|
|
|
|
Women Are "Strong Enough," Palin
Says, Raising Ire But Also
Consciousness Part One of Three By Dave Andrusko Part Two is the encouraging news that the West Virginia governor today signed its Ultrasound Option bill into law. Part Three is solid news from Gallup about the public's self-identification as "pro-life." At "National Right to Life News Today" (www.nationalrighttolifenewstoday.org), we talk a powerfully anti-assisted suicide speech and offer tips about using Twitter. Please send your comments on any or all to daveandrusko@gmail.com. My saintly wife edits the National Right to Life Yearbook, and I was doing my small part to help out on this monumental enterprise late Friday night when we noticed that CSPAN was re-airing the speech former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin had delivered that morning at a breakfast for the Susan B. Anthony List.
If you've not seen her in a setting like this before, it would only take about two minutes to figure out why Palin is so popular in pro-life circles, or, for that matter, why she would fascinate almost anyone with a quasi-open mind. She lovingly and candidly talked about her youngest son, Trig, who was born with Down syndrome, and the challenges finding that out in advance posed. Palin also talked forthrightly about the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter, Bristol, the response to which brought out the very best in the Palin family and the very worst in many in the fields of journalism and politics. But for me, the best part is a theme I'm sure Palin had developed long before being chosen as the 2008 Republican Vice Presidential nominee but one which I only learned of when she'd come upon the national scene. And that is Palin's refusal to concede the description "feminist" to the crowd that adamantly insists that the heart and soul of feminism is an undying fealty to limitless abortion, In their mind, "choice" is everything, the be-all and end-all of all TRUE feminists. But it's a very specific choice. It's not whether to go on to higher education or not; get an apartment or a house; move to another state or stay local; or to get married or stay single. All that is small potatoes compared to the unfettered ability to choose to take the life of unborn children for any reason or no reason at all. What drives them crazy is when Palin calmly looks them in the eye and flat-out refuses to accept that this kind of "choice" is a mark of female strength. Real feminism, Palin says without equivocation, is having the strength to carry an unplanned or untimed pregnancy to term, even if--or especially if--those around you are unwilling to help. You never want to make too much out of a single opinion piece, but I found Jonathan Capehart's take on her speech absolutely fascinating. The Washington Post has this section called "PostPartisan," which is described as "Quick takes by The Post's editorial writers." On Friday Capehart's column was headlined "Palin's got a point." Before I go any further, let me not forget that another Post editorial writer politely bashed Capehart (how's that for a surprise?). But the important point is that at least one editorialist was able to look at the abortion debate in a new light, thanks to Sarah Palin. Capehart, who has clobbered Palin unmercifully on other occasions, wrote that he "was fascinated by her thought-provoking slam against women's rights groups," which is no doubt enough to warrant cold-shoulders at the next editorial meeting. He mentioned that Palin "remind[ed] the audience that suffragist Alice Paul said that abortion is 'the ultimate exploitation of women,'" and that recent polls "show more young women agreeing with 'their feminist foremothers' on the issue, thus 'empowering women by offering them a real choice.'" That was the setting for this long quote from Palin: "The pro-woman sisterhood is telling these young women they are strong enough and smart enough. They are capable to be able to handle an unintended pregnancy and still be able to, in less than ideal circumstances, no doubt, to handle that. Still be able to give that child life, in addition to pursuing a career and pursuing an education, pursuing avocations. Though society wants to tell these young women otherwise. Even these feminist groups want to try to tell women, send this message that, 'Nope, you're not capable of doing both. You can't give your child life and still pursue career and education. You're not strong enough. You're not capable.' So it's very hypocritical of those . . . pro-women's rights groups out there." Predictably, Capehart copped out at the end ("While I don't agree with her ultimate stance on abortion, I think she makes a very interesting point"), but the point was made nonetheless. What if we looked at the decision to fight through the undeniable challenges posed by an unplanned pregnancy as a mark of character and courage and commitment? What if we looked at succumbing to these obstacles not as an exercise of "women's rights" but as an unfortunate decision made in very difficult circumstances--aided and abetted by a Feminist Establishment that sees women as weak and fragile? That WOULD be a "very interesting point," indeed. |
