Atheists’ Worst Nightmares: Sarah Palin, Bananas

Why should atheists be worried about Republican Vice-Presidential candidate Harriet Miers Sarah Palin?

The Christian Coalition loves her:

Roberta Combs, President of the Christian Coalition of America said: “Governor Sarah Palin is a bold choice for Vice President who is a courageous advocate for unborn children. In addition, she is a conservative who is a reformer not afraid to shake up the establishment. I congratulate Senator McCain for his outstanding selection for his vice presidential running mate.”

The Concerned Women for America love her:

Janice Shaw Crouse, director and senior fellow of CWA’s Beverly LaHaye Institute, said,

“It is particularly significant that a conservative woman was nominated for the nation’s second highest office. For years the feminist movement has acknowledged for leadership only those women who embrace a radical agenda. How refreshing that now we have a woman who reflects the values of mainstream American women. Sarah Palin is pro-life, pro-marriage and pro-family. She is a woman who is balancing the personal and professional in admirable ways. She is an outstanding woman who will be an excellent role model for the nation’s young people. Sarah Palin is chief among equals with American professional women; she brings the kind of balance that characterizes the high-achieving women of today. She will bring to the forefront of our cultural conversations an intelligent, realistic, well-grounded woman’s perspective.”

Crouse concluded: “Take that feminists — here is a woman of accomplishment who brings a fresh face to traditional values and models the type of woman most girls want to become.”

Liberty Alliance Action loves her:

“Gov. Palin is pro-life and pro-marriage. She is also a lifelong member of the National Rifle Association,” said [LAA Chairman Mathew] Staver. “Personnel is policy. With the selection of Gov. Palin, Sen. John McCain has proven that he can exercise sound judgment. Gov. Palin has electrified conservatives,” noted Staver.

Family Research Council Action loves her:

[Says President Tony Perkins:] “Senator McCain made an outstanding pick from the choices that were on the table. Governor Sarah Palin is an outspoken advocate for pro-family policies that energize social conservatives. She has a record of advancing the culture of life at every opportunity including championing a ban on partial-birth abortion and promoting parental consent for minor abortions.

“On February 11th of this year, for example, she signed into law the ‘Safe Haven for Infants Act,’ facilitating the safe surrender of an unwanted newborn to a place of safety and hope. Her actions contrast sharply with the Democratic nominee, Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who when he was in the Illinois Senate repeatedly helped to kill a bill that sought to protect babies who survived abortion.”

Even James Dobson has has apparently turned gay for her, saying, “I would pull that lever [for McCain].”

Other reasons we should be worried:

Palin wants to teach Intelligent Design:

“Teach both [evolution and creationism]. You know, don’t be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important and it’s so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And, you know, I say this, too, as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject — creationism and evolution. It’s been a healthy foundation for me. But don’t be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides.”

She thinks religious leaders have the freedom to endorse candidates from the pulpit:

“A pastor, a priest, a rabbi, certainly they have the freedom to say whatever they want to say. And you know, thank the lord that we do have that freedom of speech.

“Faith is very important to so many of us here in America, and I would never support any government effort to stifle our freedom of religion or freedom of expression or freedom of speech.

“You know, I would just caution maybe a pastor to be very careful if they’re in front of a congregation and they decide to endorse one candidate over another. You know, there may be some frustration with that candidacy endorsement being made manifest by a few, fewer dollars in the offering plate, so I would just offer that bit of caution (laughing.)

“But, no, I’ll tell you, freedom of speech is so precious and it’s worth defending and of course freedom of religion and freedom of expression will be things that I will fight for.”

Just wait till the weekend’s over and the media have combed through her entire personal and political life.

We’ll get more of her absurd statements and the Religious Right’s fawning press releases.

  • Epistaxis

    But who’s the best candidate for born children? Who’s the candidate for grown-ups?

  • Siamang

    I think this nomination really says two things:

    One is that the standard by which the Republican Party measures fitness to lead is primarily, if not solely *ideological purity*.

    Look at these press releases. They’re all about “Sarah Palin will be a great vice president because she believes in X”.

    Not “She is insightful, smart, comes up with creative solutions, is good working with legislatures, diplomats”, etc. No. They’ve picked someone because her “issues scorecard” lines up with Limbaugh’s.

    The other thing is that Republicans really, really don’t get the idea of feminism. They truly think that women’s equality is just about picking a woman every now and again. It’s because they don’t get it… when they see someone hire a woman, their first thought is “well, she just got that job because she’s a woman.” They don’t actually believe that women are equal, so they’re dumbfounded when someone says “why did you pick that IDIOT to nominate?”

    Really and truly, I think that the folks in the smoke-filled room who picked Palin don’t think that there really IS an effective leader among republican women, so they picked one at random and pat themselves on the backs for being forward thinking and modern.

  • sam

    How can you be pro-marriage if you’re against gay marriage?

  • Ryan Jensen

    She thinks religious leaders have the freedom to endorse candidates from the pulpit

    You don’t? Where does your definition of freedom of speech end? When someone religious attempts to use it? When a religious person in a position of power states an opinion?

  • http://brownjs.wordpress.com J.S.Brown

    How can you be pro-marriage if you’re against gay marriage?

    That’s simple. Define marriage so that it excludes same-sex couples.

  • Pingback: News From Around The Blogosphere 8.30.08 « Skepacabra

  • Spancy

    I’ll be honest, she is freaking sexy as hell. What I wouldn’t do for that woman to put out a swimsuit calendar…

  • Jack

    I have to disagree with you on two points:

    1. Our worst nightmare? She is much much much better than the potential VP candidate choices of Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee.

    2. “She thinks religious leaders have the freedom to endorse candidates from the pulpit.”

    What’s wrong that? Preachers are just human beings and one of the inalienable rights of man is that we have a freedom to voice our opinions.

    You are pretty much a spokesperson for atheists should you not have the right to say that you are for Obama?

    In fact every quote you selected to place in this section is a valid point especially the one you highlighted. In the past preachers have come out for candidates such as David Duke. Some of these people have been contrite about these actions later. The part about fewer dollars is obviously a bit of humor as indicated by her laughing.

  • Doris Tracey

    I think Sarah Palin is a conservative that will be liberal with her ideas. She seems to have high energy and a very happy fulfilled woman. This woman will be a great example for the country! She is pro-life instead of pro-death, Yea!!!

  • http://www.rekounas.org rekounas

    To my American neighbours. Leave! Come to a secular country like Canada. We won’t judge you and really don’t care what you believe, unless it is in favour of creationism. We will quietly laugh behind your back and nothing more will be said about it.

  • mariesala7

    To my American neighbours. Leave! Come to a secular country like Canada. We won’t judge you and really don’t care what you believe, unless it is in favour of creationism. We will quietly laugh behind your back and nothing more will be said about it.

    Oh, I’d so so love too. You have no idea. If Obama doesn’t win, it will be a major hit to my already dismal willingness to live in this country. I know the grass is always greener on the other side and that I should count my blessings, but I’m just so disappointed in the worldview of my fellow U.S. citizens. Some days it just hurts.

  • justin jm

    We keep hearing this claim…

    Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who when he was in the Illinois Senate repeatedly helped to kill a bill that sought to protect babies who survived abortion.”

    Can somebody shed some light on the situation? I don’t believe for a second anything the FRC says.

  • Milena

    Crouse concluded: “Take that feminists — here is a woman of accomplishment who brings a fresh face to traditional values and models the type of woman most girls want to become.”

    Barf. Seriously, no.

  • http://liberalfaith.blogspot.com/ Steve Caldwell

    Anyone here read any of the rumors about who might be the real mother of Sarah Palin’s 5th child?

    Here are two articles about this:

    Sarah Palin Is NOT The Mother
    http://dailykos.com/story/2008/8/30/121350/137/486/580223

    Bristol Palin Pregnancy: Is Sarah Palin’s Baby Really Her Daughter’s?
    http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/archive/2008/08/30/bristol-palin-pregnancy-is-sarah-palin-s-baby-really-her-daughter-s.aspx

    I guess we really won’t know if these rumors are true until the National Enquirer is through investigating.

  • ryot

    Warning: Bad joke ahead.

    Governor of Alaska? So that’s what Megan Mullally’s been doing since her talkshow ended.

    I may have to turn my study abroad trip into a full-on citizenship if this wingnut nonsense continues.

  • Samuel Skinner

    Siamang… people like you have to stop posting things like that- it always leads to me doing my authoritarian ideologies analogies. After all, in the Soviet Union, promotion was only available to those with loyalty to the Party and who parroted doctrine, while the Nazi’s did the same thing… dang, not again.

    Anyway, all authoritarian ideologies put a high value on “ideological purity”. As for women… they are viewed as a way to get more people for the cause- baby machines. The only reason the Republicans have women with power is they are Americans and the inclusiveness rubbed of on them.

    As for this subject
    ” She thinks religious leaders have the freedom to endorse candidates from the pulpit

    You don’t? Where does your definition of freedom of speech end? When someone religious attempts to use it? When a religious person in a position of power states an opinion?”

    You do realize that churches have a special position (they are Tax Free) and as such are resticted from becoming involved in the ppolitical process? They can if they wish, but they have to give up their tax free status because they are now a PAC. They want their cake and eat it too.

  • cipher

    To my American neighbours. Leave! Come to a secular country like Canada. We won’t judge you and really don’t care what you believe, unless it is in favour of creationism. We will quietly laugh behind your back and nothing more will be said about it.

    I’d also like to leave at this point, although I’d probably prefer Europe. If the few people I care about weren’t here, and if I had any gift at all for languages, I’d leave and never look back.

  • http://atheists.meetup.com/531 benjdm

    She is much much much better than the potential VP candidate choices of Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee.

    She probably isn’t better than Huckabee. There’s reporting that she’s a dominionist.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/29/163234/559/495/579213

    If you’re not familiar, from wiki: “Dominion Theology is a grouping of theological systems with the common belief that society should be governed exclusively by the law of God as codified in the Bible, to the exclusion of secular law, a view also known as theonomy. The most prominent modern formulation of Dominion Theology is Christian Reconstructionism, founded by R. J. Rushdoony in the 1970s. Reconstructionists themselves use the word dominionism to refer to their belief that civil government should be controlled by Christians alone and conducted according to Biblical law.”

    The religious right may have their theocratic monarch in the V.P. candidate position. I can’t imagine continuing to live in the U.S. if Obama loses.

  • http://mollishka.blogspot.com mollishka

    Miers, not Myers, btw.

    Also: nice new digs! This is my first time making it over here from Google Reader since the change… comment writing appears to still be painfully slow, but everything at least looks nice :)

  • http://mollishka.blogspot.com mollishka
    2. “She thinks religious leaders have the freedom to endorse candidates from the pulpit.”

    What’s wrong that? Preachers are just human beings and one of the inalienable rights of man is that we have a freedom to voice our opinions.

    It’s not a problem at all … unless they want to keep claiming tax-exempt status.

  • ubi dubius

    Donations to religious organizations are tax deductible. Donations to political organizations are not. When a church starts to become a political organization, they lose their tax exempt status. You can do what you want, that doesn’t mean the rest of us should subsidize it.

    We could make this simpler by getting rid of tax deductibility for donations to religious organizations. Some scholars claim the deduction is required by the 1st amendment. I don’t buy that argument.

  • Karen

    The coverage I’ve been watching on this keeps making me shake my head in disbelief. Reporters are asking legitimate questions about her fitness to be second-in-command and the Republican talking heads are saying things like, “But she’s has five children – and one of them is deploying to Iraq!

    Or “Well, she does have foreign policy experience – did you know Alaska is right next to Russia?

    UHHH – so freaking what? As if those details have any bearing whatsoever on the questions about whether the mayor of Podunk, AK is qualified to lead the U.S. on an international stage. Can you imagine Miss Congeniality negotiating with Ahmedinijad and Putin? Solving the U.S. health care crisis? Even her hometown newspapers are saying she shown no curiosity or interest in issues outside of oil and gas drilling, and she admitted a couple weeks ago she has “not been following the situation in Iraq” closely.

    It’s downright frightening, and yet serious Republicans are defending this choice with a straight face, and opining that independent women and Hillary supporters will flock to her. Speaking of choice, of course, we’re hearing over and over about how she “chose” to keep her Down syndrome baby after pre-natal testing. And yet she advocates taking that choice AWAY from other women! That’s shameful.

    The other thing that’s been bugging me is this right-wing talking point about how she has “more experience” and it more qualified than Obama. More experience, my ass!

    She went to University of Idaho and got a BA in journalism before becoming a TV sports reporter. He went to Columbia and Harvard, got a law degree, was editor of the Harvard Law Review, taught constitutional law and worked as a community organizer in innercity Chicago.

    She served on the city council of a tiny town in the middle of nowhere. He’s been in the state and federal legilsature. He’s written two best-selling books that deal seriously with the top issues of our day. He’s proven himself on the national and international level – she was chosen because she’s a “babe” who will shore up the religious nutcases of the right wing.

    This terrible, craven judgment should put McCain in the crapper and keep him there for the rest of the election, but one never knows what will happen in politics. If Americans are as shallow as they’re made out to be, we could be in far worse trouble even than over the last 8 years.

  • Pingback: Episode 1.04 and last minute change of plans « The Feeble Lance

  • philosophia

    “Take that feminists — here is a woman of accomplishment who brings a fresh face to traditional values and models the type of woman most girls want to become.”

    That is appalling on so many levels.

  • Thinker

    Think about all the jobs she is NOT qualified to apply for:

    Elementary school teacher
    Librarian
    Junior social worker
    Nurse
    Senior secretary

    and many others

    jobs she may be qualified for (depending on her driving experience/record)

    school bus driver
    elementary classroom aide (in some states only)
    filing clerk
    Avon rep.
    Shelver at library

    I do not know whether she graduated with anything other than a scrape through degree in journalism from Idaho, but it is said she dropped out from a couple of other colleges. Due to her looks and keen sports interest, she got a sports announcer job.

    What is more than relevant is that she appears to have hopped jobs a fair bit. Also, her stance on sueing the Federal Gvmnt. to stop protecting Polar Bears shows me someone who has a narrow focus-Alaska and Alaskan “ideals”. I am not entirely convinced that she is not an “oil gal” – I think she probably is, most Alaskans are.

    To dare to compare herself with Sen. Clinton shows a rather egotistical outlook. Even accepting the nomination shows a severe lack of “knowing her own boundaries” – I have much more experience and qualifications than she does, yet there is no way I would want to accept such a huge responsibility-it would be entirely foolhardy and would place my own ego ahead of the USA for sure.

    One thing we should be doing is addressing these issues in a thinking, decent manner. Personally I don’t really care if Bristol is pregnant, but I do care that had this been Chelsea Clinton, the RW Press would have savaged her.

    The re-invention in the USA of the word “liberal” as something distasteful has to be fought on the lack of merit is deserves. Conservatives don’t own this country, the people do. The Christian Right do not own this country, the people do, people of many faiths, or no faith at all, it is our right as Americans.

    It is absolutely clear that Mrs. Palin was chosen to appease the Chritian Right and win their vote. These people are not interested or concerned with World Affairs, they are consumed with a very narrow and personal agenda regarding abortion and creationism and the right to own and use guns, no matter if such guns are far more than hunting rifles. They ARE the Bridge to Nowhere. They have absolutely no time or respect for anyone who may have different beliefs from their own, and their own beliefs are defined so narrowly they are almost hateful.

    There is a clear separation from Church and State in this country, but it is being stolen from us.

    Finally, as the mother of a Special Needs child who chose NOT to have “the test” (for what reason???)as Mrs Palin did, I have to say that the present Government has stimied Special Education and refused to increased funding to any meaningful degree.

    Finally, my child receives Medicaid, but we have to travel 42 miles to see a pediatrician who will accept Medicaid. He has a terrible illness, yet we are confined to only seeking treatment and diagnosis within the State we live in, when the experts are all elsewhere.

    As a mother leaving my own career to care for my Special Needs child (in my opinion the only right thing to do)as well as caring for a disabled spouse, I have to tell you that I will not receive Social Security or Medicare when I reach that age as there is no allowance made for people who care for family members to cover the credits required for either.

    If the Republicans get in we WILL try and join family in Canada, or Europe, as there is no hope left that we can survive here.

    Thinker

  • Monica

    The future under McLame/Palin would be very bleak indeed. I would love to leave if that comes to pass. I tried to leave in 1990 when I believe King George I was pres. Went to the UK, got deported back to NYC. Thought I’d go to Canada– but too cold. Instead I moved to Cali– at least I could be warm I figured. San Diego County is very right wing (didn’t know that when I moved here), but I’m seeing more Obama bumper stickers these days. I truly hope Obama wins. Not only would it be historic, but his win would save this country. I just can’t understand how people that are not fundies fall for her. I just don’t get it. Unless all the swooning I’m hearing about on the news is all propaganda. It actually makes me ill. Sarah Palin doesn’t speak for me as a woman and mom.

  • Nelly

    Worst-case scenario: McCain steals/wins the election (on my birthday…. how’s that for a present?) and becomes president. We invade Iran, or we don’t. At this point it doesn’t matter; we’re all screwed anyway. At some point before McCain enters the third year of his term, he will die. It may be natural, or the evil part of the republican party will take him out in his sleep (digitalis or potassium chlorate). Palin becomes president. Gay marriage is banned. Abortions are banned. Books are burned. America becomes a theocracy. Oil drilling become our number 1 priority. Countless species are driven to extinction. Rebellions break out. Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people are openly discriminated against. Law enforcement is corrupted. Non-christians are persecuted. The Constitution is ignored by everyone in power. Nancy Pulosi will probably be assassinated, along with Obama, for daring to question the right. Riots erupt. People die. Palin traipses peacefully to you-know-where with America in her handbag.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X