Millions of TV viewers who watched ABC News’ interview with Sarah Palin Thursday night never saw her take issue with a key question in which she was asked if she believes that the U.S. military effort in Iraq is “a task that is from God.”
The exchange between Palin and ABC’s Charlie Gibson, in which she questioned the accuracy of the quote attributed to her, was edited out of the television broadcast but included in official, unedited transcripts posted on ABC’s Web site, as well as in video posted on the Internet.
But in the version shown on television, a video clip of her original statement was inserted in place of her objection, giving a different impression of how Palin views the Iraq war.
In the interview, Gibson asked Palin: “You said recently in your old church, ‘Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.’ Are we fighting a Holy War?”
Palin’s response, which appears in the transcript but was edited out of the televised version, was:
“You know, I don’t know if that was my exact quote.”
“It’s exact words,” Gibson said.
But Gibson’s quote left out what Palin said before that:
“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God. That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”
The edited televised version included a partial clip of that quote, but not the whole thing.
Gibson’s characterization of Palin’s words prompted a sharp rebuke from the McCain campaign on Thursday.
“Governor Palin’s full statement was VERY different” from the way Gibson characterized it,” read a statement circulated by McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds.
“Gibson cut the quote — where she was clearly asking for the church TO PRAY THAT IT IS a task from God, not asserting that it is a task from God.
“Palin’s statement is an incredibly humble statement, a statement that this campaign stands by 100 percent, and a sentiment that any religious American will share,” Bounds wrote.
In the rest of the segment that aired, Palin told Gibson that she was referencing Abraham’s Lincoln’s words on how one should never presume to know God’s will. She said she does not presume to know God’s will and that she was only asking the audience to “pray that we are on God’s side.”
A promo posted on Yahoo! News Friday continued to misrepresent the exchange. It displays Palin’s image next to the words, “Iraq war a ‘holy war?’” implying that Palin — not Gibson — had called the War on Terror a holy war.
ABC News did not respond to requests for comment from FOXNews.com.
ABC’s mischaracterization of Palin’s words was not the only one in the media. The Washington Post also did some last-minute clean-up in one of its articles on Palin — a front-page story Friday with the headline “Palin Links Iraq to Sept. 11 in Talk to Troops in Alaska.”
As pointed out by The Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol, the original version posted online used harsher language than the one that hit Beltway newsstands early Friday morning.
The original passage, written by staff writer Anne E. Kornblut, read:
“Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would ‘defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.’
“The idea that the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein helped Al Qaeda plan the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, a view once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. On any other day, Palin’s statement would almost certainly have drawn a sharp rebuke from Democrats, but both parties had declared a halt to partisan activities to mark Thursday’s anniversary.”
But in the print version, and the version now appearing on the newspaper’s Web site, the article softened its claim a bit by swapping in the last line with this: “But it is widely agreed that militants allied with Al Qaeda have taken root in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion
I watched this interview, there were obvious cuts in what was aired on the TV.
Yes but the sentiment was the exact same thing. The full quote does not change the meaning of what she was saying. She believes that fighting in Iraq is a task from God.
Her handlers have been quick to school her on how to explain this away, but the fact remains is she believes it is a divine mission.
What other "divine missions" will she imagine she'll get from God while she sleeps at night if she becomes President? Funny how God always seems to agree with the Republican's whims of the day.
She gave this speech in a church. And made it clear she believes the war in Iraq is a task from god.
SJ - I notice your right wing leanings are getting stronger as you get closer towards the Christ consciousness you claim to be striving for.
Normally I ignore your war-mongering, but this time, well.........
I have no doubt you too have offspring who kill people for the oil company profits as well as Ms. Palin, but watching the video and listening to her describe her son's Jesus fish tattoo as he went off to kill people for his god made me sick to my stomach.
as usual, you ignore the point intended by the post...and its title
As usual you have managed to mis-communicate your point. Here was I thinking you were trying to show how the media is mis-representing Sarah Palin and she does not really believe or say the things the media says she does.
Watch the video of the war speech she made in a church and you will see that you are the one doing the mis-representing.
Livelonger and Mark,
As usual, your responses put me into a category you have already defined on your own terms...as we all do But you are wrong on how you define me.
I am trying to learn to communicate from my own perspective...as yet not completely defined to myself. Responses from others help me to define what I mean.
My "as usual" in response to both of you, is about what I see as a typical left liberal response; one that I perceive does not comprehend a Christian response from a Christian point of view, I assume because you each have "issues" with Christianity defined in your own heads by your own individual experiences in life, and so you haven't been able to see Christians more objectively/clearly.
I have honestly "lived" both a Christian and a liberal life, at separate times, in this life, and now I am somewhere in between, trying to sort it out. My gut tells me that somewhere in the middle (as in Gautama's Middle Way) is the answer to all the burning questions and problems of our time. So, I look for a common ground.
Because I believe that the Christ aspect of a soul (the heart) is essentially the same as the Buddhic aspect of a soul (the mind), and that together working in a balanced way a soul is in the balanced consciousness to bring peace and harmony to life, then all people can learn to work together.
So, as this is in my mind/heart...I find that it is much harder to communicate it, put it into words and actions.
Now, I know that Christians have to learn to integrate some liberal concepts into their being and that liberals need to do the same. All people I guess, need to learn to do the same with whatever "sides" they are on. It's what are those concepts that each individual needs to sort out for themselves so that they can learn to find common ground with those they used to oppose.
We don't have to agree point to point, on anything, but we do need to learn to/try to be objective, respectful of each other in our differences, and get along to enable us to find the common ground.
From my perspective, for instance, a good issue is abortion. Liberals need to recognized/accept that Christians have a particularized "spiritual" perception about how abortion affects the soul, not only the soul of the unborn, but also of the mother and others involved in the pregnancy.
And Christians need to recognized/accept that liberals don't have that same spiritual perception, but focus instead on the freedom to do as they choose with their own body.
Christians and those that don't like the idea of abortion think about the right of the unborn soul to have a body, first, and those that like the idea of abortion think about the women's right to do as she chooses with her own body, first.
the only logical middle way is to leave abortion legal and make it safer than it is now, (i.e. like stop performing abortions in unclean, unmonitered, uninspected, unregulated environments and trying to force doctors to perform abortions that don't want to, and having laws that protect the underage girls from being manipulated in their innocence and secreted across borders to have abortions, and stop the rejection of parent/family involvement when possible to help her make her decision...AND to do as the Christians have done and see that all people get information concerning both "sides" (the spiritual and the liberal) so that a woman (or underage girl) can make a truly informed decision for herself. That also includes seeing that the woman is not hindered, forced, coerced or violently harmed to make her get an abortion.
This is a spiritual issue and there are others that liberals don't respect Christians as having.
Geez some liberals even try to stop spiritual people from having their own spiritual conscience, and Christians try to say that liberals don't even have a spiritual conscience, (because they don't appear to consider the soul's right to life in an abortion circumstance).
On and on it goes...but hearts and minds are changing, and it is gradual shift to find respect for each others' place on the spectrum of being
IT is hard to decide whether abortion is a political, religious, or a family issue...it is all three!
For the record here, too...I believe Iraq is a mission from God for everyone involved...but then again everything in life concerning everyone is a mission from God
OK, I will bite. To be perfectly honest, I am getting sick of listening to you disguise your war-mongering ramblings as some sort of higher consciousness-quest.
I tend to define people by their actions and words. Excuse me if your "God Bless our troops," words appear to me as nationalistic. And how can I be wrong in my definition of you? It is, after all, my definition, and therefore never wrong as far as I am concerned. Difficult concept to grasp, I know, but please try.
Here is where you are going wrong. Attempting to communicate from your own perspective is always a mistake. Perhaps you should try communicating from the others perspective. This is what I try to do. I try and communicate clearly from your perspective. Less misunderstandings this way. "Say what you mean," is one of my credos. If I have made myself unclear, please tell me, and I will attempt to rectify the situation.
I speak 5 languages fluently. Nonetheless, I have friends who speak English, German, Dutch, Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, and "American," and mis-communications are an every day part of my life. But we all strive to make ourselves clear.
"Typical left liberal" response. And just a few sentences ago, you are accusing me of defining you on my own terms. If you do not see the hypocrisy here, you have denial down to an art form. Oh, wait.....
A Christian response, from a christian point of view. Hmmmmm. We are clearly in disagreement over what constitutes christian. Personally - I have yet to meet one. And if you mean objectively/clearly to mean blinkered, OK, I could go with that. Killing people for money. Very christian.
When I read the bible, I see clearly that it says, "THOU SHALT NOT KILL."
But many christians seem to ignore this and take it to mean," Except when you are killing for your country, OR GOD." In which case, it is fine.
Well, I wish you well in the sorting it out, but there ain't no middle. You either believe killing people for money is wrong, or you don't. I do not see a middle ground, unless you are talking about the current "christian," middle ground when killing people for god/oil companies is OK, but killing baby fetuses is wrong.
Quote all the "gurus," you like. At the end of the day, we must make up our own minds what is right or wrong.
Meaningless garbage when you start a thread such as you just started. Especially when you look at the reason you started it. SP thinks the war in Iraq is a task from god. Many people take issue with this, myself included. It implies a higher power that has decided what is right or wrong, and (SPs personal benefits aside) this is wrong.
According the the name of this thread, you started this to show "typical media misrepresentation of people's words."
When I watched the video that prompted these question, there can be no doubt that SP said what she meant, and I do not see any mis-representation here. You do. Why?
It just so happens that SP has a vested interest in Iraq. And a vested interest in persuading herself that her son is doing god's work - BY KILLING PEOPLE. With a Jesus fish tattoo on his calf.
Jesus would be turning in his grave (If he had one) to hear this nationalistic rubbish. And you are claiming to be reaching for the christ-consciousness?
Read your bible again.
Once again, you have managed to confuse me. I didn't think you were a christian, I thought you were a right-wing war-monger with children who kill people for money who was striving for the christ-consciousness, middle-ground, karmic-balance, guru-stated, chakra-balanced, open-to-everything whatever. Hmm. Starting to make sense now. Kill people for money. It is god's will.
If you put me in the box, "liberal," - why on earth would I want to listen to this war mongering? I do not think it solves anything. All it does is make one small group more financially powerful.
No. I cannot be objective. I cannot respect your feelings that war is a "mission from god," and good. There is no/can not be any common ground. I think it is wrong to kill people for money. You think it is right. Zero middle ground.
Once again, no. "Christians" cannot say with one breath that the war in Iraq is "god's war," and a good thing, and in another breath say that abortion is a "spiritual" perception and wrong."
As usual, you have managed to mis-communicate your opinions on this. Do you think a woman has the right to choose to abort, or do you think you have the right to deny her that choice?
I wonder which answer you will come up with
I disagree. Christians (the ones who think killing indiscriminately is right, and the war in Iraq is god's war) are more interested in inflicting their opinion on others. If I met an anti-abortionist, and he said he would personally take care of any non-aborted fetuses, I could change my perception. How many stopped abortions has GB taken in?
I agree - I think about the woman's right to do with her own body as she chooses.
As far as I am aware, (notwithstanding the federal government's withdrawal of monies to planned parenthood) abortion is legal in the US.
And there you go again. Pitting "spiritual" (christian) vs "liberal." Why?
And once again, you are showing your colors(my perception - your words)
I do not believe anyone who thinks it is OK to invade another country and use nuclear weapons can consider themselves christian. I must have read a very different bible to you.
You are now calling yourself "spiritual?"
My spirituality does not allow me to have an opinion on what some one should be allowed to do with her body. But - yours does?
How very Fox news/christian of you.
I cannot and will not have any respect for some one who claims to have an opinion on what a woman should be allowed to choose, and in the same sentence says ware is right.
No. It is none of the above. It is a personal decision by the woman concerned.
Now, if you are saying that you personally will take an interest in, and help the development of that fetus - for the life of that person, I would change my stance. But - I suspect you are more interested in getting cheap gas for your new car. In which case - you are not entitled to an opinion.
Of course you do. And I am certain you are not allowing the fact that your children are paid to kill people to influence that decision.
Welcome christian right-winger (my perception based solely on my own issues - nothing to do with anything you have said.)
And I will throw in a few more smiles so it doesn't look nasty.
Every media misinterpretation of a person's "stand" begins to paint a picture of that person's stand...and is always never completely true to that person. In that we all affect or can affect each other in our communication...it isn't "fair" or ethical for media to "cut and paint" as they do.
That is why getting as many perspectives (liberal, conservative, independent, feminist, etc) as possible is best and than finding within onesself what we feel and think about that person.
The media does it about everyone and we are all learning about being a victim or not, deciding about what and who a person is, and about finding our own self-discernment on people and issues, and not just going along with the "herd" consciousness, believing any particular media story, or the conservatives, liberals, feminists, etc. I hope that is happening anyway. In this time of big change in our souls, hence in our states and countries, it is a challenge to not get stuck in a particular mindset instead of moving to something new and different.
SJ - "somewhere in the middle (as in Gautama's Middle Way) is the answer to all the burning questions and problems of our time. So, I look for a common ground."
The common ground is under your feet - this little ole earth. You could start there. We have that in common.
Or is it Christ points to heaven. Don't think will ever have
that in common. Ah - or God is supposed to be the commonality. I sit in the dirt, but I have never seen God, unless they are one and the same.
SJ, I didn't think you were pro-war. I thought you were pro God in however you chose to believe, I thought you were pro- diversity and had a vested interest in the well-being of people as a whole.
War is never Gods mission. It's mans. Sorry if you find this offensive cause I think you are sweet. But these three words do not belong in the same group. God, War, Good.
Certainly you must be thinking that because it is written then it has to be done and it is Gods will that it be done, but I have to strongly disagree. If any of it is true, then you should be heeding the warning signs and considering youself lucky to even have the chance to change it before it gets that way.
The promise of God should not be more important than the life we have here right now. A lot of it sucks really bad, I complain a lot too, but sh*t, I would never wanna hurt no one and I would think that a good heart would know that it is a trick. It just aint right. When has war ever been right?
And women should have the right to chose if abortion is right for them. I am pro-choice, but I could never have one myself, at least that is how I feel right now, it could change if the circumstances changed.
Well, I still love you anyways. I just thought you were smarter than that.
You need to go back over these posts and any previous ones where I mentioned war...Mark labeled me a pro-war monger, from his own interpretations of my words. Are you so stuck on your perception/acceptance of Mark's words, that you cannot tune in to mine? He seems to enjoy twisting anyone's words to suit his own agenda of being right about everything.
I can only use my own words, from my own experiences and feelings, and cannot make anyone understand them. What a waste it is to try and learn to express myself, if all some people are going to do is twist them.
when I speak of war, it is always from a spiritual sense...you mean to tell me you would not defend a soul, in a body, if you needed to? would you not defend your child to the death? your husband, your family, if you needed to? your neighbor? your nation? your own life?
war is not the best of answers...but when it comes down to not being able to communicate, like with terrorist fanatics, to save the lives of others from such fanatics, would you not go to help them?
Come on...I thought your were smarter than that...had more heart than that. (how does that feel)...not so good huh
God doesn't have a mission, people have God's mission (to live, multiply and prosper)...to help one another, to save souls. Are we not all of God? So is it not God's mission to help one another?
Take Misha's suggestion and re-read the story of Arjuna and war. The war of the spirit is the only war there is...the spirit of evil that comes through any and all people, the anti-christ, until they learn to stop it/ bar it from manifesting within/through themselves, is the only war.
As long as people choose to not root out their own spirit of evil, war on the physical plane will continue to manifest in the continued states of delusion/illusion. But we are here to defend souls and their right to have a life.
Sorry SJ. It was a miscommunication that is why I said I thought differently of you. Lately that is all I have been seeing out of people is war this and war that...How do you expect me to feel?
Would I defend to the death people, yes I would but I wont do it in war. It is like my dad said: let them hit you first. And by this I do not mean I have any intention of killing anyone, only to defend as long as I can and none of which has to do with war.
I am sorry I hurt your feelings, your right it doesn't feel good. I love ya Jewel.
I love you too, Sandra. Thanks for the apology. I apologize for having to make my point that way. It is perfectly understandable that we have miscommunications...we all come from different spaces and places, experiences and belief systems.
I am trying to do the best I can and pray that we all are...being self discerning and compassionate toward others in their stands is one way to bring peace to the world. Sometimes for others, defending others, is the way. We all screw up to some degree, but no one person is ever to blame for everything about a situation, it is human to try and blame, that is why I ideally try to find an understanding of being more divine in my responses. I am not perfect humanly.
I know Jewels. I think this is what Mark is trying to say...Knowing that people are inclined to read something one way over another, it is easy to say "God bless our troops", and have someone else think "she is pro-war".
When what the person is saying, "I cannot stop or change thier minds, they believe they are doing the right thing, and if they have to go because of lack of better judgement, fear or whatever compells them to go and do the thing they know they should not do, then God help them out and pray that things will turn out right".
I understand the "implicatioins" that words have on our psyches, so I think it is always important to consider how you chose your words. Not at all saying I think you are some ill individual cause I know you aren't, and the middle ground is very hard to do because even in the middle there are consequences.
But I am glad you accept my appology and we can continue our conversations in a civil fashion. Love you!
Umm, just a question to Mark and Sandy. Probably more to Sandy, cause I think Mark did read it, and after all he claims to be an atheist.
Did you read Bhagavad Gita?
Do you remember how Krishna explains to Arjuna that it is his God mandated duty to kill his relatives and friends in the battle?
No, it's been a while maybe ten years. Continuesssss......
Marks rants are very entertaining, Interesting to find many atheists that are more spiritual than Christens. Mark makes alot of sense to me. Most Christens do not. Are you making a hub out of
this presentation Mark ;-)
Misha - no, I have not read that one
Coolbreeze. I have been working on my ranting technique. I don't be ticklin' or nothin' And I have to share this one:
Mark, you rock!
I realized last night as my better half and I were watching the news that people much younger than us (in our late 50s) don't have a personal memory of what life as like before Roe v. Wade. I remember that time vividly. I've considered writing about it in a hub but balked at the thought of all the fanatic crap I'd certainly have to take in comments. Still, unless a person was around to see how NOT having Roe v Wade in place really was for women and children, it strikes me that that person is pretty much talking out their butt in regard to repealing it. What really bothers me about McCain is that he KNOWS what it was like and wants it repealed anyway. I think he really is a hateful little bastard, and I pray he and his Alaskan Barbie doll don't get elected.
Repealing Roe v Wade won't stop abortion. It will just insure that the girls and women who seek abortions will die with their unborn fetuses. On a related note, abstinence-only sex ed insures a steady stream of clients for any butcher who thinks he or she can abort a fetus. We can also go back to the good old days of coat hangers and teen-aged girls dying in pools of their own blood alone. Ah, religion... I'm sure this is exactly what Jesus had in mind. Dead teenagers.
Just a thought. Just a short trip down memory lane offered up by an old lady who couldn't possibly know anything because of her leftist liberal politics.
I must admit I have no comprehension for people who feel that abortion should be made illegal. Especially when they go on to say that they are a christian. I did not live in the pre Roe vs Wade America, but I do know that abortions will be done regardless of the law, and am well aware of the horrors of the back-street abortionist.
Or a coat hanger, a warm bath and a bottle of cheap gin. * shudders *
Write the hub and I will come and argue with the "pro-lifers" for you
I can understand it, and I am not religious at all and I do support the right to abortion.
Abortion is effectively killing a new life. I don't think there is any argument I've seen that would make me think otherwise.
But I do believe, also, that human liberty trumps the obligation to see a fetus grow to viability outside the uterus, and, yes, banning abortion will not make the practice end, either. I also find it, well, *convenient*, that the loudest voices against abortion tend to be men (those that will never be forced to make a decision for themselves).
One's stance on abortion relies on a person's deeply held philosophical convictions, nothing more.
I remember reading one of Julian Baggini's philosophical experiments in "The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten" that mirrors the abortion debate. In that scenario, you go to a party, get drunk, and wake up the next morning in a hospital with a bunch of tubes coming out of you. A doctor comes by and says you came to the hospital last night and agreed to provide life support to the person at the other end of the tubes, who will die if the tubes are taken out. You're confined to the hospital bed for 9 months. What do you do: take the tubes out and let the other person die, or lie in bed for 9 months?
Again, it depends on your philosophical underpinnings.
I agree, but it always seems to me that these philosophical underpinnings are "flexible," and I have yet to hear from an anti-abortionist who does not also think that America should use nuclear weapons and the war in Iraq is the "right" thing to do. They also seem to favor the death penalty and the idea that a man should provide his own health care.
I never seem to hear, "All killing is wrong, and I will personally care for the baby when it is born."
Douglas Adams nailed it with breeding animals that want to be eaten
I personally am not certain when life "begins," and I see abortion more preventing a life from happening rather than killing. But I think the mother's right to choose supercedes the argument against abortion.
One logical inconsistency that has always bothered me, even though I know it will sound flip, is that, if life begins at conception, why don't the people who fervently believe this hold funerals for miscarried fetuses? Most miscarriages happen before the fourth month, when the fetus is the size of a pea or smaller, so why don't we honor these fallen fetuses with funerals or memorials? They are persons, yes? Then why just throw them in the trash?
To take it a step further, since most miscarriages are spontaneous in the first trimester and the mother never even knows the egg was fertilized, why aren't we combing through menstrual tissue and blood for unimplanted or miscarried fertilized eggs so we can give them proper burial and grieve their passing?
I know this makes me sound like a bitch, but seriously, this kind of inconsistency bugs me. It's as if it's cool to say life begins at conception but only in certain discussions and only when it involves forcing someone else to bend to your own ideas. I don't see any of these people combing through menstrual fluid for possible persons.
I see it like this...having had a miscariage (no need to feel sorry, anyone.) that it was no different than a regular period. Gross, maybe, but when you think about it, every egg that is expelled when a girl has her time, means that essentially it had the potential for life, and my body prevented it.
So when it comes to abortion, I am in agreement that it is like killing after the first trimester, but anytime before it is like having a period. Also as a mom and as a girl, I think it depends on what sort of attachment you have to it.
For instance, when I found out I was pregnant the first time, I did not have any attachment to her right away. To be honest, I did not feel anything other than "weird" until I heard her heart beat and I didn't or couldn't hear her heart beat until about four- five months of gestation.
Which is when she became a life to me. Sorry if I just grossed everyone out.
Sandra, I don't think it's gross at all--I think it's exactly what is missing from the discussion--first hand experiences of real women who have been through it. I think if we collected enough of these kinds of experiences, we'd quickly see that they are all very different, even though some things are similar.
I had a miscarriage at 14 weeks. It was incredibly traumatic. I went for a routine ultrasound exam and was told there had been no movement or development. I asked, "So are you saying they baby is dead?" The ultrasound technician said she was not allowed to say one way or the other, but to go home and if the baby was dead I'd have a miscarriage within 48 hours.
They sent me away and I got as far as the door, turned around, went up to the front desk and said "I need to see a doctor immediately." The chick at the counter said it was not standard to see a doctor at an ultrasound exam, at which point I burst into tears and a couple of nurses hustled me into a back room. Eventually they brought a doctor in who refused to say one way or the other again, and told me to go home and if the baby was dead I'd miscarry within 48 hours.
About 12 hours later I miscarried in the car. The end. I had to clean it up myself, I don't even remember doing it, just crying. It would have helped me a lot if anyone had treated me with the slightest compassion or acted like it was a real loss, which for me it was, even though I hadn't wanted the pregnancy. I'd spent all that time reconciling myself to it, and then boom, well rots a ruck, if it's dead it'll come out and you'll know that way.
So it's not like I have an answer--like, yes there should be funerals for fetuses, no there shouldn't be--I don't have any answers. And I've been through it. So I don't want other people telling me how it has to be. Because no one can know until they experience it.
from my own experiences and my experiences of friends I have seen that every situation is different. I knew the souls that came into me when I was pregnant, very early on. In one case, even before I conceived, the soul was "hanging around" waiting to "come into life". Boy did I feel compelled! to perform
I have had friends that were so distraught after their abortions that suicide and depression were their experience. My daughter was so distraught about her miscarriage, she is still traumatized about it. I have just recently had a memory of my own as a soul that was aborted by my mother's doctor because of bleeding that they thought was a miscarriage...but I was viable...and the pain and separation of the d&c/abortion was extreme. We all have memories of birth and prebirth, or between lives experiences. Some people just haven't gotten to a point of it being time to deal with it.
Check out the Elliot Institute. (I'll have to check the web address). There are tons of real life stories from women and their experiences and research and statistics of how their experiences have affected their life and family and community.
I was born in 1982, well after Roe Vs. Wade, but speaking from the perspective of the younger generation, I hope you will write it. My aunt is a lawyer for Planned Parenthood,and I've heard many of her compatriots worry about the fading pro-choice sentiment among young women. People my age tend to take it for granted, you know. Our "memories" of pre-choice America need to be created for us to appreciate the options we have, and every little bit helps.
Being a history nut, I'm considering writing a hub on infanticide, which wasn't even considered a crime until Victorian times, it was such a fact of life in a world that had little birth control and less abortion. Yet this is the world that these "pro-lifers" wish to return to...
You know, that's a really good point--Your aunt is right, I think young people do take it for granted because they haven't seen the alternative up close and personal. You are right, how could they if no one ever talks about it? It's all gotten way too cerebral and antiseptic. If Mark will show up and fight with the Right to Lifers, maybe I should do it. History is a good teacher--It's interesting because you know, it hasn't been that long since women got the right to even have INFORMATION on contraception. Margaret Sanger was instrumental in fighting that battle. The women of my grandmother's day could not legally even learn about what little contraception was available at the time, and this during an era where death from 'childbed fever' was rampart due to the widespread use of unsterilized instruments. You write the infanticide hub and I'll write the pre-Roe v Wade hub, and then we'll get Mark to run interference for us. I think it's a good idea. Thanks for the encouragement.
LOL, well, my ESL sometimes drives my crazy
OK, let me try to google it, cause i have it in russian...
Well, I have a beautiful poetic Russian translation. I could not find anything remotely close in English available on the net - which surprises me a lot because of how many Indians do speak English. You may have a good one in print. It would be great if Kenny or Paraglider, or someone else with good knowledge of Bhagavad Gita could chime in with their thoughts and may be favorite translation, too
Anyway, more or less decent translation (not poetic at all )is here http://eawc.evansville.edu/anthology/gita.htm . Just read several first chapters, cause they all are devoted to exactly that topic. Just a small excerpt from the second chapter:
Considering also your duty as a warrior you should not waver. Because there is nothing more auspicious for a warrior than a righteous war. (2.31)
Only the fortunate warriors, O Arjuna, get such an opportunity for an unsought war that is like an open door to heaven. (2.32)
If you will not fight this righteous war, then you will fail in your duty, lose your reputation, and incur sin. (2.33)
I don't think you're being a bitch, pgrundy. You are simply following the logic of what an unborn fetus is to people who believe it's a fully-formed life. I do think there's some shame associated with a miscarriage (I don't know why) and maybe because a name wasn't assigned, a funeral doesn't seem appropriate.
Mark: I agree - I've noticed a very high correlation among pro-life and pro-death penalty and pro-militarism. I don't think those people value human life at all; the lip service they pay when talking about abortion loses all meaning when they consider hundreds of thousands of innocent people being murdered as "collateral damage." I have yet to see any of them trying to outlaw war. But then again, usually these same people are trying to "protect marriage" by preventing gays from getting married, and never by outlawing divorce, so their ability to reason is suspect from the very beginning.
sandra - Thank you for sharing your experience. Not gross at all; this is a very common human occurrence.
Wow, what a story, pgrundy. I agree wholeheartedly that first-hand accounts like yours shed light into something that is often talked about in vague, sterile terms.
Thanks livelonger. I think about it a lot, about how often women don't get what they need in this area of life, and how we waste all this time arguing about stuff that doesn't really matter in the end. It gets into the "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" territory, when really what is so sorely needed is compassion and real care.
yeah Pgrundy, that sucks. Sorry you had to do that alone and you are right, there should be more first hand accounts than the sterile one that do not take into account what it does to the human psyche of the one who has to go through it. And it should be considered more wholeheartedly that it is not an easy choice for a women to make when it comes to abortion.
Pro-lifers don't consider the circumstance and not every womens body is able to give birth, which is another topic of its own. They don't consider the child who is scared to death of telling mommy and daddy that she got knocked up and killer herself over having to lie to her folks and getting improper care.
They don't consider rape, they don't consider birth defects, they don't consider the life that is already here, which is the mother.
My mom had some troubles with my little brother and the doctor told my dad that there was a chance she would not make it and he would have to chose between my mom and my brother, my dad chose my mom. When I asked him how he made his decision, he said because she has a life, she has a family, and because we can make another one. He said it was not an easy choice to make, but one had to be made. So in this "context" my dad was suggesting that "life" was one that already had attachments.
Some could argue that a baby does have attachments to the mother in the womb after so many months, but I could also say that it would not hurt the baby. The only reason I can even say that is because no one can remember what it was like to be born. We couldn't feel anything, we don't remember anything, all there is a the mother and father, or the people who have made thier own attachments to the baby, and ultimatly it is only them who will feel the pain, and this one is emotional.
Elliot Institute is a major resource for organizations around the world who are concerned about protecting the rights of women and their unborn children. Their mission also includes educating others about abortion's injustice, trauma and risk to all involved, and raising awareness of the need for healing. As well as giving assistance to those who are dealing with varying effects that can occur after an abortion. www.afterabortion.org
Sandra - If you are having trouble understanding what SJ means, you are not alone. But I am quite sure you do not base your interpretations solely on my opinion. I personally have trouble understanding when some on says the things she does like "God Bless Our Troops!" as meaning anything other that what I take them to.
SJ - You really might want to reconsider the way in which you choose to communicate.
Some one like myself might take what you have just said. i.e the fact that you knew there was a soul "hanging around," before you even conceived and that you felt "compelled to perform" or the fact that you remember being aborted as some what difficult to grasp.
One might even mistakenly get the idea that when you say "the rights of unborn children," and "abortion's injustice," you were some how against abortion. I am of course projecting my own interpretations of those words to mean what they say rather than whatever obscure personal meaning you have chosen to apply to them and not shared.
One might even take that a step further and look at the link you have left to a site that proclaims "Abortion is Unwanted, Unsafe and Unfair." And then jump to the erroneous conclusion that you in any way supported this idea.
For goodness sake say what you mean. It would avoid all sorts of communication difficulties. If you are going to start inventing your own language which uses English words, people are inevitably going to interpret them to mean something you didn't mean to say.
And just in case you misunderstand me, I am in favor of allowing women the choice of an abortion. Based on several things, not least of which that I value the existing life over the soul that is "hanging around."
And here are a few links to confuse you because they are all pro-abortion and I don't want you to think that just because I said I was pro-abortion I actually am.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health … n-4260.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/03/healt … 3essa.html
Do I even need to add the sarcastic smilie?
Oh and getting back to the topic of the thread that the media is misrepresenting Sarah Palin, not that you are in any way associating yourself with her war-mongering, in fact quite the opposite I now gather, take a look at this post. Be afraid, be very afraid:
http://tpzoo.wordpress.com/2008/09/21/e … your-life/
welcome to my world, Mark!
If there is anything you might try to understand about where I stand, than at least try to comprehend that I try to be more middle ground than extreme right or left. There are so many more factors of life (my belief as factors, anyway) that affect our personal decisions than most people have to consider.
Hubpages is the one place in my life where I can say what I feel, think and know as Truth or as learning whether Truth or not. I have to monitor myself constantly in life...please allow me my one (even though anonymous) place in life where I can speak my mind. It has turned out that way...I didn't start Hubpages to be so open and out about my "unusual" life knowledge and beliefs...it just became a healthy thing for me to do, instead of ignoring my complete feelings and thoughts on issues. I was feeling so fragmented.
In my view, there is no need for cynicism, sarcasm, or frustration in life because there are so many of the choices that people make in life that are based on incomplete knowledge as to their basis for coming to their reasonings or feelings.
I know who I am, where I came from and pretty much the most important things about where I am going. People can go along or not, question or not, send negative energy my way or not, judge me or not. My main concern is that if they knew how much their negativity was contributing to the overall problems in the world they would just keep their mouth shut, or be more objective and/or be more compassionate, especially in situations or communications where they haven't a clue where the other person is coming from.
There is a state of consciousness that will unite people and their decisions for making the world a better place..for everyone, though never perfect for everyone's desires and beliefs. I am trying to attain and maintain that state of Christ consciousness and share it if possible.
I am not opposed to answering genuine and sincere questions to my stand...but I will never react, don't want to ever react, in a negative way to someone's negative responses to my opinions. It is hard to be kind and understanding, but I try to not condemn and put down others for their opinions.
Sparklng Jewel... you have been beaten up relentlessly here.
It is just this ugliness on the part of the so called "free thinkers" that has made me consider quitting Hub Pages.
It is just this ugliness and ignorance that is going to bring about the fall of our nation one day.
Not today. I have confidence that there are enough conscience driven people in our country to sustain it yet... through their votes.
Our freedoms as a nation are dwindling by the moment. Voting in McCain and Palin will give us time to stop the bleeding... at least maybe slow it down... maybe even give some of our govenment back to we the people???
God is not to be mentioned in today's society as far as these "free thinkers" go... certainly no one believing in God can be in a government position.
President Kennedy would be banned today.
Take God out of life.. there is no life..just chaos and confusion.
Look around you. Case proven.
The best thing we can do is go and vote our conscience. If you do that .. you have to vote for McCain and Palin.
Those who vote for Obama.. should he get in.. will be the ones crying loudest when the government finally once and for all sqeezes their toes then up to their hearts where their money lies.
Good luck with Hubs... sparkling jewel.....
As a mother of 8 and a small business owner... I really don't have much time for it any longer...
May God continue to bless America.. in spite of all of us.... and yes.. may God bless our troops.... those who defend our freedoms today and all those who have gone before... including those I know who have given their lives... and all those I don't.
Ooops.. this thread started on the media's misrepresentaion of Sarah Palin.. and nothing more need be said.. other than..
...our mainstream media have become equal to the supermarket tabloids of today.
The sad thing is how many people read those tabloids and nothing else.
Pathtiec statement of the intelligence of society.
You are confusing me.
You say that your "freedoms as a nation are dwindling by the moment."
And also that "God is not to be mentioned in today's society as far as these "free thinkers" go... certainly no one believing in God can be in a government position."
Yet you have a President in office who believes in God and has presided over these "dwindling freedoms," for the last 8 years.
And you have written a hub warning against voting for Obama because the current administration is nationalizing the insurance industry.
I think she was trying to say that "free thinkers" believe that people who believe in God should not have a place in government. Though in actuallity, even people who do believe in God also say that "God and Politics" don't mix.
I often wonder why it is always "God bless America", never "God bless everyone"?
I went to that link you posted, it's nausiating at best. For a moment yesturday I was considering voting Obama just because I really, really, really do not want Palin but for as sickening as these people are becoming, I still say "don't vote".
I cannot stand this crap that is going on using God as the basis for war and whatnot. As paranoid as I am becoming I am thinking that anyone who votes will shown if favore of some sort of discernnment and penelized for it in some way.
I am probably overreacting, but all of it is just sick.
Mark.... you should know by now it is Congress who makes laws...not the President. Didn't you study government way back in school?
As for the rest... well.... it's just not worth my time to respond if you are that ignorant..other than to say you really should read up on Marxism and communism... and you should thank President Bush every day that you get up withut having suicide bombers in your neighborhool.
I would guess the terrorists are just kicking themselves for not having taken more full advantage of and didn't move faster in their plans for this country while Clinton was in office.
Sorry.. can't waste my time respondintg to more drivel like this.... it is gettng comparable to the radio host somewhere out west.. maybe California.. who spit on Palin by saying you would not want to let your kids spend the night at her house.. she was sure she would be sleeping with the boys.
It is beyond sick.
Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton.... Lincoln.. all our great presidents.....all war veterans dead and alive... all servicemen in office now...... all honest politicians who have worked their hearts out to do what is right for the people..not to GIVE to the people by taking other people's money etc..... to all of them.... people like you , Mark.....owe a huge apology for pretending that you in your hearts are true Americans.
You don't even know what the word means.
Goodbye... and may God bless you somehow in spite of yourself ... for you too have an immortal soul... and we all must die one day.
No escaping that... no matter how opinions differ here.
LOL having typed the whole screen after stating it's not worth your time is kinda funny
Thanks for the support.
I guess you did not know that Mark is not in America or an American, or that he is an atheist. All of those aspects can ease your mind as to why he is the way he is...I agree that it could be upsetting to think that an American would talk and act the way he does. But he is not American...and he does have an opinion of his own, formed by his own experiences or lack thereof.
We can't let others manipulate our lives by reacting to them, right ?
I hope you will at least visit here once in a while
Sandra - As you may have noticed, I feel the same way you do. Claiming some sort of divine connection and then using it to promote war-mongering nationalism makes me sick too.
It is all over the world, not just the USA, and I genuinely wish we could have learned from our mistakes of the past. It seems not......
The rhetorical nationalistic crap coming out of the Islamic radicals is just as bad. No doubt Misha will attest to the fact that the communists were just the same. The problem is that the ones who own the TV stations and the munitions manufacturing are able to spend enough money convincing enough people they are under some sort of threat that it just keeps going.
Education is the only answer, yet these people are resistant to dolphin-hating atheistic, communist lies being spread by left-wing radical baby killers
I am offended when some one says "God bless America," or "God Bless the Queen," because the second part of that statement is "And F*** the rest of the world."
In an ideal world we would all love each other and do what is necessary to help other's survive. But we don't live in an ideal world. Evil exists and there are people who feel it's necessary to do us harm simply because we don't believe as they do. I don't think by asking for God's blessing for America you are at the same time saying "f**K everyone else". After all when someone sneezes and you respond with a "bless you" are you wishing ill on the rest of the world?
The issue here is whether or not Palin believes God is talking to her and instructing her on how to make her decisions. I don't believe there is any indication of that in anything she said. She obviously believes in God, but that doesn't make her a bad person nor would it make her a bad vice president. Just as scientists studying evolution or the universe can believe in God and still perform their job function, so too can a politician. If they start to justify their decisions by saying "it's God's will", then we have a problem, but to pray that they are performing God's will, is quite different though subtle distinction.
ahh poppa blues, she does say it is God's will. I am sure she is a nice person in her own mind, outside of this, which I conclude is her idea of God's will and the fullfilling the prophecy, then she is no longer using her better judgment as a human alike in all aspects of other humans, but using a 2000 year old book to guide her decisions.
Besides, witch hunting...I thought that stopped a long time ago, apperantly not.
Poppa Blues. You need to watch some of the videos in that link I left.
Unfortunately I can't stream video here but going by what was written in the original post, I'd say it was clear Palin was not saying that God talks to her directly.
Well, I do believe you are splitting hairs here. So for those who did not follow the link or do not have streaming video, this is a few select quotes:
"I can do my part in working hard for the pipeline. Pray for the Alaska pipeline. God’s will has to be done in unifying companies and people – but none of that does any good if the people of Alaska’s hearts aren’t right with God."
"Pray for our military who are doing what is right for the country. National leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God. That’s what we are praying for and that that plan is a plan is God’s plan."
"Let us pray god may give to you the spirit of revelation including the spirit of prophesy. God is going to tell you what is going on and what is going to go on. Good, good things in store for the state of Alaska. Let us pray for God’s will to be done here for all of your destinies to be met in this state. We are the head not the tail and I see things in the works that are coming to fruition, percolating, coming along. Praying for the outpouring of God’s spirit for the revival to be here in Alaska."
Seems to me she had a very good idea of what god wants.
Perhaps I'm splitting hairs, but maybe, just maybe, you're seeing something that isn't there or coming to a conclusion based on your own beliefs. You can't just take a part of what she said out of context to bolster your argument. That's the same thing that was done to Obama with the reverend Wright.
Well...she is also a bold faced liar. Most everything that has come out of her mouth has been half truth and half truth to achieve an effect is a lie. She is also convinced that Alaska will be a refuge for people during or after the "war".
If that is not a strong indication that she really believes this "war" is going down during her lifetime, then I don't know what is. Further, she strongly believes that she has been chosen to do the will of God because she also said...
"be amazed that the umbrella of this church here, where God is going to send you from this church; believe me I know what I am sayin', where God has sent me from underneith the umbrella of this church throughout the state, and: Alasksa is all over the world map right now...there is something going on here with where you all are going...we are the richest state in the Union in terms of our natural resources......and making sure our troopers have thier cop cars and their uniforms and thier guns... and really non of the stuff does any good if the people of Alaska hearts isn't right with God.
Also note, when she says guns...she says it like, yeah guns. like a misguided kid who watches old western movies and says wow a gun.
Really you should find a way to get this video.
There is a slight difference in blessing thyself and blessing others
Sandra, The quote I read was that she was 'praying that the war was God's will'. That's very different then claiming you are doing God's will. The implication being you as a human being knows what God's will is! Anyone that would make such a claim would lose all credibility! Words matter and it's important you don't jump to conclusions>
I'll check out the video when I get home. Still nothing you posted indicates she believes she is one of God's chosen people here to do His will!
True much of her claims have not been completely accurate, but after all she IS a politician and which of any of the politicians running has been totally honest in all of their claims and accusations????
As far as voting, it's important to sort through all the noise. I know I can't convince anyone to believe something other then what they already believe so I won't try. Palin is certainly not the perfect candidate to run as a vice president, but neither is Obama the perfect candidate for president and really that's what we're voting for.
I have nothing against Obama or the democrats. I'm probably closer to them socially speaking but economically I'm closer to the republican point of view even if they haven't followed that philosophy the last 8 years! In my opinion a democratic congress coupled with a democratic white house will be economically disastrous for us. True Obama wants to raise taxes on only the richest Americans, but he also wants to raise corporate taxes. We already have the second highest corporate taxes IN THE WORLD! Raising them now would be further weaken our already troubled economy. In addition if we are going to compete with labor in places like China and India, we need to have edge and lowering corporate taxes would help to give us that. I won't ramble on about the rest of his smoke and mirrors economic plans, though I could.
As far as Palin is concerned, I believe her appeal is that she is more like most middle Americans than any of the other folks running. She's basically a PTA mom that got involved in politics because she was concerned. She's not a Washington insider or career politician like McCain, Obama, and Biden.
Poppa Blues - If McCain were a young, vigorous man in his fifties, this would not even be being discussed. But if you think a "PTA mom," who has already demonstrated dubious decision making and taking advantage of her position to further her personal ends would be a good choice as President.....
For my money, Obama is just the lesser of two evils.
Well Obama has less experience, and he is without a doubt an ambitious man even to the point of running in a primary against the very person that gave him his shot when her plan to run for another office didn't work out and she asked him to step aside and let her run for his seat.
The way I look at it the "best and the brightest" got us where we are now, maybe a PTA mom could do a better job, hell I know I could!!!!
Oh, and 72 isn't that old these days. If Cheney could make it, I'm sure McCain can make at least one term!
Anyway, in my mind, McCain is the lesser of the two evils, but of course there is still Barr and Nader and of course you can always write in whoever you want, like me for example or perhaps Ron Paul!
Misha - All I did was ask for a simple explanation. Now I am being accused of all sorts of things.
Like being American..............
Although, if Congress makes the laws, what difference does it make who is President?
Although I thank President Bush for the fact that there are no suicide bombers in my neighborhood every God blessed day.
ss- God bless you also - it is what you deserve.
PB - Expecting a 72-year old cancer survivor to last to 80?. For your information, although you think 72 is not old, the average life expectancy of an American male is 75.15 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co … expectancy
Which gives him 3 years average. Now you understand why S. Palin is an issue?
Nope. Like I said, she has MORE experience than Obama. The fact that she's religious doesn't affect me one way or the other. Unless and until someone can show me that she believes the voices in her head are from God himself, I'm not going to worry about it a great deal.
Averages can be very deceiving too. A more accurate measure would be the median age of mortality in men. An even better gauge might be the median age of males that survive cancer for more than 5 years!
You know, it is not so much that she believes in God or if she even get's messages from above. It is what she is doing with it that has got people worried.
It's one thing to believe in the prophecy or to believe in God, it is another to try and bring them about.
I am curious, while I mean no offense whatsoever, when was the last time you read the Bible?
Like I said, we/I could be paranoid but with the way things are progressing and knowing about our history...well you get the point.
That's life expectancy at birth *today*. If you're born in 1936 like McCain was, the figure is considerably lower....Although he does have billions of dollars at his disposal for the finest doctors, and I do remember Deng Xiaoping was kept "alive" (more or less as a vegetable) for a few years after he was cognizant.
I hadn't thought of that. Although, it seems that if you have already decided 72 is not old, no amount of facts and figures will change your mind.
SJ - Don't you worry. I have lived a quarter of my life in the US, love her as potentially the best country in the world, am married to an American and have the right to live, work and vote there.
I will continue to disturb right-wing fascists with my dolphin-hating for many years.
The fact that I choose to broaden my horizons by living in a foreign country should not put you off in any way whatsoever. I am just as entitled to an opinion as you are.
Upsetting as that may be........
Be careful of life expectancy stats. After all, the average life expectancy of centenarians is probably 101, no matter when they were born
by Paul Swendson6 years ago
Is it possible for pro-life and pro-choice people to find any common ground? Too often, the argument becomes fixated on the morality and legality of abortion, which are both worthwhile topics. But in the end, I think...
by Credence23 years ago
This fellow has such a screwed reasoning system, check out this articlehttp://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/20 … c#commentsDoes he really believe that the indiscretions of a former President almost 20 years ago...
by Credence24 years ago
How wide spread is the message that seems to come from the Republican Right that among the parties involved in a rape crime, the status of the woman is less important that that of the offender or that of the unborn...
by bBerean3 years ago
Paul Harvey, April 3rd, 1965, "If I were the devil." Consider society when Paul Harvey first aired this, and how much has transpired to fulfill it already. Forewarned, yet still we stay true to the...
by andrew savage4 years ago
What are the aspects of the two modes of practical law that make one incompatible with the other?
by SparklingJewel8 years ago
Though this is still in the religion forum, it is also a political issue and a spiritual issue (which to me has some additional/different attributes than as a religious issue)As a spiritual issue, for me, believing what...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.