With all the rumors being spread across the Internet about whether or not that little boy, that Palin claims, is hers or her daughter's, there are some serious questions that need honest answers. Add to that the fact that her daughter is pregnant (many believe for the second time) and there is no attempt, so far, in the direction of adoption surrender, makes me wonder about a lot of things.
Is it, for instance, only those of us without political/social/financial connections that should surrender our children for adoption? Is it OK to condemn Jamie Spears but not the Governor's daughter? And what about this assumed, shotgun engagement to the high school hockey jock who calls himself a "f***ing redneck," who "kicks ass" and "don't want kids." Something is truly skewed here. I know that the LAST thing we need in this country's executive branch is an evangelical Christian with the agenda of the radical right wing, who thinks they have the ear of God Almighty, in her apron pocket. Shades of Phyllis Schlafly!!
Oh, and she speaks of her daughter's "mistake." It seems some things never change because it wasn't her having sex that was indicated as the "mistake," but the fact that she got pregnant. Does this ring any bells with my senior sisters? The entire attitude leads me to believe that, as young people, we could have screwed like bunnies as long as it didn't show up in a baby bump. Same attitude, present day......
The Republican party, or as I call them, Enemies of Mothers who Keep (EMK's), is trying to attract the disgruntled "vagina voter" (Thank you, Chris. I love that term.) who are all peeved that Hillary didn't get the nomination. Hey guys, I was a Hillary supporter, too, but I'll be damned if I will vote with my genitals, just because McCain picked a woman for a running mate. If worse came to worse and some bigot decides to take a whack at Obama, I would rather have Biden filling the gap than cuddly, little Palin. Things in the Alaska Governor's mansion are smelling fishy, anyway.
Remember, this is the party that would have maternity "homes" in every town and would push domestic infant adoption like a drug dealer pushes crack. Add to that what I know, personally, about the Fundies and their agenda, and the option of any kind of choice for a female goes down the tubes. Yes, there are still those women who might still opt for no termination and ultimate surrender, but there needs to be protection on the books for the majority who want to make up their own minds without pressure from the "more moral than thou" contingent.
As I look out to sea, from the shore of my thoughts, towards a roiling ocean that is the Republican machinations taking place, I feel like the old world map-maker who wrote, in areas of the deep ocean, "Here be monsters." I can see the Kraken, with its one great eye, waving its "elephantine" tentacles and licking its beak. I didn't trust them eight years ago, I don't trust them now, and I doubt if I ever will. There is also the distinct probability that, should they be elected, what is, now, a really giant undertaking for SMAAC will become an unbelievably difficult struggle and that is to have our stories heard and addressed by our national government. I'm not saying that there are not adoption proponents on both sides of the Congressional aisle, but experience tells me that we stand a better chance with the Dems than with the EMK's.
I am a firm believer that the direction in which this election goes will make the difference between the rights of women being retained or lost. I am bombarding the Obama camp with letters about our reproductive rights and the EMS and the issues of the Senior mothers.
I call it "As The Wheel Squeaks." Join me.