Speak for Yourself

I'm getting political again so hold on to your hats.

I received an email today from my Congresswoman, Marsha Blackburn. It was a fundraising email, much like the letters we write at my job for non-profits asking for donations, asking me to contribute to John McCain's presidential race.

The hook of the email was that of an article written by Kim Gandy, chair of the National Organization for Women (NOW) stating that Sarah Palin "is not the right woman" for the vice presidency, obviously because she's conservative. The article mainly cited her pro-life stance and her almost appointment of a top public safety commissioner with a past reprimand for sexual harrassment. Because of these issues Gandy writes "she will speak to many women. But will Palin speak FOR women?"

She speaks for me!

The abortion issue for me has always been black & white--you either believe life begins at conception or you don't. It's that simple. Because if you believe life begins at conception and you're "pro-choice," then that means you think it's okay to kill babies. Personally, I don't think it's okay to kill babies under ANY circumstances be it rape, incest or a situation where the mother's life is in danger. I know, that's a very controversial opinion to have, and I myself have never been in any of those situations. But for me, I know no matter what the cause of the pregnancy, I honestly couldn't live myself regardless. Knowing as many couples as I have who have waited and waited to adopt a child because they themselves cannot have children, but have all the love in the world to give--I just can't see how someone could pass up the opportunity. Giving a child up for adoption is one of the most selfless things a person can do. Yes, you have to be pregnant and deal with all the symptoms that come with it. You have to go to doctor's appointments and you don't get live the carefree lifestyle you're accustomed to--but that doesn't discount that child's right to a shot at life. Mother Teresa said it best, "It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."

My abortion rant does indeed have a point and relevance to what I said before it. This NOW article pointed to a gubernatorial debate in which Palin stated how much she was against abortion. She said she would "choose life" even if her daughter was impregnated by a rapist. So? Just another reason I like her. (Coincidentally, this article was written on August 29th, the day Palin was announced as McCain's running mate and before it was announced that Bristol Palin was pregnant--just trying to be fair here!)

The article goes on to state that Senator Joe Biden is the VP candidate with a history of advocacy for women in the Senate with "authorship of domestic violence legislation, support for pay equity and advocacy for women around the world."

So that automatically means that Sarah Palin supports domestic violence, lower pay for women and thinks oppressed women around the world should fend for themselves? Um, no. The assumption is insanely ridiculous--especially since the article was written the day she was announced as VP, I guarantee Ms. Gandy knew just as much about her as everyone else did, which is very little!

The main women's issues for the NOW are posted on their main page and include:

1. Abortion and Reproductive Rights (We've already covered that topic. However I must say--notice how the term "reproductive rights" basically is just a positive spin to the right to kill an unborn baby. Just an observation.)

2. Economic Justice

3. Ending Sex Discrimination

4. Lesbian Rights

5. Promoting Diversity and Ending Racism

6. Stopping Violence Against Women

It's safe to assume that #4 might not be one of her conservative ideals, but 4 out of 6 ain't bad, and I'm sure speaks FOR a lot more women than the NOW would like to think. The truth of the matter is, no matter who the republican nominee is in ANY election, the NOW won't support him/her--especially when republicans are mainly pro-life and the #1 issue on their agenda is abortion.

I think that the NOW somewhat contradicts itself in that women can think for themselves. I don't need a liberal "feminazi" organization telling me what to believe and what issues should be of importance me. If men shouldn't do that, why should a bunch of women? It's a generalization. That, in and of itself, is a disservice to women.