What does the RNC ticket offer Women this election?

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 09:15 PM
link   

John McCain





John McCain voted against "equal pay for equal work" in April earlier this year.

John McCain offers us an explanation as to why he voted against offering women equal pay for equal work




"This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system."
source



So – John McCain does not support federal regulation of equal pay for equal work, because it’s “intrusive government”…that he doesn’t support? (keep reading for the reason the question mark exists)














John McCain says women should not have a right to their own reproductive freedom.



To further that, John McCain supports an intrusive Federal Government who would regulate the states to prohibit states deciding on women rights.




He's also sponsored pro-life legislation -- one bill that would make it a federal crime to transport a minor across state lines to get an abortion and avoid a parental consent law, for instance.
source




But here we see a Different John McCain.



I'd love to see a point where (Roe vs. Wade) is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to (undergo) illegal and dangerous operations.
- John McCain (source)


But ultimately - John McCain tells us that he is pro life.
But what exactly is pro-life?


The term describes the political and ethical view which maintains that fetuses and embryos are human beings, and therefore have a right to live

and

it can be used to indicate opposition to practices such as euthanasia, the death penalty, human cloning, and research involving human embryonic stem cells.
source

But in the issue of Abortion, John McCain tells us that Abortion is okay as long as the woman was raped...


McCain was asked whether he would reinstate the Reagan era rule that prevents international family planning clinics that receive federal funds from discussing abortion.

McCain said that he opposed abortion except in cases of rape and incest. He was then asked how he would determine whether someone had in fact been raped. McCain responded, “I think that I would give the benefit of the doubt to the person who alleges that.”
Sources

So we should trust them? Or we should give them a scapegoat to allow them to have an abortion, John McCain?

Allow me a moment to speak to the McCain Campaign and their supporters:

If you are truly pro-life, then abortion should not be okay in any instance. To say Abortion is OKAY in the event of rape or incest is to accommodate the MOTHER, and not the unborn fetus.

It is because of this hypocritical stance from "pro-lifers" like John McCain that we can truly, and accurately, state that they are, indeed, " ANTI Pro-choice" where women are concerned, and i can base that statement in pure factual substance by using the very definition of "pro-life" as provided by those who support it. (view references for validation of this statement)

















Sarah Palin



To start off, Sarah Palin is a member of Feminists For Life

This is an organization, obviously comprised of women, who take a strong pro-life stance to abortion. So strong in fact, that they are able to not contradict themselves in adherence with the definition of being pro life

We can see from the FFL website that this organization does not support Abortion even in the event of rape or incest.

I disagree with them - but ATLEAST they stick to their guns, and dont have any cherry pickable arguments in order to favor abortion.


So.


To encompass the entirety of what we currently know about Gov. Palin:


She is a fierce opponent of abortion and same-sex marriage. She supports the death penalty and the teaching of creationism in schools. Palin is an enthusiast for the outdoors and a gun owner, and is opposed to environmental restrictions on drilling in Alaska.
source

By the precise definition of Pro-Life - as given to us by Pro-Life - Gov. Palin is not pro-life. She is anti-choice. The Death Penalty (even though i strongly support it) isnt being pro-life. Its pro-death. Hence the name.

Yes - i do support the death penalty, and i do support pro-choice. I do not- however, call myself pro-life, as the definition does not allow me to believe how *I* want, and is a play on words by anti-choice advocates in order to defeat the rights of women to have reign over their own reproductive system.





and just recently - we see Sarah Palin decided to no-show at the Republican National Coalition for Life:

Today, Palin's scheduled appearance in St. Paul, Minn., as guest of honor at an afternoon gathering by the Republican National Coalition for Life was canceled. And that didn't sit well with a leading social conservative.

Phyllis Schlafly, who in the mid-1970s almost single-handedly derailed what had been the expected ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, told ABC News that a McCain aide notified her late Monday that Palin would not be attending the event.


"I think this is clearly somebody in the McCain campaign who doesn't understand where the votes are coming from," Schlafly said. "They only told me this at 10 o'clock last night, and it was a call from somebody down the line in the McCain campaign."


She added:

"The pro-lifers who paid $95 to come to this event because of Sarah Palin are going to be very unhappy."


Palin's appearance was set up before she was picked for the GOP's national ticket, McCain aides stressed. And her spokeswoman, Maria Comella, told ABC that Palin needed to pass on the antiabortion event to work on her speech to the Republican National Convention.


source

















Conclusion



So there ya have it.

We’ve seen that both candidates, McCain and Palin, stand in opposition of equal pay for women, and freedom of choice for them too, and we’ve seen how they choose to condone their approach.

BUT!

In the light of optimism, the McCain campaign does offer the American citizens as a whole their own form of change

Currently,

California, New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts all recognize gay American citizens the right to marriage. source

And

Currently – abortion is a choice that is not regulated by federal law in order to make it illegal.

So

If that’s today’s world, and the Palin/McCain ticket offers to constituationally disallow gay marriage, and to make abortion illegal, then you can begin to see what kind of change this republican campaign offers to our country.
It seems the only change we’re going to see is a revert back about 50 years, to a time of ignorance and fear.





Is that change…..you…..can believe in ?





posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 09:48 PM
link   
oh, and don't forget to pick up your "Support John McCain" yard sign

Lets put women back in their place!



Mod Edit: Image Hotlinking – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 3/9/2008 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 07:40 AM
link   
If anyone thinks that John McCain's choice of a woman has anything to do with helping women, they are sadly mistaken. He likes to be surrounded by pretty women. If women vote for McCain because of Palin, they are doing their gender a huge disservice.

Fortunately for me, abortion will not be an issue in my life. But I am concerned for the young women who, in the near future, may be living in a country where legal abortion is no longer an option and other means are exercised once again... :shk:



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   
thanks for your input, BH. I'm glad someone cares to talk about the issues of the 2008 election...

Funny how - this real issue gets no attention save one person...


all that jive about "lets talk issues" and.... well here ya go

womens rights

yahhhh you're right...lets go talk about how obama smokes cigarettes...

THAT is an issue

He must support Marlboro lobbyists

i bet, if obama is elected, cigarettes will be distrusted in school cafeterias all across the country!!!



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Rachel Madow on MSNBC even said "If women are stupid enough to believe the party that thinks they belong in the kitchen suddenly changed they deserve to be put in the kitchen by the armed GOP troops." Something like that, it was on last night/this morning.

So thankfully not all women want to be in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant.



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Andrew,

These issues only arrise in an election cycle and really have been non-issue for quite some time. The "checks and balance" system is in place for a reason. One or two people cannot change things without a hell of a lot of support, ie; the house and senate (and the last time I looked both were controlled by Democrats). I mean wasn't Row v Wade supposed to be struck down a few years ago when the evil GW Bush took over the supreme court of the US? What happened? Nada!

Despite the Democrats urgency to throw the same issues out every election cycle nothing happens and in my opinion nothing will. Americans as a whole have come to terms with the woman's right to choose. The only opposition comes from individuals or very specific groups.

I don't know why you guys keep bringing this up! At this point it's way on the back burner. You won with Roe v Wade, let it go!



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 10:27 AM
link   

These issues only arrise in an election cycle and really have been non-issue for quite some time



So...womens rights arent an issue?
The threats from the McCain/Palin ticket to make abortion illegal...

the words of John McCain about a law to require equal pay for equal work...thats not an issue?

So to me, it sounds like your assertion is that women should all go back to pre-WW2 duties.

Hmm.

Womens rights arent an issue?

tell that to women...



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 10:35 AM
link   
please allow me to giggle at your shear panic that you find yourself in.
You feel obama's coronation and ascension to the whitehouse slipping away from you.

try again in 8 years after paulin has had her 4 years in office.



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Fathom
 


Her name is PALIN. (Pay-lin). You do her a disservice to display her picture and continue to spell it (and no doubt pronounce it) wrong.

And did you answer what the RNC has to offer or did I miss your answer?

No panicking here. "Shear" or otherwise.

[edit on 3-9-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fathom
please allow me to giggle at your shear panic that you find yourself in.
You feel obama's coronation and ascension to the whitehouse slipping away from you.

try again in 8 years after paulin has had her 4 years in office.


i'm the one panicing?


You're the one who can't discuss the issues and you fall back on "HAHA you're scared"

Really? Am I? Because all signs point to its you beating around the bush, not answering questions, avoiding issues, and talking about how good Mayor Palin looks in a skirt.

It sounds like its you who is scared and you're clinging onto your last bastion of hope in this Election. Sarah Palin. Well guess what? The american public isnt anywhere as stupid as the RNC predicts they'll be.

They're going to vote for McCain because his VP is a woman? Are you dense?

The only thing Palin brings to the table is a set of breasts and a gynecologist.

Other than that, she's exactly like the old bigoted white men of the party.

Totally against womens rights
Totally against Gay rights

all in the name of religion


But thats a problem for the Constitution of the United States of America

a document that McCain and Palin are supposed to be protecting!

[edit on 9/3/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Aw come on Andrew women's rights? You have taken generalization to a whole new level. I was going to write a long retort here but I think instead I'll just sit back and wait for you to join us again in up-coming years and tell us "I told you so".

"What if" has been the mantra of the liberal politicos for as long as I have been voting. Keeping the liberal voter in darkness and using fear to as a strangle hold on a very susceptible constituency. The funny thing is hardly ever if at all does this "what ever" seem to break out into the daylight. It's smoke and it's mirrors and you know that as well as I do.

As an aside, if I had treated any woman I know or have known in my life in the manner you portray, they would have kicked my a**!! No sir, I believe you are the one demeaning women in this thread because you forget one important thing....

You seem to think they need defending. Therefore, they cannot think for themselves or act for themselves. Typical Liberal thought process.



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by GeneralLee
 




You seem to think they need defending. Therefore, they cannot think for themselves or act for themselves. Typical Liberal thought process.


let me give you a tip: don't pretend you know me. Because you're wrong.

I dont think women are defenseless.
I do think that John McCain and Sarah Palin don't support womens rights
I do think that John McCain and Sarah Palin don't support Gay rights
I do think that John McCain and Sarah Palin don't give a damn about the environment

I do think that John McCain and Sarah Palin don't give a damn about anything other than their own pocket books and the presidency of this country.

Thats it.

I do think that they are selfish.
I also think you're taking a cheap road in insinuating that i don't believe women can stand up for themselves

plenty of women do that all on their own

simply because i AGREE with what they say, doesnt mean that i think they are weak so i have to say it too

your logic, or absence there of, simply astounds me.

McCain/Palin

a vote for change
only if you're gay or a woman. And if you're a gay woman...you're really screwed



and




Aw come on Andrew women's rights? You have taken generalization to a whole new level.


What is generalized about womens rights?
Why should a woman have no right over her own reproductive system?

And why should the Federal Government not protect women against discriminating corporations by demanding and enforcing equal pay for equal work?

Generalizing?

Please.

You're blind to the real world my man.
You need to wake up

[edit on 9/3/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Again Andrew, you are missing the point. Your accusation was directed at my feelings toward women and not McCain, and I find it highly telling that now (out of nowhere) you have added the environment to your list. You see, I have been dealing with politics all my life and what I see is yet another Liberal going down the list. If one topic doesn't pan out, move on to the next. Do you realize that Ted Kennedy and Jimmy Carter were debating this stuff back in the seventies? Point being they were scaring their voter base with the same crap as you're party big whigs now are.

Anyway, until the liberal party removes the magic mirror off their prospective walls it's simply going to be more of the same.

No Andrew I don't know you, but I can guarantee you that if I attempted to shove miopic, hearsay statements through a thread like you have, there would certainly have been one hell of a hissy fit pitched!

But don't worry, I have run many a Liberal out of a room screaming at the top of their lungs and pulling their hair out! I'm just having fun....

The Liberal party has been an afterthought since 1980 when Ronald Reagan was elected and its only taken someone like Geroge W Bush to give you any sense that there is light at the end of the tunnel. Almost 30 years....there is a reason for that.

You are about to find that out with Sarah Palin.....a woman by the way.



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by GeneralLee
 


First off, the environment arguemnt existed in the OP
you would know that had you read before you replied


secondly


but I can guarantee you that if I attempted to shove miopic, hearsay statements through a thread like you have, there would certainly have been one hell of a hissy fit pitched!


What is hearsay about what i've laid out?
The candidates themselves spoke the words and voted the bills that i've shown in the OP

It is 100% anti-gay rights
It is 100% anti-women rights

Period.

The post was about women rights, and i had full intentions on doing a second one about gay rights....but it fits in well here as well.

They are opposed to giving rights to women and gay people

How is that statement false?

Prove me wrong.

You are making accusations that I *AM* wrong - but you arent giving us reasons *WHY* I'm wrong

Typical conservative bull *snip*

You talk talk talk
but when it comes time to prove up

you run run run

Are you going to finally be the one who stays and says "mccain and palin arent against rights for gay people and women because they ___________"



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Ok buddy, I'm game. Let's talk about gay rights first. I would like you to enlighten me as to what specific rights a gay male or female does not have that I don't have. Are you speaking about gay marriage? If so then that is subterfuge because its not about marriage, love, sealing a relationship or whatever. Isn't it really about the ability to get corporate spousal health care like traditional married couples get? Oh, and be very careful how you define "rights"!

By the way as a little comic relief.....marriage isn't all that it's cracked up to be...even the second, third or fourth time!

Answer that question then we will move on to women's rights! But for now, my day is done here in Florida. I'll be back tomorrow. Didn't want anyone to think I was doing a hit-and-run post. I guess tonight will go a long way describing what the GOP thinks of women...I hope anyway.

[edit on 3-9-2008 by GeneralLee]



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Maybe I should change my name to "Thread Killer". That seems to happen to me alot! Sigh.......





new topics
top topics
 
3

log in

join