Now on ScienceBlogs: Oh, no! School wi-fi is making our kids sick! (2012 edition)

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Thoughts from Kansas

You will notice that it lacks definiteness; that it lacks purpose; that it lacks coherence; that it lacks a subject to talk about; that it is loose and wabbly; that it wanders around; that it loses itself early and does not find itself any more. --Mark Twain

Search

Profile

Josh at work Joshua Rosenau spends his days defending the teaching of evolution at the National Center for Science Education. He is formerly a doctoral candidate at the University of Kansas, in the department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. When not battling creationists or modeling species ranges, he writes about developments in progressive politics and the sciences.

The opinions expressed here are his own, do not reflect the official position of the NCSE. Indeed, older posts may no longer reflect his own official position.

Sb/DonorsChoose Drive


Thanks!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Subscribe to TfK:

Accolades

Best of Kansas City

Good posts from history

The Birth of Intelligent Falling

A failure of Intelligent Design

Why it's called Intelligent Design Creationism

Write a letter to the editor

My photo albums.

Support TfK

Buy me things from my Amazon.com wishlist.

Buy yourself things!

Search Now:
Search Amazon.com
Add yourself to the Frappr map!
Check out our Frappr or add yourself to it!

    follow me on Twitter

    « Palin-genesis speaks | Main | McCain favors teaching creationism »

    Palin-genesis: Too extreme for (Cindy) McCain

    Category: Policy and Politics
    Posted on: September 4, 2008 12:42 PM, by Josh Rosenau

    In an interview with CBS News, Cindy McCain lights into Sarah Palin:

    "We differ on many issues; we differ with, across the board with people. We don't have to agree on every issue," the Arizona senator's wife said.

    …CBS anchor Katie Couric asked if she supports an outright ban on abortion including in cases of rape and incest, she said no.

    "No? So that's where you two differ," Couric asked.

    "Uh-huh," McCain replied.

    "What I agree with is the fact that she is a social conservative," McCain said.

    No one disagrees that she's a social conservative. Indeed, her views are so far into the wings as to offend majorities of Americans, including, it seems, John McCain's second wife.

    In the famous Eagle Forum questionnaire (scrubbed from the web but saved here), Palin demonstrated two things. First, that she can't follow simple directions, and second, that she believes women should be forced to carry the children of their rapists and/or relatives:

    1. Complete the sentence by checking the applicable phrases (you can check more than one).
    Abortion should be:
    Banned throughout entire pregnancy.
    Legal to save the life of the mother.
    Legal in case of rape and incest.
    Legal if the baby is handicapped.
    Legal if the baby has a genetic defect.
    Legal in the first trimester.
    Legal in the second trimester.
    Legal in the third trimester.
    Other:__________________

    SP: I am pro-life. With the exception of a doctor’s determination that the mother’s life would end if the pregnancy continued. I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending an innocent’s life.

    She failed to fill-in-the-blank, but her answer is that even rape and incest are not viable reasons for an abortion. In a Time poll earlier this month, 46% of Americans thought abortion should be legal in the first trimester regardless of reasons, and 40% said it should be legal in cases of rape, incest or to save a woman's life; as much as 86% of the public could well oppose Palin's view. In a Fox poll from last October, 70% agreed that "abortion should be legal … If the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest."

    In that same Fox poll, 45% of voters needed to know a candidate's view on abortion before making their choice. Given that only 21% of voters agreed with Palin's restrictive views on abortion (and only 3% opposed abortion in cases of incest or rape but not to save the expectant mother's life), at least as many voters ought to vote against Palin because of her extreme position as will vote for her ticket.

    Whether Cindy McCain is on that list remains to be seen.

    Share on Facebook
    Share on StumbleUpon
    Share on Facebook

    TrackBacks

    TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/80384

    Comments

    1

    It would be great if Cindy opined - on Fox - that she disagrees with Palin so much, she will vote for Obama.
    Maybe Cindy is smarter than I gave her credit for. Of course, if she were REALLY smart, she'd toss the old geezer out on his fundament.

    Posted by: J-Dog | September 4, 2008 3:33 PM

    2

    this seems intersting: http://lindsaycampbell.tumblr.com/post/48768948/a-letter-about-sarah-palin-from-a-resident-of-wasilla

    A resident of palins hometown in an open letter.

    Posted by: flo | September 4, 2008 8:56 PM

    3

    The problem for the anti-abortion side is that its most extreme position is its most coherent position. A woman gets raped, gets pregnant and carries baby to term. Just about everybody would agree that it would be wrong to kill this baby. Most people think it would be acceptable to abort it, at least in early pregnancy. That's because people make a distinction between aborting a blastocyst and killing a full term baby. That's a distinction that the anti-abortion side does not cannot make. To accept those exceptions would be to acknowledge that there is a difference in status between an embryo and a baby. This means by being "reasonable" they would be conceding the central point of the debate.

    In case it isn't clear I'm in the pro-choice side of this issue.

    Posted by: tresmal | September 4, 2008 9:48 PM

    4

    I don't know.

    Posted by: nick | September 6, 2008 10:43 PM

    Post a Comment

    (Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





    ScienceBlogs

    Search ScienceBlogs:

    Go to:

    Advertisement
    Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

    © 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.