great Republican bugaboo of late term abortions (because, you know, there are so many women running around and deciding after being pregnant for six or more months that being pregnant is no longer convenient for them), Obama replied that he didn’t vote for the late term abortion ban because it had no provision for the health or life of the mother. And that’s when McCain proved how heartless and clueless he is: Again…just again, an example of the eloquence of Senator Obama, health (indicates air quotes) of the mother. You know that’s been stretched by the pro-abortion movement to mean almost anything. Really? Not a legitimate concern?

From Sarah Palin Lies…

We already knew McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, isn’t concerned about the health of mothers since she opposed a ban on abortions even in the case of rape or incest. Now we learn that McCain has contempt for women’s health issues as well and thinks concerns about their health is “extreme.” McCain can kiss the independent women’s vote good-bye after this doozy.

From Nancy Keenan…

McCain doesn’t understand a key principle that, for many women, is central to their choice of a candidate for president. The same woman who wants a president to address the difficulty of paying to put gas in the car while other bills pile up on the kitchen counter also wants a president who respects her ability to make the personal, private medical decisions that are best for her and her family. She doesn’t want a politician like McCain mocking protections for her health or voting against birth control. As the election enters its final phase, and these key voters hear from NARAL Pro-Choice America about the stark differences between John McCain and Barack Obama about a woman’s right to choose, women will choose the candidate who will stand with them. That candidate is Barack Obama.

From Equal Writes…

John McCain put women’s “health” in inverted commas during the debate last night, as though it’s a made-up phrase that represents some imaginary or laughable idea. Or alternatively, an idea that doesn’t matter very much and can be easily dismissed by a candidate who, say, had no idea that health insurance plans cover Viagra but not birth control. McCain labelled people who support the right to terminate a pregnancy when that pregnancy endangers the health of the mother “extreme” and “pro-abortion.”

From The Fertile Infertile…

In my last political post, I said I was deeply disturbed by McCain’s stance on women’s reproductive rights. Now, I’m going to say, if you are a woman of reproductive age or if you love a woman of reproductive age, you are playing with her life and health if you vote for McCain. McCain totally dismissed the fact that pregnancy ever threatens a woman’s life.

. . .

Hell, I wish we could completely ban late term abortion but I value the lives of the adult women involved more than I value their unborn babies. I am pro-choice but I am not pro-abortion. I will never presume to claim I know whats best for someone medically and that includes whether or not they should continue to carry a baby. I believe each and every woman should be able to decide what to do with their own body. With this one ignorant statement, John McCain has alienated many people who feel the way I do.

Never underestimate the power of women who feel they are targets of campaign condescension. I received an email urging me to donate to Planned Parenthood in Sarah Palin’s name three times over the last two weeks, and that my friends, means it went viral. But just how viral? Almost $1 million dollars worth according to Ben Smith at Politico. Why does Palin inspire such a strong reaction from women who favor choice? Linda Hirschman’s editorial in the Washington Post outlines part of a future that simultaneously inspires fear and fury in women across the country. I’m sure Palin is going to enjoy receiving all of those thank you cards for donations to Planned Parenthood.

Should Health Workers (ie: doctors, nurses, pharmacists, volunteers, etc) Be Able To Refuse Healthcare To Women Based On Morals?

Community member Slim, from no fish, no nuts – sent me the following email…

Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt has proposed a new rule that will limit the rights of women to receive medically accurate information and treatment. The alleged goal of the rule is to protect the rights of “conscience” of health care workers, volunteers, and trainees. The result would be limited access to birth control and abortion for women all over the country – regardless of state law.

Here is what you can do…

The ACLU has a letter you can send.

Planned Parenthood has a letter you can send.

NARAL has a letter you can send.

It will take you less than five minutes to click through and sign all three.

I urge you to sign and send every one of them – and pass every one of them along to every single family member and friend you know.

We have 19 days. After 19 days this regulation goes into effect and every single health care worker in the United States will be able to refuse any woman health care based on their own personal moral views.

Thank you.

The following is a reprint of a February 2008 post which was prior to my joining Political Voices of Women. In light of the recent Republican National Convention I thought that I’d dig it out of the archives and share it with the community. The feedback that I have received on this post sustains my belief that Americans still have more in common than not. Hopefully, in 2008 and beyond the political parties will start focusing more on our common ground instead of finding ways to turn us against each other.

Friends,

This post has been extremely difficult to write and even harder to publish. In fact, after having completed, proof-read, previewed and seemingly saved the entire post, it totally disappeared from Blogger when I tried to publish it. That certainly makes you wonder.
I am not writing this article in an attempt to change your views on abortion. I am writing this with the hope that it will be food for thought if you are tempted to judge a person’s faith by their political views on this issue.

Abortion has been one of the most politically divisive issues in US politics over the past 30 years. Persons on all sides of the political issue have, more often than not, manipulated the truth to advance their cause. And some, on the far political right of the evangelical community, have tried to use a person’s views on abortion as a litmus test of faith.

Prior to the 2004 US Presidential election, “ the Roman Catholic bishop of Colorado Springs issued a pastoral letter saying that American Catholics should not receive communion if they vote for politicians who defy church teaching by supporting abortion rights, same-sex marriage, euthanasia or stem-cell research. “

As the New York Times reported Bishop Michael J. Sheridan stated:

”Anyone who professes the Catholic faith with his lips while at the same time publicly supporting legislation or candidates that defy God’s law makes a mockery of that faith and belies his identity as a Catholic,

The article further states: “In a telephone interview, the bishop said: ‘I’m not making a political statement. I’m making a statement about church teaching.’ “

Well, whatever the Bishop might have meant, his comments were perceived as a political statement. His actions, without a doubt, had a political impact that was not lost on Karl Rove, Rush Limbaugh, and their ilk. And, for the record, I don’t agree with his “statement about church teaching”.

Where do I stand on the issue of abortion, both as a matter of faith and politically?

I am a Christian, pro-life and opposed to overturning Roe V. Wade. A contradiction — not in my mind or in my heart.

Science and the dictionary define life as:

The property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli or adaptation to the environment originating from within the organism. http://www.bartleby.com/61/80/L0158000.html

According to Wikipedia:

An embryo (from Greek: ἔμβρυον, plural ἔμβρυα, lit. “that which grows,” from en- “in” + bryein “to swell, be full”) is a multicellular diploid eukaryote in its earliest stage of development, from the time of first cell division until birth, hatching, or germination.

And the Christian Bible says the following about conception:

Oh yes, you shaped me first inside, then out; you formed me in my mother’s womb. I thank you, High God—you’re breathtaking! Body and soul, I am marvelously made! I worship in adoration—what a creation! You know me inside and out, you know every bone in my body; You know exactly how I was made, bit by bit, how I was sculpted from nothing into something. Like an open book, you watched me grow from conception to birth; all the stages of my life were spread out before you, The days of my life all prepared before I’d even lived one day. — The Message (MSG)Psalm 139:12-14 (in Context) Psalm 139 (Whole Chapter)

Based on these definitions, I believe that at the instant of conception, the embryo is a life. Therefore, an abortion ends a life – a life which had immeasurable potential and inherent value.

So if I controlled the world and controlled people:

• all life would be valued,
• young men and women would be taught to value themselves,
• men and women would give more thought to the consequences of their actions,
• no woman would be raped,
• every child would be wanted from the moment of conception,
• there would be loving individuals willing to adopt every child who was not wanted by their birth parents,
• every child born would be loved, cared for, appreciated and given every opportunity to achieve their destiny and,
• there would be no abortions.

I am pro life.

However, I do not control the world or its people. No human does. Christianity teaches that God gave man-kind “free will” or freedom of choice. So while I may not agree with another woman’s choices, I do not think that her life should be in jeopardy, if she chooses abortion as an option.
The argument advanced by the religious right is that the unborn child is “innocent”. It is easy to view the child as “innocent” and the woman as “guilty” but is this what Christianity really teaches?

Does Christianity teach that we should have more compassion for the unborn child than the mother?

I certainly do not condone the practice of using abortion as a method of birth control but do I believe that I can legislate behavior or conscience. No I don’t.

So how do I believe Christianity views the woman who has had an abortion?

John 8:3-11 The Message (MSG)

The religion scholars and Pharisees led in a woman who had been caught in an act of adultery. They stood her in plain sight of everyone and said, “Teacher, this woman was caught red-handed in the act of adultery. Moses, in the Law, gives orders to stone such persons. What do you say?” They were trying to trap him into saying something incriminating so they could bring charges against him.

Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger in the dirt.

They kept at him, badgering him.

He straightened up and said, “The sinless one among you, go first: Throw the stone.”

Bending down again, he wrote some more in the dirt.

Hearing that, they walked away, one after another, beginning with the oldest. The woman was left alone. Jesus stood up and spoke to her. “Woman, where are they? Does no one condemn you?”

“No one, Master.”

“Neither do I,” said Jesus. “Go on your way. From now on, don’t sin.”

To me the only political argument left on the issue of abortion is whether it should be taxpayer funded, not whether it should be a legal option in every state.

Churches should continue to teach the tenant of their faith. Parents should continue to instill their values in their children. And people of faith should stop letting people with political agendas manipulate them.

Related posts:

Attempt to Hijack Christianity Failed

Bill Moyers Examines The Legacy of Karl Rove

Christianity, Politics & The Issues

Here is an extensive fact-check of the statements Sarah Palin made in her speech last night, that I received in my email earlier today.

 If you missed the Sarah Palin speech you can see it in full here.

Read more »

The following is a video clip of the advice GOP Vice Presidential Nominee Sarah Palin had for Senator Hillary Clinton during the Democratic Presidential Primary Race.

url: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA15XU23kEc

related article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/29/palin-hillary-clintons-wh_n_122504.html

Hopefully, Sarah Palin will take her own advice.

Read more »

From community member Veronica Arreola, who blogs at Moms With Issues…

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

It was the tweet heard around the world. Sarah Palin is John McCain’s pick for his running mate. Ah, sweet irony.

Palin is now the second woman to ever be chosen for the vice-presidential position on a major party ticket. This is a major milestone for women in this country. It was a generation ago, 1984, that Geraldine Ferraro was the running mate for Walter Mondale. The college students I work with on a daily basis weren’t even born then. Think about that.

That said, I think that Palin may be the best thing for feminism since Alice Paul went on a hunger strike. Stay with me…

It is obvious to many women that the decision to pick Palin is a direct ploy to woo still angry Hillary Rodham Clinton supporters. For some of those HRC supporters McCain is far too conservative for them to really vote for and the addition of a NRA-supporting, abstinence-only toting, polar bear-hating woman to the ticket isn’t going to sway them. Yet, the GOP is playing Palin as if she is the answer to disgruntled feminists.

Read more »

 Here is a guest post by community member Deb Della Piana from Turn Left.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

Like many others, I consider 17-year-old Bristol Palin’s pregnancy a personal family issue. I can see absolutely no reason to drag a child through the mud of a political campaign. However, there is a story here about whether or not abstinence-only sex education works. In Bristol’s case, it did not. It also has not worked for the children of several other people I know. While the abstinence-only approach is advocated by tunnel-visioned President Bush and the nation’s Christian conservatives, the failure to present a comprehensive sex-education approach to America’s youth is doing them a disservice. There was no need for Bristol to have to grow up sooner than her parents had ever planned, as Sarah Palin put it today.

Read more »

What would you do if your method of birth control (ie: pills, IUD’s), were deemed to be an abortion and no longer available to you?

This is a reproductive rights story that has been covered by bloggers for several weeks now. And, as shocking and crazy as it sounds, it just may become a reality before the end of the Bush administration. If this policy is implemented, it will not be a simple thing to correct, even with a new administration.

On his blog today, Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt, has attempted to defend his position of redefining contraception as abortion. In his dishonest attempt to clarify this position, he blatantly ignores the main aspect concerning contraception, while also blurring the lines between medical ethics and ideology. Below is an example.

Michael Leavitt…

I want to reiterate. If the Department of Health and Human Services issues a regulation on this matter, it will aim at one thing, protecting the right of conscience of those who practice medicine. From what I’ve read the last few days, there’s a serious need for it.
[read full post by Michael Leavitt here]

Here is video of Hillary Clinton speaking at a Planned Parenthood conference on this serious issue…

From The Huston Chronicle – Redefining Abortion…

The Bush administration has consistently opposed providing funding for international birth control programs, but until now has not tried to limit the use of contraceptives inside the United States. That could change in the president’s final months in office. Health and Human Services officials are considering a draft regulation that would classify most birth control pills, the Plan B emergency contraceptive and intrauterine devices as forms of abortion because they prevent the development of fertilized eggs into fetuses.

The rule, which does not require congressional approval, would allow health care workers who object to abortion on moral or religious grounds to refuse to counsel women on their birth control options or supply contraceptives. It would forbid more than half a million health agencies nationwide that receive federal funds from requiring employees to provide such services. Pharmacists could use the rule as a justification for refusing to fill birth control prescriptions, and insurance companies could cite it as a basis for declining to cover the costs.An existing regulation allows health care providers with objections to abortion to abstain from providing it to patients. By extending the definition of abortion to cover contraceptives, federal officials are attempting to create by administrative fiat what would fail by a wide margin in Congress.

Read more »

This is from a post and podcast on Reproductive Rights, by Suzanne Reisman at BlogHer.

A few weeks ago, it occurred to me that reproductive rights were not the number one issue for all women voters in the country. In fact, it seemed to not even be the number one issue for women of childbearing age or women who care about women of childbearing age. As someone obsessed with my right to self-autonomy, I wondered what was up. A quick investigation into the matter led me to conclude that many women didn’t prioritize reproductive rights as an issue because they falsely assumed that both candidates supported the full spectrum of reproductive rights.

. . .

To find out more about the role of reproductive rights in national, state, and local elections in 2008, I spoke to the president of Planned Parenthood, Cecile Richards. We discussed everything from John McCain’s anti-choice voting record (out of 119 votes he cast on reproductive rights issues, 115 are construed as anti-choice by NARAL) to abortion rights as part of the Democratic party platform to critical issues in state elections, such as the California ballot initiative for parental notification and South Dakota’s ballot initiative to ban abortion. Richards insight into the issues should not be missed.

. . .

Read Suzanne’s full post and listen to her podcast at BlogHer.