Editing Sarah Palin for accuracy

In my day job, I’m an editor. Which is why it’s hard for me to look at quotes like this, from Sarah Palin…

“The pro-life movement is pro-women, and it empowers women with the message that we are strong enough and smart enough to be able to pursue education, vocations and avocations while giving life to a child.”

…and not want to edit them to reflect reality, which looks a little something like this:

“The pro-life movement is [NOT] pro-women, and it [FORCES UNWILLING WOMEN TO GESTATE A FETUS FOR NINE MONTHS AND GIVE BIRTH] with the message that we [ARE NOT ENTITLED TO HEALTH CARE, PAID FAMILY LEAVE, FLEX TIME, OR AFFORDABLE CHILD CARE, BUT MUST STILL BE] strong enough and smart enough to be able to pursue education, vocations and avocations while giving life to a child.”

Empowering! (via The Awl.)

Reminder: Tomorrow is Blog for Choice Day! The theme this year is Trust Women.

and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

7 Comments

  1. SenBoxerFan
    Posted January 21, 2010 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    I think that Sarah Palin should be able to “believe” whatever she wants to call the “Pro Life” movement, but I just hope that she doesn’t push the “Prolies” agenda on women.
    Everyone is pro life, no one is pro abortion and I think that Sarah Palin associate the radical prolife movement with what the majority of Americans thinks. The Prolife movement is not about helping or empowering women, their mission is to made abortion dangerous, that being said a woman can choose not to have an abortion and still be a part of the prochoice movement.
    I think that Sarah Palin should become a part of the prochoice movement, because she will always have a choice whereas the prolife movement would rather let a woman die from an illegal abortion.
    On a side note, I just want to express my frustration at the radical prolife agenda and their crippling influence at Church.
    I recently attended Mass at a nearby Catholic Church with a MALE friend of my, and I read one of the programs that the church sponsor was crisis pregnancy center.
    Moreover, at the end of Mass, the Priest told everyone, “Don’t forget to attend the March for Life this month and afterward, we will all go to the Cemetery to hold a memorial service for all the unborn babies that was murder by abortions.”
    When Church ended, I was the first one to leave and I will never return.

  2. Ryan
    Posted January 22, 2010 at 4:13 am | Permalink

    Well, I suspect you’ve conflated things a bit. There is nothing about pro-life philosophy that is inherently opposed to subsidized child care, national health care, etc. These things may be resisted by those of a strong conservative or libertarian bent, but I think the association of this mindset with anti-abortionism is largely a recent American phenomenon. (Remember that only a few decades ago the pro-life movement was strongly aligned with the Democratic party.) Just look at France, where there is an active pro-life socialist movement…how different things must be over there!
    The issue of the relationship between pro-life beliefs and political and cultural attitudes that contribute to the existence of abortion came to mind recently while reading Zoe Romanowsky’s column from last year on Canadian abortion doctor Garson Romalis. I was particularly struck by her comments following her relation of a story of a woman who claimed that, had it not been for her abortion, she wouldn’t have been able to attend medical school.
    Her terrible “choice” underscores the pervasive societal error that pregnancy is a woman’s problem and hers alone to fix. For the woman facing an unexpected pregnancy, she can face the threats of a boyfriend or husband… or have an abortion. She can quit her job… or have an abortion. She can leave campus and her educational aspirations… or have an abortion.
    When did this become “choice”?

  3. liz
    Posted January 22, 2010 at 8:33 am | Permalink

    While the Catholic Church is also anti-death penalty and anti-war, there seems to be hardly the kind of advertising of those two issues like there is for its anti-choice projects.

  4. Rachel
    Posted January 22, 2010 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    I wasn’t aware that Palin lived in Lala Land, Alaska.

  5. uberhausfrau
    Posted January 22, 2010 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    my very conservative cousin-in-law said during a facebook debate/wankfest: “The ones that cannot afford insurance can obtain assistance through the government right now (chips and other programs). As to the bit about killing innocent, I know from doing adoptions for six years that there are thousands of parents who would love the chance if given the opportunity. I dont know who the people are that fight child murder but do not care about kids.”
    this despite many conservatives in power, especially his beloved Bush, voted against expanding CHIP and many other anti-child and anti-family policies put into place by the republicans in power during the 2000s. (clinton certainly isnt blameless with his “welfare reform”). this is way i didnt care so much about dennis kucinich’s “pro-life” identification because his voting record was still extremely pro-child/pro-family. and to a certain extent, mike huckabee was in the same boat.

  6. FLT
    Posted January 22, 2010 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

    While the Catholic Church likes to point to “tradition” in its refusal to ordain women, it does not acknowledge that their “tradition” of being anti-abortion is only about 100 years old.
    Yes, even the Catholic Church used to consider the issue the woman’s own business until the time of fetal movement.

  7. kungfulola
    Posted January 24, 2010 at 10:14 am | Permalink

    I hear that Lala Land has a beautiful view of Russia.

181 queries. 0.730 seconds