this woman’s work

You know the whole pro-life even in cases of rape and incest thing? I get that. I do. Because if you truly believe every embryo at conception is a person like I am a person sitting here typing, you can’t quibble. You can’t say it’s ok here but not there. (And I have to add here that I’m bothered by this assumption that every pro-choice woman would handle an unexpected pregnancy the same way; that one has to be politically pro-life to carry a child to term who was conceived by rape. That’s simply not true. Pro-choicers believe that it’s a personal CHOICE, which doesn’t mean that we would all make the same choice whatever the circumstances. I know politically pro-choice women who have given birth to children conceived by rape. It’s about CHOICE; not mandates.)

So that — while I philosophically disagree with it — I get.

But I don’t get her willingness to trudge forward even though she is so obviously unprepared to be president. And I don’t get why people are still voting because they “like” her. Listen, I like my mom a whole lot. I love her politics and she’s a helluva lot more informed than Ms. Palin but I sure wouldn’t vote for her to be vice president. It’s not a learn as you go job.

I’m intrigued that she calls herself a feminist. In my mind, CHOICE is central to feminist belief. Not just (and not necessarily) reproductive choice. Although I find that absolutely unequivocally at the heart of my feminism, I understand that if you truly think an embryo ought to have the same human rights as a child that you just can’t go there. (It bothers me that you want to stop anyone else from going there either but I get it.) But other choices matter, too. I don’t know how she feels about supporting programs that give women choices because she wouldn’t talk to Moms Rising about it. That her office wouldn’t even let them drop off a stack of paper doesn’t reassure me.

Note — she says she wants to make adoption easier. Easier how? And for whom? Adoptive parents who adopt newborns from private agencies (you know, adoptions that are held up as the great alternative to abortion) already get huge tax breaks. So now are you going to eliminate homestudies so we don’t have to clean our houses and answer all those pesky questions? Maybe she means easier by creating a plethora of infants available for our hungry little homes.

Or does she mean she’ll make it easier for women to place? How’s she going to do that? It’s already pretty easy to find someone who’s willing to get your baby adopted away from you — especially if you’re white and healthy. Boy howdy is it easy! Just set up a myspace mentioning that you’re young and pregnant and out come the wolves! (That link goes to Jenna’s blog — if you haven’t read that post yet, you should. It will make you insane.)

Yeah, I’m not getting that whole “easier to adopt” thing. (She said this during the interview where they talked about evolution, charging for rape kits, and whether or not she’s a feminist.)

Oh one more thing. I HATE how often she uses passive sentences. Yikes. She’s never doing stuff — stuff is getting done. “Adoptions to be made easier” not “make adoptions easier” or “make it easier to adopt.” MS Word’s grammar check would have a field day with her!

When it comes right down to it, I vote primarily on the issue of choice. I’m a pro-choice, pro-reproductive rights, pro-sex ed voter because I don’t see how I can be a woman who cares about women and vote otherwise. I don’t see how I can be an adoptive mother who cares about adoption reform without supporting abortion rights. I don’t see how I can be a mother by birth and not understand the toll that an unwanted, unplanned and unsupported pregnancy can take on a woman.

I care about the war and the environment and education and the economy (boy howdy) but the issue that is most important to me is choice period.

So it’s hard for me to understand women who feel otherwise. I just don’t get it. You want to stop abortion? Quit cutting social services. Stop eliminating support for single mothers and teen mothers and families who are struggling. Make birth control more effective and more available. (Remember McCain thinks vaigara should be covered by insurance but not birth control.) Work to bring better sex education to the schools and while you’re at it, set up a daycare there for the teens who get pregnant anyway. (Because it sure looks like whatever we do, some teens will get pregnant anyway.) 

You can’t have it both ways. You can’t be against abortion but refuse to do the things that you need to do to make abortion less needed.

But even if all of those prorgrams were in place, I’d still vote on pro-choice issues because ultimately the decision about whether or not to be a parent needs to lie with the woman facing the positive pregnancy test. Only she knows whether or not she’s ready, willing and able to make the sacrifices it takes to be a parent. Anyone reading my blog knows that adoption isn’t the easy-out for any unhappily pregnant women. 

We deserve access to ALL of our options. We can have our own conversations with God (as we understand him/her/it). We don’t need the government intervening for us.

Didja hear his firm stance on talking about Bristol? 

“The media should respect Bristol’s privacy. That’s always been the tradition and practice when it comes to the children of candidates.”

And his campaign reiterates, “The children of candidates do not choose to run for office and be thrust into the spotlight.”

(source)

Yeah, McCain! Good on you! Gee, I wonder what changed in ten years? Oh yeah, he’s talking about candidates! Not politicians currently holding office! Those kids are free game! That’s why McCain thought this joke was so hilarious:

“Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? 
Because her father is Janet Reno.”

(source)

But he’s learned his lesson!! You don’t trash kids! In fact — don’t even talk about them! Leave their personal crises alone! Certainly don’t exploit them by, say, bringing on the father of Bristol’s baby to the convention or anything. That might draw attention to her private matter.

(What do you bet they get her married for a photo op.)

McCain needs the pro-life, evangelical vote and he’s willing to exploit chldren to get it.

The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman’s decision to have a child by ensuring access to and availability of programs for pre- and post-natal health care, parenting skills, income support and caring adoption programs.

from Bloomberg.com: News

So do adoption groups ever endorse politicians? I’m curious if they look to anyone — like Evan B. Donaldson or (ahem) the NCFA — to get behind this stuff. Because I want to know what a caring adoption program might look like.

I hate the democratic backpedaling on abortion. Hate it. But I’m not the boss of everybody. Grr.