Posted on 09/19/2008 9:25:04 AM PDT by Notary Sojac
There are, it would appear by reading newspapers and watching TV, many reasons not to like Sarah Palin, and even more reasons not to approve of her. Indeed, on the very day Governor Palin was announced as Senator McCain’s running mate, DrRich said to his own lovely bride of these past 35 years, “I hope Ms. Palin has Clarence Thomas’ phone number. She’s going to need some advice.”
Clarence Thomas, of course, is the Supreme Court Justice who is masquerading as an African American (his credentials as an actual black person having been thoroughly and systematically discredited by the diversity establishment, by virtue of his conservatism, during his confirmation “hearings”).
“Why, whatever do you mean?” asked DrRich’s sweet-hearted spouse.
“Just look at her,” DrRich replied. “There she stands: Sarah ‘Jesus, Babies and Guns’ Palin. Why, she’s the embodiment of the rubes Senator Obama talks about, the ones that cling in their misery to their Bibles and their varmint guns, and that keep making babies because they’re just too dim to figure out how to prevent it, and probably even too dim to figure out what causes them in the first place. In other words, she’s conservative. So by definition she’s no more a woman than Clarence Thomas is black. If she’s allowed to pass herself off as a legitimate (much less celebrated) embodiment of American womanhood, it will set the Movement back to the days of Ozzie and Harriet. So she’d better put on some thick skin because it’s going to get very nasty and very ugly very quickly.”
All of this, of course, has since come to pass. Why, Wendy Doniger, who is a Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School, and so who has the formal authority to rule on such things, has even established in her Newsweek blog that Ms. Palin is not actually a woman. (”Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman.”) You can’t actually be a card-carrying woman, you see, and say and do the stuff that Ms. Palin says and does. Any educated person can see that, and it’s good that the very well educated are taking the time to inform the rest of us.
So, like DrRich says, there are many reasons not to approve of Sarah Palin, some based on facts and some confabulated from a general knowledge of the kind of things primitives like her might believe, and all of them are being well and thoroughly (and desperately) documented for the public record by a panicky media establishment, with every hope and confidence that, once fully informed, no thoughtful person could ever actually vote for one such as she.
But as cynical as he is, and as savage as he expected the attacks to be, there is one criticism being made of Ms. Palin that took even DrRich by surprise. DrRich refers to the criticism she is receiving for failing to abort the latest addition to her family, her little son Trig, even though she learned while pregnant that he would likely have Down syndrome.
When DrRich was in medical school oh so many decades ago, children with Down syndrome were still largely institutionalized from birth. So when DrRich was being taught about Down syndrome he was shown pictures and movies of drooling children who were unable to speak or communicate meaningfully, and who were unable to feed themselves, use toilets, or interact as humans.
But of course, if you were to place any of today’s Baby Einsteins in such an institution from birth, they would end up much the same way. And once the era of institutionalization ended, and many Down children were raised instead with their families, amazingly we learned just how normal these kids could become.
When Down children are raised in the home by loving and caring families, it turns out that most of them become highly functional. DrRich knows people with Down syndrome, and finds them to be good-natured (most of the time), articulate, thoughtful and even witty, and they are not only quite capable of providing for themselves their basic human needs, but also of earning a living. Above all, they are happy to be alive, and their families are as happy to have them as they are any of their other children and they love them just as much. Of course, they do have problems, including a high incidence of cardiac abnormalities that need to be surgically corrected, and a relatively high risk of developing leukemia and infectious diseases. But these are fully-realized humans who enjoy their lives and have much to offer.
So if a pregnant woman finds out she is carrying a Down child, she has a lot to think about. There are a lot of potential problems with these special-needs children, and not every family is prepared to deal with these problems. But on the other hand, the experience of raising a Down child can be extremely rewarding - for everyone. So as DrRich sees it, the decision to deliver a Down child and welcome him/her into the family is at least a reasonable one, if not a blessed one.
So at first DrRich was a bit puzzled by the criticism being heaped upon Ms. Palin for keeping Trig. At first, he thought this unreasonable complaint was simply one of the many things being caught up in the pile of indiscriminate criticisms being leveled against her during that first mad rush to discredit her, to shame McCain into dropping her from the ticket immediately. Surely, nobody could really hate her for intentionally delivering a Down child.
But even when the mainstream media realized that it had overplayed its hand a bit, and began to settle down to some of the more reasonable criticisms of Ms. Palin (her inexperience in foreign affairs, for instance, which is every bit as troublesome as Mr. Obama’s), the issue of her having chosen not to abort her Down child did not go away.
The complaints, of course, are couched in terms of concern. A mother with a special-needs child should devote her efforts to the child, so it is clearly inadvisable for such a mother to seek the Vice Presidency. But while they express concern for the wellbeing of the child, their underlying tone is clearly one of approbation, and the criticism rings of false indignation. Since when does the women’s movement become so vociferously exercised because a working mother is not spending enough time with her children, whatever the needs of the children?
Besides, DrRich respectfully reminds critics of Ms. Palin that the Vice Presidency is famously a job with no responsibilities whatsoever (unless the President dies, of course, in which case a new VP is tapped to sit around and do nothing). In practical terms, being VP is the perfect job for any mother with a special-needs child, and it will certainly allow Ms. Palin to spend more time with her family than she ever could as Governor of Alaska, or even as Mayor of Wasila. Only being a Senator would approach the suitability of this job for a mother with family responsibilities, judging from (as demonstrated by Senators Obama, McCain and Biden) the massive amounts of time for which it is apparently perfectly OK not to show up for work. In fact, mothers with special needs-children ought to be harshly and publicly condemned if they do NOT seek the Vice Presidency of the United States.
No, there is clearly something more going on here than mere indignation that Ms. Palin is seeking a job that will take her away from her family. And gradually, DrRich has figured out what that is.
Ms. Palin had a duty to abort Trig, and she failed to discharge that duty. By so failing, she has abandoned, by her own choice, any claim she may have had to the title “woman,” and certainly any claim she may have had on the sympathy, much less support, of other women.
It is one thing to deliver a special-needs child who cannot be identified prenatally as having special needs. Women with such children are simply victims of the draw, and are to be pitied and supported in every way possible, with whatever public funds that may require. Women should not be punished with such an unforeseen and unpreventable burden, foisted on them by chance, or, if there is a God, then by the divine MCP (which is one reason why the notion of a divinity is so abhorrent to so many of the leftward persuasion - if God exists, he’s certainly stacked the cards against everyone except white males). Such a child is one of the worst things that can happen to an independent, self-actualized, competitive modern woman. Any real woman who cares about the child, who cares about herself, and who cares about doing what’s best for all women would abort that child whenever possible.
The idea that a woman who actually had a choice would cheerfully choose to have a child with Down syndrome seriously undermines the argument. Such a woman is clearly ignorant or stupid, and must have (through their ignorance or stupidity) bought into the old-fashioned, male-dominant paradigm that we enlightened folks have fought so hard to overcome. When women like this do their thing in Wasila, Alaska, one merely shakes one’s head at the backwardness of it all, and consoles oneself that, some day, the truth will filter out even to these bush people.
But the idea that a woman, once making such a poor decision, would then not just quietly slink along through her life, privately bearing the burden of her poor choice; the idea that such a woman indeed would allow herself (and even seek) to become well-known, and to run for public office, much less seek the second highest office in the land; the idea that such a woman could become not only popular but publicly acclaimed and even adored - why, such an idea is utterly anathema. This woman calls into question the fundamental tenets of the Movement.
This explains one aspect of the approbation being heaped upon Sarah Palin for choosing to give birth to a Down child. She has made mortal enemies of the extreme women’s movement, and they need to destroy her at whatever the cost.
But another aspect of it (and one that finally resonates with the theme of this blog), is that Ms. Palin is setting an example that, if followed by admiring women, will cost the healthcare system a lot of money. Down children, for a variety of reasons, often need a lot of expensive medical care. And by actively campaigning to encourage women to abort their babies if pre-natal testing suggests a high risk of Down syndrome (by describing to the stunned mother-to-be the institutionalized Down child of the 1960s, by outlining the horrors of heart surgery and other medical issues that may occur, and by neglecting to mention that Down children most often become completely fulfilled and completely lovable people who bear their trials with grace and humor, and who actually have a lot to teach us), obstetricians in the US, Canada and many European countries have succeeded in sending over 90% of Down pregnancies to abortion in recent years. Sarah Palin, especially if she remains popular, and most especially if Trig grows up in public view and becomes a beloved example of the potential of Down children, threatens to cause many women to consider their options more carefully. And that will cost society big time, as a prominent Canadian obstetrician has pointed out.
Women who have chosen to deliver their Down babies are today being subtly scorned by society. Women have a duty to their gender and to society to abort those babies, and when they choose otherwise they are displaying serious psychopathology and sociopathy. It is becoming very difficult for women to do otherwise.
Sarah Palin threatens to change the paradigm. Perhaps she already has. The duty to abort has been hard fought and hard won. Palin has got to be stopped.
And that explains at least some of the passionate attacks from people who, one would think, would normally celebrate the ascendancy of a strong woman who has succeeded at a man’s game while remaining an admirable wife and mother.
DrRich will end by pointing out that the duty to abort disabled children (a duty that, thanks to Sarah Palin, is obvious today for all to see), is really no different than the coming duty to accept assisted suicide or euthanasia. Observing the attacks on Ms. Palin has made DrRich realize that we are farther along that road than he had thought.
Thank you for posting this. A very good read.
A good read.
bookmark
Love It! Julie Gorin wrote a good one today, too, titled: “I want Sarah Palin’s Baby” - Julie was all fine with having a Downs baby, considering what a sweetie that little Trig Palin is — but kids with peanut allergies must not be allowed to live - much worse impact on all of society (and our desserts).
As to this line: “really no different than the coming duty to accept assisted suicide or euthanasia” - sorry DrRich, but we’re already there - Terry Schiavo was the most public example, but this is going on all the time now. Mom’s have the right to kill their babies and Next of Kin have the right to send their disabled husband, wife, mother, dad to die in a Hospice so as “not to be a burden.”
I'll have to look for Julie Gorin's article.
Clarence Thomas has said that the uproar during his Senate Confirmation hearings had nothing to do with Anita Hill and sexual harassment. The underlying issue was abortion.
And the uproar regarding Palin is also based on the issue of abortion.
Having a woman partner in the White House who is anti-abortion is a slap in the face to all abortion proponents. They are scared to death because they fear they may be losing ground.
How many women in the hostile environment that NOW and women like Freidan and Steinam fashioned are able to stand next to their sister and admit that they are not pro-choice when they stand in the anonymity of the voting booth? My guess is few have enough guts to stand up to the pro-abortion women in America. It’s easier to just sit there and smile and wait for the subject to change.
My youngest daughter is now 12 years old, but when I was pregnant with her, my doctor told me he suspected that the baby I was carrying had Downs syndrome because the head was way too large early in my pregnancy. He suggested I have an amnio to confirm this one way or another.
I had already read up on the amnio tests and had determined that I didn't want to have one, because of the possible risk to the baby and reiterated this to him. I told my doctor I did not want the test, since there was nothing that they could do to prevent the baby from having Downs syndrome if, my child did in fact have it.
He appeared to be embarrassed and quite shocked by my answer but, nevertheless told me, that most women want to know one way or the other so they can then decide whether or not to have an abortion and then try again for another child without Downs syndrome. This time he shocked me!
I told him it didn't matter to me, and that I would not be having the test or an abortion. He told me it was refreshing to see a woman that was willing to continue her pregnancy, even if the child might have a disability.
I was perhaps better prepared for this decision than Sarah Palin, so I found the decision an easy one to make. I had known a friend that had a child with Downs syndrome and I had seen first hand how much joy that child had brought to their family and how much closer their family had become as a result of that child being born. I also had a friend who worked with special needs children, and had told me she had found that to be the same with virtually all the families of special needs children. I knew there were people and resources that were readily available to help me if I needed it.
As it turned out, my daughter's body grew into her large head and toward the end of my pregnancy, my doctor thought that there was a good possibility that my child might not have Downs syndrome after all, since aside from the size of the head early in my pregnancy there were no other signs of the syndrome. Not wanting to get my hopes too high, I just accepted the fact that I wouldn't know for certain until the baby was born. As it turned out my daughter was born without Downs syndrome.
I am proud of Sarah Palin's decision not to have an abortion, and I stand by my decision too. I have great respect for Sarah Palin and we know that we are REAL WOMEN!
“It is one thing to deliver a special-needs child who cannot be identified prenatally as having special needs. Women with such children are simply victims of the draw, and are to be pitied and supported in every way possible, with whatever public funds that may require. Women should not be punished with such an unforeseen and unpreventable burden, foisted on them by chance, or, if there is a God, then by the divine MCP”
And the most appalling yet is WHY oh WHY do these mothers of Down Syndrome children NOT visit “bioethicist” Pete Singer who thinks it’s acceptable to kill a baby with special needs after the birth has taken place (and up to how long after)? Certainly, he, (with the help of Kevorkian) could take care of this situation!
That is despicable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.