Palin's homophobia could have harmed her daughter's baby

[Onlooker]

For a so-called conservative Christian woman who got pregnant before getting married and whose daughter did the same thing to have the audacity to want to make gays second class citizens is outrageous.

She pushed for an amendment to the Alaska Constitution (separate from the already passed Alaska anti-gay marriage amendment) that would not only deny gay partners the same benefits as straight partners, it could deny, for instance, her daughter and the baby access to medical insurance and other benefits through her boyfriend's job. What kind of family values does this woman have?

http://alaskalegislature.com/stories/122106/leg_20061221021.shtml

"Palin said she would also move forward with a statewide advisory vote intended to help pass a constitutional amendment barring both state and local governments, such as Anchorage and Juneau, from providing same-sex benefits."

Here's what the amendment she favors would say, in part,

http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=136&languageId=1&contentId=94925

"In Alaska, for example, the new amendment states that all 'rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage shall be extended or assigned' only to married, heterosexual couples."

[Balderdash]

1. Could you please frame your

remarks around the issue and get off the baby shit. Damn, it's sexist, do you not get that. You're not just fucking with her with the sexist remarks, you're doing it to all women, women right here on this board.

How can this be the Progressive/Democrats board with so damn much sexism?

Oh and I'm a gay woman, so I really want this issue to be talked about but not at the expense of women in general.

[Onlooker]

2. I don't think it's sexist at all

We're attacking Palin for her moral hypocrisy. Some people have raised the issue of whether a good mom can also be a VP. That's sexist, but that's certainly not the issue I'm raising.

In this thread, I'm simply pointing out that Palin favored legislation that would hurt gays and unmarried people, including unmarried moms like her daughter. How is that sexist?

[blogslut]

3. How is it sexist?

Those marriage sanctity laws are indeed hurting non-married heterosexuals and their children. That's one more reason why these anti-GLBT laws are so wrong.

How is the OP's statement sexist?

[DU9598]

4. Sexist?

Seriously Balderdash? Sure are a lot of "concerned" Democrats who don't like us hitting hard on the McCain Palin ticket. Kinda odd that the under 1000 post crowd is usually the most "concerned" and alleging sexism.

[Bluenorthwest]

6. You make huge and awful charges

That I surely do not agree with. But you offer no explaination at all, just your own opinion. Why not tell us the specifics, why is it sexist to attack a woman's political position?
And by the way, Palin, as a free and equal human, made the CHOICE to use her family as political props. She parades them, talks about them and pushes them into the limelight. She did that. No one else. She did it.
The fact that you are here wishing to blunt attacks on a woman who as no problem attacking GLBT families, or their kids, makes me think all kinds of bad things about your posting.
How in the hell is saying that this woman promotes anti-gay legislation that would also harm her own well limelite family sexist in any way? And the idea that such a factual point made about Palin is at the expense of all women needs to be specifically backed up, tell us what you base that crazed opinion upon? Do you think all women are grandstanding homophobic religionists who use their family as political window dressing?
Palin is Palin. She is not all women. You say otherwise. Now show your work. Support your accusations, which is what they are.

[terrya]

5. I think that the fact she's vehemently anti-gay is damaging in and of itself.

Yet another reason to elect Obama/Biden. I'm so fucking sick and tired of the government pushing a homophobic agenda.