Friday, August 29, 2008

More on Governor Palin and Feminists for Life

A press release from Feminists for Life of America:

August 29, 2008

FFL Member Nominated for Vice President of the United States

Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, has been selected by Republican presidential nominee Senator John McCain as his running mate.

According to The Anchorage Daily News published August 6, 2006, "Palin said last month that no woman should have to choose between her career, education and her child." The article went onto say that "she's a member of a pro-woman but anti-abortion group called Feminists for Life." "I believe in the strength and the power of women, and the potential of every human life,' she said."

Feminists for Life's policy is that all memberships are confidential. However, since Governor Palin has been public about her membership, we can confirm that Palin became a member in 2006.

Earlier this week Feminists for Life reacted to the inclusion of woman-centered solutions in the Democratic Party platform, and the inclusion of FFL's trademarked message, "Women deserve better® than abortion,©" in the Republican Party platform.

FFL President Serrin Foster said "It is unprecedented to see the platforms of both major U.S. political parties incorporate key pieces of FFL's unique message."

"Of course there is a certain excitement about the recent movement toward FFL's woman-centered solutions and message by the parties, and now the selection of a pro-life feminist as the Vice Presidential nominee. But as a nonpartisan organization, we cannot endorse any candidates," Foster said.

"FFL members represent a broad political as well as religious spectrum, and we remain both nonpartisan and nonsectarian. There are many issues outside Feminists for Life's mission. Feminists for Life is dedicated to systematically eliminating the root causes that drive women to abortion—primarily lack of practical resources and support—through holistic, woman-centered solutions. We recognize that abortion is a reflection that our society has failed to meet the needs of women and that too often women have settled for less. Women deserve better than abortion," said Foster.

As each party takes steps to acknowledge and meet the needs of women, Feminists for Life is prepared to work with our elected leaders on behalf of girls and women who deserve far better than abortion. FFL has a long track record of working with both sides of the political aisle on major legislation such as the Violence Against Women Act, Child Support Enforcement Act, and much more. Many members of Congress have already stepped forward to cosponsor the FFL-inspired bill with bipartisan support, the Elizabeth Cady Stanton Pregnant and Parenting Student Services Act.

"We invite all parties, all public servants, and all people to join us on the bridge of woman-centered solutions," Foster said.



"Abortion is a reflection that we have not met the needs of women. Women deserve better than abortion."
Say NO to the Status QuoTM

Feminists for Life is a 501(c)3 organization.
All donations and membership contributions are tax deductible to the extent allowed to law.
Refuse to Choose and Women Deserve Better are registered trademarks of Feminists for Life of America.


reddog said...

FFL seems like a laudable organization. One thing is unclear to me. Do they seek to make it easier for women to make the decision to bear children, through education, services and law or are they going that one step further and seeking to deny women the right to make the choice.

Also, they appear to be neutral on the subject of birth control. They recognize that some of their membership reject most forms of birth control as being a legitimate philosophical stand. Do they make any such statement about members of their organization who may support the use of a wider range of birth control measures?

Christina said...

FFL believes that abortion is an injustice against womenm.

FFL's frequent presence at pro-life rallies would suggest that they wish to create a world in which women do not need to to choose abortion, making the issue of "denying" them a choice moot.

Christina said...

From the FFL news page:

"Feminists for Life is working to systematically eliminate the root causes that drive women to abortion."

They seem to be primarily concerned with helping women after they are already pregnant.

I cannot recall seeing or hearing any specific statements on birth control from them, possibly because of the diverse opinions on the subject among their membership.

RS said...

Women Want Safety, not Biden's Abuse of Power

As a pro-life supporter of John McCain and Sarah Palin, I'd like to bring a concern about the Violence against Women Act to light.

Senator Joe Biden proudly proclaims that he was regularly and severely beaten by his older sister as a child and as an adolescent. This is the same sister that raised his two sons after his wife and daughter were killed in an auto accident.

Biden has often claimed that the Violence against Women Act is the greatest achievement of his career. He also claims that a woman cannot be a perpetrator of domestic violence, despite the fact that hundreds of studies show that women commit acts of domestic violence as often as, or more often than men. Many studies also show that lesbian women physically attack their intimate partners at least as often as heterosexual men.

As a result of Biden's Violence against Women Act, the federal government pays states to create laws effectively requiring that men be removed from their homes and families without even an allegation of violence, with no legitimate standards of evidence, when a woman makes a claim that she is afraid.

Elaine Epstein, president of the Massachusetts Bar Association (1999), has said "the facts have become irrelevant... restraining orders are granted to virtually all who apply. Regarding divorce cases, she states "allegations of abuse are now used for tactical advantage". According to Epstein, who is also a former president of the Massachusetts Women’s Bar Association, restraining orders are doled out "like candy" and "in virtually all cases, no notice, meaningful hearing, or impartial weighing of evidence is to be had."

State restraining order laws are starting to fall because they're unconstitutional. The federal law behind them, written by Joe Biden, is likely to fall as well, not because it isn’t popular, but because it is clearly unconstitutional.

Supporting Documentation

Here are some of the facts regarding Biden's abuse at the hand of his sister. During senate hearings held on December 11, 1990, Biden testified to the abuse.

This recent CDC study indicates that women between the ages of 18 and 28 initiate reciprocal violence against their intimate partners about as often as men. It also indicates that women initiate non-reciprocal violence against their intimate partners more than twice as often as men.

Here is a link to a bibliography of over 200 studies indicating that women are as violent as men in their intimate relationships:

According to the US Department of Justice, women also abuse, neglect and kill their children at significantly higher rates than men. Here’s some of the data on child homicides.

Research clearly indicates that lesbian battery is at least as common as heterosexual battery.

Cathy Young reports on the Elaine Epstein quote and the broader issue at here:

and provides in depth analysis here:

HumanRights101 said...

I'm very happy to see that John McCain has selected a running mate of such conviction and character.

I hope, as the debate on feminism emerges in the campaign, that Sarah Palin will recognize that the Violence Against Women Act has spawned legislation in the states that is beginning to fall. It's falling because it's unconstitutional and because false allegations of domestic violence are destroying the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans every year.

Restraining orders are now granted automatically in many states, with no consideration of the validity of the claims. Human rights activists, academics and even bar associations have known for a long time that the ease with which restraining orders are granted has led to an epidemic of false claims, which are often made to gain an advantage in divorce litigation.

The consequences have been profound... for the falsely accused and their children.

I ask, sincerely, that those who read this think also of the those who have been harmed by the shortsightedness of the Violence Against Women Act.