Palin and McCain's Disregard for Women's Health

We all know John McCain and Sarah Palin are out of touch on women's health; between McCain's infamous air-quoting of the word "health" and Palin's countless contradictions on reproductive health care, we know that we would be in bad shape if they were to make it to the White House. That is no big news.

But what Sarah Palin told the American public last week was a stark confirmation of where they stand.

During an interview that Focus on the Family founder and anti-choice leader James Dobson conducted with Palin, he brought up the Republican Party platform's position on choice, identifying it -- in his own words -- as, "the strongest pro-life, pro-family document to come out of a political party." [The Republican platform seeks a constitutional amendment banning all abortions -- with no exceptions for rape and incest, and no exception to save the life of the woman.] To me, that's not pro-family -- that's pro-government in women's lives.

Not only did Palin express her support for the platform's principles, but when she was asked if McCain also "strongly supports those views" and whether she believes he will "implement it," she responded, "I do, from the bottom of my heart."

With that statement, Palin affirmed our fears that she, along with John McCain, is on board with the platform's most severe anti-woman principles. Apparently women's health is not only "extreme," but it's not even up for discussion.

If McCain upholds the Republican Party platform while in office, where will this leave the teenager who is impregnated as a result of rape? Where will this leave the woman who might die if she doesn't receive abortion services? Shouldn't these women have the right to make these personal decisions about their health, about their lives?

Regarding the principles of the Republican Party platform, Palin said: "[T]hey are there, they are solid, we stand on them and again I believe that it is the right agenda for the country at this time. Very, very clear and contrasted tickets in this election, November 4th."

That last sentence is the one thing Sarah Palin and I can agree on. And there are only eight days left to go. Governor Sarah Palin is assuring Americans that a McCain/Palin administration will implement the very harshest of anti-woman policies -- meaning no choices, and no exceptions. Next week when you're at the polls, use your vote wisely; don't put the government in control of women's health and lives.

Comments

[Fudgefase]

"....in Colorado today a 21 year old got an amendment on the ballot which confers personhood upon a fetus at the moment of conception. They are hailing it as the beginning of overturning Roe V Wade. If fetus' inside a woman's body are persons - What about all those potential little babies in petrie dishes just waiting to be implanted?..."

This is fascinating - and relates directly to something happening in the UK concerning women with cancer.
Women diagnosed with cancer and facing infertility after their treatment, have their eggs frozen so they can reproduce after treatment. Normally the 'donor' of the sperm is their husband or partner. Apparently fertilised eggs store better than unfertilised ones, hence the decision, taken and agreed, by both people. After the treatment is over, if the couple then split up, the woman asks to get her fertilised eggs put back in - and her partner refuses, insisting that they are destroyed, as he no longer wishes to have children with that particular woman and/or be held responsible financially for their upkeep. The woman's only chance of having her own children are then destroyed by court order. Not a single woman has won the right to have the eggs transplanted. Not one. The men can still have kids but the woman whose eggs were frozen is unable to conceive.
This is a HUGE and overlooked injustice.
Is it the same in the States?

[Niki1102]

I still don't understand how it is anyone"s business what a woman chooses to do with her body. This is supposed to be a free country where people are allowed to make choices and live their lives as they see fit. Yet there are people out there like Pailin who want to take that freedom away by taking away rights.

It astounds me that any woman could be so against protecting women and their choices. Just because you don't believe in something doesn"t give you the right to force your beliefs on everyone else. I don't care if you think abortion is a sin and that anyone that has one is going to hell because what a woman chooses to do privately does not affect you.

If a woman wants to have an abortion regardless of her reasons it is her business and no one else"s.

God help us if McCain/Pailin get elected. It"s bad enough I live in Florida where the votes don"t count unless it"s for a Republican.

[gustafson]

just another reason NOT to vote of these "out of touch" people

[goodoldusa]

the Republican Party has become "amend the Constitution happy" that's the only approach they seem to have lately from Huckabee's - amend it to match the bible - to McCain/Palin - amend it to prevent abortion. How can these people say they aren't for big government when they want to bring it into your bedrooms and even your mind? This brand of Republicanism has to go, somewhere else not the USA.

[mnmod]

I believe the issue is not only abortion, but contraception. Both McCain and Palin believe life begins at the moment of contraception and have indicated that legal rights should follow. Does this mean any contraception that may stop a fertilized egg from implanting in the womb could be banned, such as IUDs, birth control pills, Plan B, etc.
What about miscarriages? Could a woman who has a miscarriage be investigated for causing an abortion? Could a woman whose doctor tells her to go on complete bed rest, doesn't, and miscarries be charged with causing an abortion?

[Gail54]

I read that there are consevatives who believe that "the pill" is a form of abortion! This is so scary! I would suggest to women who are on birth control and who have daughters to stock up on the "morning after pill" in the case that all of our options are taken away if the pubs would get into office.Even if they don't get in,there are those who will still be working to reduce our options.

[franwnyc]

McCain and Palin deserve to lose by the widest margin in history.
However, with women like these and their husbands, I fear the worst.
If these 2 get elected, I fear that every principle for which this country stands will be lost

[mtflyer]

I have asked several women who had Women for McCain stickers on their vehicles why they support McCain considering his and Palin's utter disregard for women's rights or health. Various answers in-cluding that their husband put it on there, they don't believe in abortion,etc. One even said she didn't think women ought to vote. Good grief! It occurred to me how moronic it is that these anti-abortionists supposedly care so much about the unborn and then don't give a hoot about kids after they are born. They are the ultimate hypocrites. Again it is the government butting into something that is only between the woman and her creator. One's religious beliefs are another thing entirely.
I am sure I have alienated some long-time friends because of our political differences, but I have come to the conclusion that if they are so stupid or corrupt that they cannot see the necessity for profound change in the way this nation is headed, then I do not need to be asociated with them for one is judged by the company they keep.

[EasyCheese]

Since it disappeared....

Imagine a building that is about to be demolished. All that remains is to push the button. Suddenly a citizen runs up and tells you "I think I saw a man in that building!" Are you going to blow it up without a search? A rational human being would not. Because there is the potential loss of human life, a rational person would search that building thoroughly just in case. Life is too precious to be lost like that.

At the moment of conception, is there human life? Most would say yes. How about in the 8th month? Probably. What about 7th month? 6th? 5th? I don"t know and I don"t think anyone does.

We just don"t know. Therefore, ethically we should not destroy that embryo/fetus¦.there is a possibility that you will be ending a human life.

[AEinPHX]

Don't impose your ethics on me .... I will make the decision myself. I am a rational human being and quite capable of deciding what is best for me and my family. I don't need you, the govt or Sarahwho butting into my personal life. If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. Joe Biden said it best when he said that he personally was against abortion but that he would not limit the right of a woman to examine her options along with her Dr and family and decide the best course for her.

[cjinaz]

I agree...who best to judge if this child is the best addition to this family unit? The last time I looked, a fetus does not contribute to the bottom line, it does not impact the economy, it does not tend to the other children in the family. A fetus does not occupy a desk job or a space on the factory floor or a place at the table. It does not take care of elderly parents or balance the checkbook. I recently told a friend who is a McCain supporter that the moment women and unwanted pregnancy stop being the commonly used phrase...that when abortion becomes a condition a man and a woman experience, that is when the scales will become more balanced. As activist Flo Kennedy said years ago, "if men became pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." Think about it, is is even remotely possible that some of the child abuse in this country is foisted upon children who were not WANTED by the mother? When a woman is forced to accept an unwanted pregnancy, she may turn out to be another Casey Anthony, unable to bond to a child, having different priorities than a real mom should have, able to squander her time on activities not related to the child...........

[billw8017]

We just don't know because we just don't care. In point of fact, life began some 3 billion years ago and everything now alive -- fungi, animals and plants -- is not merely descended from that life but an aspect of that life. The fetus is not a chance gathering of minerals but living material from before it was a fetus. All the living things now on the earth are as if buds of one life that started 3 billion years ago. To say it becomes living material at birth, or in the third month of gestation, or at conception is a legal fiction meant to extend the normal protections of a person to the formative person at some phase of development. Pushing the legal definition of a person back simply prevents us from treating population control -- whether by personal or state standards -- in the most realistic way. In point of fact, some women are not ready to become mothers, and they are ready to harm themselves to cause a miscarriage. Another evil about the "pro life" people is that they would deny medical supervision and care to those women. Basically, "pro life" people despise women and may say since they had the fun, they should pay for it -- quite as if, having a baby is a practical punishment!

[indy100]

I personally would never have an abortion, or want one of my daughters to, but I don't believe it should be illegal either. It is not the governement's or any church's business. And the irony, as stated earlier, (and which I talk about frequently) is that those adamantly opposed to abortion don't give a hoot about any children except their own, once they're born. Any attempt to help low income and single parent families is "socialism". Apparently Fascism is okay, because it's where we're already at, but anything that benefits everyone is evil. Great values.

[BlueZoo]

Until all these pro-life women adopt the babies they feel should not be aborted, then, and only then, do they have a say! Until that miracle occurs, they need to shut the hell up! Obama-Biden '08!

[mtflyer]

Great point! Also of course, the system for adoption has gotten so restrictive that people have to go to other countries and adopt kids there. The hypocrites indeed should just keep their traps shut and actually DO something to help the situation so that there could be no kids without a home or family. LOL

[mzspine1]

I have adopted two of these babies ( I adopted both locally not from another country) so I guess according to your reasoning I now have the right to speak my opinion.

First, abortion has nothing to do with women's health so please do not pretend that it does. It is sad that we live in a society that will gladly pay to destroy life but will do very little to help conceive it or preserve it.

Abortion is a choice that in a few cases is born out of gut wrenching circumstances but in most cases it is a quick fix and selfish choice born out of an already irresponsible one. I cannot fathom how any "woman" and I use that term loosely could ever allow anyone to do to any child what they do to a child during a partial birth abortion. Whether you want it or not. To allow a life to be treated with such disreguard is frightening to me.

I went through years of fertility treatments after suffering a terrible miscarriage and I would have gladly taken any of these babies and raised them. I can tell you as I miscarried my five month little baby, it would be a "fetus" to you. I felt his tiny hand in mine I would have surely traded my life for his. I held him all the way to the hospital and as small a he was he was a perfectly formed little boy.

[Gail54]

As I said before..."Women's Health".Consider women who have a chronic illness and become pregnant.Women who have a disease called Lupus or other potentialy fatal diseases may become very ill during their pregnancy (at any time in their pregnancy)and have to make that agonizing decision to carry the baby to term or not when it threatens her lfe.It does happen that the womans health is in danger.

[indy100]

I'm an adoptee, and am VERY familiar with adoption issues, and adoptive families. As a woman who suffered infertility and later adopted, you view things differently than many people. I'm also a mother of four myself. Adoption is not the end all, be all answer. Having a great family doesn't solve all the problems that come with being adopted. Adoption should not be promoted as the only option. Women should have choices, and those choices should be made by us, not for us.

[JustMyWords]

The idea that you could say that abortion in "most cases is a quick fix and a selfish choice born out of an already responsible one" only proves that you don't understand abortion as well as you may understand adoption.

Most abortions involve a gut-wrenching decision, made by someone who would give anything NOT to be in that position. (And in my personal opinion, any woman that could make that sort of decision as a "quick fix" probably shouldn't be having a child anyway - that's hardly the sort of responsible behavior you would want from someone in charge of an infant, now, is it?)

And let me point out as well that partial birth abortion is not an on-demand procedure in any state that I'm aware of. And the idea that there are just hundreds of women out there deciding willy-nilly in the 7th or 8th month of pregnancy that they just don't want to have a baby after all is absolutely ridiculous.

[fedupwithrepublicans]

Only when Men can become pregnant should they have any say about what a woman does regarding a pregnancy!

[mtflyer]

RIGHT ON! As a man I can see that my gender is the cause of this- I have never heard of a woman who chose to be artificially inseminated changing her mind and having an abortion. Also of course with the small percentage of women in the Congress or on the Supreme Court over the years they have had no say in what laws have been made in this context.

[tis]

Scary woman this Palin. No, I refuse to give her the power over my body, it should be my choice.

[berrycooda]

If you don't want to get pregnant.....take precautions to not get pregnant.

By the way, the few pregnancies you refer to as being caused by rape, are only a
drop in the bucket as to the millions of babies aborted in this country.

If a woman is so desperate as to go for a back street abortion, then be more careful.
So many people want to adopt babies, why not go that route instead.

God knows babies when they are in the womb, and maybe one of the aborted babies was
predestined to do something when it was an adult that could have made a big difference in
this world. Babies are supposed to be a blessing not an afterthought.
Most people who get abortions regret it later on....
They don't forget that an impulsive action was a big mistake and they would have had a
son or daughter.

[saynotocults]

If abortions are banned , then the only choice women will have is street abortions, and no legitimate doctor care. Country first, women last.

OBAMA/BIDEN '08

[Kambriel2]

There's the rub. People are wanting to adopt babies. Not all babies, just some. Of the eight foster children my sister has taken in, she's adopted six of them. Believe me, she didn't have to fight a long waiting list for them at all. Decent loving children, with birth parents who are drug addicts, drunks, and child abusers. All with physical and emotional healing that we have to work on helping heal. Would I trade a one of them? No, of course not. I love them all. However, I get angry that they, or any child had to suffer what they endured because someone was too lazy or too stupid to figure out how a condom, birth control pills or a diaphragm works.

[stryker]

No, an aborted baby was not destined to do something as an adult. Just like a one year old child beaten to death by her stepfather is not destined for something. Or a five year old who runs out into the street and gets hit by a car. You are only destined to be what you grow to be. For every Einstein aborted there may be two Charles Mansons or Adolph Hitlers. Trying to determine what an unborn child would turn out to be is ludicrous.

[Kayeyeem]

people don't want to adopt all the babies- fyi. As the baby grows older, the chance decreases. People don't want to adopt them and so they are in foster care, children homes, orphanages, being cared for in a group of ten or so by one overworked social worker. I'm not saying these kids should have been aborted but the idea that one can simply put a baby up for adoption and it will have a swell life is not in reality. The argument that adoption is an easy solution within our current social system needs to be more thought through . And within that adoption argument- we still need places like Planned Parenthood to help the women, girls, who need prenatal health care.

[mtflyer]

And of course the fanatical right-wingers would do away with Planned Parenthood programs, sex ed in our schools, and other programs that provide the alternatives to abortions.

[kathy4change]

What about the woman whose life is at risk? Mc Cain/Palin say no abortion so you just wait to see what will happen - and losing your life is a possibility? Ridiculous.!!!! If a woman's life is in danger, the choice should be hers - not the government. Shame on Mc Cain/Palin for having so little respect for women to make the decision that is right for them. GO OBAMA/BIDEN

[Gail54]

Horrible is what Taiyo went through-we will never those days return as long as there are women on this earth.

[Gail54]

Funding for sex education,birth control= less abortion

[Kambriel2]

Abortion is considered wrong because it destroys potential life. And yet, funding for sexual health education, reproductive health care, and research for improved and advances in birth control - things that will actively diminish the need for abortion - are not worthy of funding. Abstinence education is cheap. Funding child care, early education, pre-natal and post-natal health care, foster care and child protection services, continued education programs for teen parents these are all expensive and why use tax money for social services that benefit all Americans when there's oil exploration, Military operations in Iraq and corporate bail-outs to pay for - since we have to make sure taxes are not raised whatever the cost. If abortion is murder, shouldn't it be prevented at all cost? Should birth control then be made available as freely and openly as possible?

All men and women on death rows, were innocent babies just as much as the victims of violent crime. If life is so precious that we will sacrfice a woman's health for it, then why should we treat death so cavalier? By calling for further military action in Iraq, she would surely be willing to cost the lives of American soldiers and Iraqi citizens. They too were innocent babies, once. When did their lives become worthless?

It seems to me, some lives are more pro than others.

[Taiyo]

I grew up in the 1950s and I know first hand how frightening it was for a young girl who had the misfortune to get pregnant and needed an abortion. My experience even involved interrogation by detectives!! Women of all ages MUST have access to legal and SAFE abortions. The alternative is just too damned scary!