Sarah Palin is no Susan B. Anthony

By Ann Gordon and Lynn Sherr Last week in Washington, Sarah Palin addressed the Susan B. Anthony List – the … Continued

By Ann Gordon and Lynn Sherr

Last week in Washington, Sarah Palin addressed the Susan B. Anthony List – the political action committee that calls itself the “nerve center of the pro-life movement” – claiming that her opposition to abortion rights was rooted in our “feminist foremothers.” No one asked for sources.

For nearly 30 years, both of us have been immersed in Susan B. Anthony’s words – Ann as the editor of Anthony’s papers, Lynn as the author of a biography. We have read every single word that this very voluble – and endlessly political – woman left behind. Our conclusion: Anthony spent no time on the politics of abortion. It was of no interest to her, despite living in a society (and a family) where women aborted unwanted pregnancies.

The List’s mission statement proclaims, “Although [Anthony] is known for helping women win the right to vote, it is often untold in history that she and most early feminists were strongly pro-life.” There’s a good reason it’s “untold:” historians and good journalists rely on evidence. Of which there is none.

The bits of information circulating on the Web always cite “Marriage and Maternity,” an article in a newspaper owned for several years after the Civil War by Susan B. Anthony. In it, the writer deplores “the horrible crime of child-murder,” and signs it simply, “A.” Although no data exists that Anthony wrote it, or ever used that shorthand for herself, she is imagined to be its author. The anti-abortion forces also ignore the paragraph in which the anonymous author vigorously opposes “demanding a law for its suppression.” In other words, the article opposes the criminalization of abortion and was written by someone other then Anthony. Untold? Unproven.

The only clear reference to abortion in Susan B. Anthony’s writings, recently discovered by Ann, was quickly fitted into the anti-abortion narrative. After a visit with her brother, Anthony remarks in her diary that her sister-in-law aborted a pregnancy, things did not go well, and the woman was bedridden. Anthony concludes, “She will rue the day she forces nature.” Clearly Anthony did not applaud her sister-in-law’s action, but the notation is ambiguous. Is it the act of abortion that will be regretted? Or is it being bedridden, the risk taken with one’s own life? At most, the quotation amounts to private disapproval within the family, unlikely to be voiced to her beloved relative. But there is no hint that this is a social problem or a political matter. No one could mistake the diary entry for “passionate abhorrence” to abortion, a commitment to “pro-life activism” — as pro-lifers claim.

Naming this lobby for Susan B. Anthony doesn’t change her views any more than clicking your heels three times gets you back to Kansas. But here’s Palin again, in her Friday morning keynote: “Organizations like the Susan B. Anthony list are returning the woman’s movement back to its original roots, back to what it was all about in the beginning. You remind us of the earliest leaders of the woman’s rights movement: They were pro-life.”

Our argument here is not over abortion rights. Rather it is about the erosion of accuracy in history and journalism. If Republicans want to claim Susan B. Anthony, they can certainly boast that she supported the 1872 Republican candidate – Ulysses S. Grant – the one and only time she cast her ballot in a presidential election. It was, of course, against the law and got her convicted as a felon, but that is a story for another time. Still, you have to be careful about your history. In a shout-out to the Tea Party Friday, Sarah Palin said, “That’s enough, federal government, enough of your overreach, and we’re going to do something about it!” This in the name of a leader who, in her lifetime, was one of America’s most consistent advocates of federal power, with its promise of overriding ill-conceived and discriminatory state laws.

Susan B. Anthony, a lifelong Quaker, included Mormons, Catholics, Christians, Jews and atheists in her movement. But she firmly believed that religion had no place in politics. “I dislike those who know so well what God wants them to do,” she said, “because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.” On Friday, Sarah Palin called Susan B. Anthony “one of my heroes.” And well she should be – as long as Palin understands who Anthony was. And wasn’t.

Ann Gordon, Research Professor, Department of History, Rutgers University, edited the 5-volume Selected Papers of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony.
Lynn Sherr, award-winning broadcaster and former ABC News correspondent, wrote “Failure is Impossible: Susan B. Anthony in Her Own Words” and is writing a play about Anthony.

Read a response by Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony list.

  • EEMargolin

    Ugh. I wish the press would more accurately represent the proper terminology. It’s either pro-choice or anti-choice.

  • areyousaying

    true that. How can “Pro-life” be for capital punishment, pre-emptive wars based on propaganda lies and torture?

  • whocares666

    Paylin, like the Susan B. Anthony dollar, will be a flop.

  • wireman65

    Ms. Palin has never let facts come between her and a good sound bite.

  • eal1

    I am pro-life and pro-choice and don’t see any contradiction in that statement at all. That’s because for me, “pro-life” is about choices one has in one’s life, ergo, “pro-choice”. Anthony was about equal access and choice. Palin is about Palin and is raising Bristol similarly. Like mother, like daughter. Ask Palin if she was pregnant when she married her First Dude…she was.

  • Azarkhan

    Susan Anthony regarding abortion:”Guilty? Yes, no matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death…”The “faculty lounge” feminists (see Elena Kagan) of course hate Sarah Palin. Why?You leftists are going to have increase your hatred and lies about Ms. Palin before she gets traction. Good luck!!

  • missingwisc

    Thank you for the article. At least I wasn’t the only one struck by the irony of Palin and Susan B. Anthony being said in the same sentence. Most likely Palin would not even accept Anthony’s ideals if she were alive today.

  • kevin1231

    As afar as I am concerned Sarah Palin is a stupid manipulative woman. The fact she is popular among some groups says a lot about those people. They talk about fiscal responsibilities but yet are willing to coffer up 100,000 for her to speak. Isn’t this hypocrisy?

  • iamweaver

    Azarkhan writes:’Susan Anthony regarding abortion:”Guilty? Yes, no matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death…” ‘Two problems with this quote. 1) It has never been proved to have been from Susan B. Anthony.2) The original letter, whoever wrote it, is not a “pro-life” letter, as Palin defines the term. As with *many* of us, we are personally pro-life, but vehemently opposed to the Government ramming our personal beliefs down the throats of those who don’t agree with me. The letter isn’t “pro-life”, because like me, it vehemently opposes the state outlawing the practice.This is because the “pro-life” movement incorrectly identifies itself. It’s not just “pro-life”. It is “Anti-choice”. There is a difference. I am “pro-life”, “pro-choice”.

  • Azarkhan

    “The fact she is popular among some groups says a lot about those people”We know what it says-we’re just not as intelligent as someone like you. Or maybe we are not as arrogant. I can’t decide.Anyway, while you leftists are screaming about lies, how about Tawana Sharpeton-his entire career is built on a lie. All together now-let’s hear some condemnation!

  • denise4925

    So are the quotes on this page wrong?*******Wikipedia? Seriously??!!

  • Azarkhan

    “Wikipedia? Seriously??!!”Yeah! We’re just poor dumb white trash. We can’t afford a subscription to the Encyclopedia Brittanica.

  • denise4925

    To quote Keith Olberman, “That woman’s an idiot!!”

  • Azarkhan

    To quote Keith Olberman, “That woman’s an idiot!!”So we finally found that one individual who still watches Olberman. Gee, quoting from the declasse Wikipedia is better then a quote from the loon Olby.

  • denise4925

    Yeah! We’re just poor dumb white trash. We can’t afford a subscription to the Encyclopedia Brittanica.*****

  • kreator6996

    It needs to be noted, that most of the Susan B. Anthony quotes in question frame the question as it relates to MEN.The quote is about MEN calling women guilty of abortion/murder while not doing anything to prevent it.This is NOT about abortion/pro-life as Palin and her ilk would have you believe, it as just a continuation of her struggle against a male-dominated society that stated women were lesser than men, and unable to make her own choices.Were she alive today, she very well may have been against abortion.But she sure as hell wasnt going to have any man or tell her what her choice should be, either.

  • KeithW2

    denise4925:Are those quotes incorrect or taken out of context to the point that their meaning has been misinterpreted?I am asking a question. If I trusted Wikiquotes without question then I wouldn’t be asking the question. But my experience is that the large majority of information I have viewed on Wikipedia is accurate and that the Wikipedia editing model promotes accuracy.If I had time scholarly research on the topic of course I wouldn’t rely on Wikipedia as a source.

  • denise4925

    To quote Keith Olberman, “That woman’s an idiot!!”*****At least what Keith says is fact or is based on fact. This is more than I can say for Wikipedia and Sarah (the half-term governor) PAYlin.

  • Azarkhan

    “But she sure as hell wasnt going to have any man or tell her what her choice should be, either.”I think you are absolutely right. My question is: Who would Susan Anthony find more admirable, Sarah Palin or Terry O’Neill?

  • Urnesto

    Hey Azarkhan: Don’t be stupid and then offensive and then misread, and then be smug about your misreading. Don’t do it. It is true: that no one NEEDS to buy the encyclopedia because of the internet. That it’s for sale is irrelevant.

  • denise4925

    “No one has to purchase the Encyclopedia Britannica anymore”****At first I didn’t get why there were people who bowed at the feet of Paylin, but now you’ve opened my eyes to the people like yourself who either fail to comprehend what you read or have an inability to critically think about what it is you’ve read.

  • Azarkhan

    “people like yourself who either fail to comprehend what you read or have an inability to critically think about what it is you’ve read.”Like I said, compared to geniuses like you, I’m just poor dumb white trash. But ma’am, I’m trying to get better…I really am!

  • denise4925

    denise4925:*****I wouldn’t rely on quotes from Wikipedia, especially for entries on politically diverse issues, regardless of how accurate the quotes are. Unless read in the entirety, quotes from this source are impossible to rely on, simply because whomever posted the quotes has a stake in selling the reader their political point of view.

  • YEAL9

    What Susan B might have said if she were alive today and what Sarah P should have said but didn’t:It is obvious that intercourse and other sexual activities are out of control with over one million abortions and 19 million cases of STDs per year in the USA alone. from the CDC-2006″Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain STDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psychological consequences of STDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs associated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars.”How in the world do we get this situation under control? A pill to temporarily eliminate the sex drive would be a good start. (Andy Rooney of 60 Minutes, 4/18/2010 described them as anti-desire pills). And teenagers and young adults must be constantly reminded of the dangers of sexual activity and that oral sex, birth control pills, condoms and chastity belts are no protection against STDs. Might a list of those having an STD posted on the Internet help? Said names would remain until the STD has been eliminated with verification by a doctor. Lists of sexual predators are on-line. Is there a difference between these individuals and those having a STD having sexual relations while infected???Note: No Sarah P. references to god were or are needed to address the situation.

  • buckminsterj

    Don’t be so hard on yourself, Azarkhan.It can’t be easy to defend a subliterate sell-out who, when not invoking an imaginary sky-fairy to affirm her prejudices and gratify her ego, enjoys shooting things from helicopters. Chin up! Just take a deep breath and maybe get yourself a snack.

  • denise4925

    “people like yourself who either fail to comprehend what you read or have an inability to critically think about what it is you’ve read.”****Well good. Because the first step in recovery is admitting there’s a problem.

  • Azarkhan

    ‘Don’t be so hard on yourself, Azarkhan”Don’t be so full of yourself, Buckminsterj.Obviously you think you know everything, or at least everything about Sarah Palin and her fans. But of course, you don’t. All you know is the world of Starbucks geeks(Coffee Party, anyone?) and leftist arrogance and maybe some half-remembered leftist text you read in *university*. It’s OK. Come November we’ll introduce you to the real world.

  • KeithW2

    denise4925:You said:Can you please explain what leads you to say that they are taken out of context? Can you point to a link or post here the full/fuller context of those quotes? Just as you suggested it is foolish to trust Wikipedia without further examination, I will need more than just your assurances that those quotes have been taken out of context and misinterpreted.Respectfully,

  • edbyronadams

    Yeah, not Susan Anthony. In fact she has a stronger connection to the future in the fact that she has children.

  • KeithW2

    It can’t be easy to defend a subliterate sell-out who, when not invoking an imaginary sky-fairy to affirm her prejudices and gratify her ego, enjoys shooting things from helicopters. Chin up! Just take a deep breath and maybe get yourself a snack.I’m not taking sides, I’m just sayin’, that’s very funny! (Note to self, avoid Web forum arguments with buckminsterj.)

  • Azarkhan

    “avoid Web forum arguments with buckminsterj”Only a punk avoids an argument with a fatuous blowhard like bucky.BTW, if you think what he wrote was funny you are probably still a fan of SNL.

  • buckminsterj

    “Obviously you think you know everything, or at least everything about Sarah Palin and her fans.”No, not everything. I know that her fans like to be told it’s super-awesome to be white and christian and terrified of progress, and that she likes to take their money in exchange for that service.If there’s more I should know, please fill me in. I’ll just be at Starbucks reading Das Kapital.

  • AnotherContrarian

    “Sarah Palin is no Susan B. Anthony”Or rather, Susan B. is no Sarah P. You comparison is based purely on politics. If Sarah agreed with your views you would be writing that she was a new Susan B. That invalidates your entire argument.

  • denise4925

    denise4925:Posted by: KeithW2 | May 18, 2010 4:00 PM*****LOL Keith, I’m not your research assistant. Just like you found Wikipedia and the Washington Post online, I’m sure you won’t have much trouble Googling the texts from whence those quotes came and read it for yourself. I’m not trying to assure you of anything. What I’ve given you is my opinion. I’m not asking you to accept my opinion without fully researching the matter yourself and drawing your own conclusions. Now, if you’re too busy to do that, than I can’t help you. But, it seems you certainly have enough time on your hands to read this article, research Wiki for quotes, come back here, read comments, and comment yourself three times.

  • Azarkhan

    “super-awesome to be white”Ahh yes. Good old-fashioned race baiting by the leftist. Now this used to actually work. In fact Chairman Obamao tried it as did that tired old retread Jimmy Carter. But no more. I think we’ve outgrown racial smears, don’t you?BTW, I wouldn’t waste time on Das Kapital (turgid!) or The Nation for that matter. Just go straight to The Great Terror by Robert Conquest. It will tell you all you need to know about your leftist antecedents.

  • post_reader_in_wv

    Poor Sherr and Gordon. They think that arguing the facts using rational discourse is going to have much effect. What ARE they thinking? Perhaps they should read Perry Bacon’s piece today about the follies of using reason, logic, and facts in the current climate . . .That Gordon and Sherr are scholars is already damning enough, the ivory-tower elitists! I mean, who do they think they are, having written every extant word Susan B. Anthony wrote? Who would do such a pointless (and obviously elitist) thing? And what normal person cares about And then, to have the temerity to utter cautionary words to Sarah Palin and the Susan B. Anthony List folks about their faulty exegesis of Anthony’s writings! Obviously, we can attribute this to their atheist, socialist, feminist, heathen, leftist, marxist, un-American (did I leave any appropriate adjectives out??) agenda and their lack of decent, REAL American values!

  • jetchs

    Thank you, Ann and Lynn, for providing a reasoned argument based on historical facts — what a refreshing change! Know that there are many of us out here who share your concern “about the erosion of accuracy in history and journalism.” Normally I (and suspect countless others) hardly bother anymore with trying to cut through the muck of hateful postings which most online articles attract, but your article deserves a shout-out. Well done.

  • post_reader_in_wv

    Sorry,previous comment should have read “having READ every word . . .”Pardon the sloppy proof-read. My bad.

  • alaskansheilah

    Abortion has a history that surpasses this nation. In this day and age of prevention, the barbarism of abortion is even more pronounced. Sarah Palin should have had her daughter Bristol on birth control. Only a moron on drugs would assume teenagers aren’t going to have sex. So basically Sarah forced her child to have a child from before the word go.Even the religious need to be realists. Birth control such as France’s birth control shot for men (good for up to 5 yrs.) should be manditory to attend public High Schools as Immunization Against Poverty. ONLY SOUND birth control methods can prevent abortion; Abstinance is NOT one of them.

  • areyousaying

    Next the Huckabees will be telling us Newt Gringrinch is Thomas Jefferson reincarnated.

  • denise4925

    Sorry,*****

  • buckminsterj

    “But no more. I think we’ve outgrown racial smears, don’t you?”But not hyperbolic comparisons apparently! Not that anyone would seriously question the equation of Obama to Mao . . .BTW, thanks much for the book recommendation. You do realize you’re supposed to read them, not gnaw on the corners?

  • Azarkhan

    “So basically Sarah forced her child to have a child from before the word go”Leftists and their lies. Wow-even I get surprised sometimes, and I really despise leftists.And Keith keeps asking for a reference. Keith, leftists are nothing but lies. They never reference anything-since leftists have no shame (what an archaic word!) they feel free to lie about anything and everything.

  • Azarkhan

    “You do realize you’re supposed to read them, not gnaw on the corners?”Really?! Actually I use Das Kapital for toilet paper. (I’m on chapt. 6) You know us rednecks.

  • sharronkm

    Thank you ladies. It’s too bad more of Sarah’s statements are not examined more thoroughly for accuracy. She gets away with many misstatements but she has her followers totally snowed so I doubt they would care.

  • AuntMuriel

    I admire (sort of) the rhetorical argument applied by the SBA List. Susan B. Anthony fought for basic American freedom i.e. the right to vote. The SBA List claims that their patron was “pro-life” and therefore being pro-life is equated with basic American freedom. Those “pro-choice” by implication are anti-American. The same trick is used to inject religion into government; the Founding Fathers were Christians, ergo America is a Christian nation. If you are not a Christian you cannot be a good American.

  • Pillai

    Really?! Actually I use Das Kapital for toilet paper. (I’m on chapt. 6) You know us rednecks.——————No, we don’t know our redneck trivia. But I bet you have a poster of Palin right next to where you keep that Das Kapital.Arrogant wingnuts.

  • dcwca

    “Sarah Palin is no Susan B. Anthony”…is to…”On Faith doesn’t always represent true faith..”

  • Azarkhan

    “But I bet you have a poster of Palin right next to where you keep that Das Kapital.:Oh no Sweetheart! I got Sarah Palin matchin’ sheets! I sleep with my girl!!

  • buckminsterj

    “I got Sarah Palin matchin’ sheets! I sleep with my girl!!”Won’t Ayn Rand be jealous? Is there enough room in your trailor for both?

  • apspa1

    There came a time when Sarah Palin heard about Barnum’s belief that “there’s a sucker born every minute” and it could make you rich.And now Sarah Palin is rich.

  • apspa1

    Use of the pages of a book for toilet paper certainly says more about the wiper’s self-respect than anything they might guess the book is about.

  • Azarkhan

    “Won’t Ayn Rand be jealous?”Ayn Rand is old news!”And now Sarah Palin is rich”And that is what kills you leftists! You did everything you could to destroy her. You lied about her, smeared her and her family (u oughtta be ashamed!), *excreted* a ton of venom, and yet you couldn’t destroy her.She speaks truth to power, people.

  • Azarkhan

    “Use of the pages of a book for toilet paper certainly says more about the wiper’s self-respect “Boy, stop talkin’ bout your great granma that way! What you think they used back in the day?

  • post_reader_in_wv

    Azarkhan wrote:But it’s a free country. If you want to bow and scrape to some egghead, go ahead.So apparently Azarkhan believes that patrician old-money raised-in-privilege Bush43 had more in common with him than Obama. Bush: degrees from Ivy League Yale and Harvard; Obama: degrees from Ivy League Columbia and Harvard. Wow! Big difference there! Oh, maybe it was Bush being from Texas and wearing cowboy boots and clearin’ brush on the ranch at Crawford (hey, I clear brush on my “spread” here in West Virginia! And, boy, Dubya’s swaggerin’ sure persuaded me!) Of course, it could be that because Obama is more articulate and “urban” than Bush that Azarkhan feels great affinity for Dubya . . . . Whatever.Truth is, this isn’t about who is more “elitist,” Bush or Obama, Azarkhan’s feckless comments to the contrary. This is about two scholars saying “Wait a sec!” to Sarah Palin regarding a subject about which they have expertise and she doesn’t (aside: what IS her domain of expertise? Just asking . . .). Expertise, you see, is a loathsome and contemptible “elitist” thing ardently to be avoided. And those who claim it legitimately deserve our derision, it would seem . . . .God forbid that we should “bow and scrape” to “eggheads” (I’m quite serious) when they pontificate upon matters beyond their expertise (and some certainly do that). But we allow plenty of pontification by the ignorati on BOTH sides of the political divide. And that, apparently, would be perfectly acceptable to Azarkhan.No, thanks. I’ll pass on taking advice from people who break the silence even though they can’t begin to improve upon it.

  • Azarkhan

    “Devoted husband? Devoted to what? To self-gratification at the expense of the respect of his wife. I know men who call themselves Christians, who would insist that they are gentlemen, who never insult any woman—but their wives. They think it impossible that they can outrage them; they never think that even in wedlock there may be the very vilest prostitution; and if Christian women are prostitutes to Christian husbands, what can be expected but the natural sequence—infanticide?”Susan Anthony was no fool, and no dupe for male chauvinism. While her conscience may have prevented her from advocating abortion, she realized men were equally responsible, if not more. And it was the male patriarchy that kept women there.However, this does not mean that Sarah Palin may not also claim Susan Anthony as an example to pro-life advocates.

  • bevjims1

    Sarah Palin is a Post Turtle, and nothing more.

  • frayedcat

    Nice article on the topic of SB Anthony and on current mis-speakings of Mz Palin which seem designed solely to aggravate prejudice. I am pro-life and pro-choice. As Obama said “People of good will can exist on both sides…nobody wishes to be placed in a circumstance where they are even confronted with the choice of abortion …we should be doing everything we can to avoid unwanted pregnancies that might even lead somebody to consider having an abortion.”

  • Azarkhan

    Bye guys-I have to go get brainwashed by Fox News.

  • denise4925

    Finally found a link with some primary sources:Posted by: KeithW2 | May 18, 2010 ****************************In addition to the context in which the words were written, we also have to look at the context in relation to the era in which the words were written. During this time, it’s not hard to believe that these feminists were anti-abortion based on the fatalities that occurred when women had abortions performed by ill-equipped (medically and educationally) mid-wives and when they performed them on themselves. Women were more concerned with trying to figure out how to prevent pregnancies. Birth control, other then the rhythm method, was illegal. I can understand their abhorance to abortion, but not because of any moral objection they had (which some may have had), but because in most cases it was fatal to the woman.

  • mblace

    One of my favorite sayings with my political science students is that many (if not most) politicians believe that “one should never let the facts get in the way of a good story”. As if the facts can’t stand on their own… Oh well.

  • TOMMYBASEBALL

    Azarkhan said “You did everything you could to destroy her. You lied about her, smeared her and her family (u oughtta be ashamed!), *excreted* a ton of venom, and yet you couldn’t destroy her.She speaks truth to power, people.Todd, is that you? C’mon First Dude, fess up!!If you are not Todd you better watch your back. Covet his meal ticket that much he is going to be looking for you….

  • TOMMYBASEBALL

    I agree with denise4925, most of those quotes appear to be taken out of context.Jefferson, for instance, was most certainly not discussing abortion. You also have to doubt some of the other quotes, too. The discussion seems too modern for some of the speakers…

  • Fate1

    Palin was speaking to those who would not know a S. B. Anthony quote from a Michelle Obama quote, so she can make up anything she wants, and she knows it. And when you tell her she made a mistake she will just smile knowing that her audience doesn’t care.

  • papafritz571

    The only thing I have gleaned from Sarah Palin is that she is a vengeful vindictive person. Every time she opens her mouth, she says something demeaning and denigrating about those she considers her enemies. This woman has told so many lies about President Obama, it is a wonder her witch-doctor pastor allows her into his church. If Jesus walked among us right now, He would put His Hand over her mouth constantly as she defames decent people. What you do to My people you do to Me. Isn’t what what He tells us?

  • washpost16

    Ann and Lynn claim that “Susan B. Anthony, [was] a lifelong Quaker….”Wrong. Perhaps they read everything she wrote, but their research was a bit shallow. Ms Anthony became a Unitarian as an adult and was a member of the First Unitarian Church of Rochester, New York.

  • chatard

    The first commenter pointed to errors by the writers – so if they are hot shot researchers and reporters and can’t get it right, what business do they have attacking Sarah Palin, who is merely a conservative politician. Oh, I forgot, that IS their business, and that of the Washington Post. The Post today attacks not only Sarah but her TEENAGED DAUGHTER. Dave Letterman got nothin’ on these folks.

  • alance

    Who cares? Anthony was also a temperance nut and was for prohibition. Today, she is known as that old battle axe on a dollar coin no one used back in the 1980s.Most of what Palin says was recently invented anyway. Palin’s audience is primarily from trailer parks all over the nation. She will always be remembered as John McCain’s big gamble that fell flat on her face and cost him the election.

  • Fate1

    dread3eye wrote: “The baseless distinction between “Catholic and Christian” betrays vast ignorance. Is it willful or innocent?”Oh its willful. Most evangelicals do not include Catholics to be within christianity, and they are even starting to question Protestants after they allowed gay ministers. By separating Catholics from “christians” Palin is using code to say that she is one of them. I wouldn’t be surprised if that distinction is written on the palm of her grubby little hand.

  • Jose5

    You know very well Palin has little or no sue for history, much less facts. You think now is the time for her to sort the two out? I doubt it.

  • Azarkhan

    “Palin is just a nasty person sucking up as much money as she can. She viciously slanders everyone in Hollywood and then tries to sell them her daughters for cameo roles. She slanders celebrities and then promotes a reality show with her as its star.”Were you born that ugly and nasty, or did you go to a liberal college to get that way?

  • mw839737

    I think what is really important to remember here is that what Palin is saying is being taken completely out of historical context. Abortion did not have the same political weight back in Anthony’s day as it does now. It is simply just not the same!

  • arancia12

    Palin = Grifters

  • Azarkhan

    Azarkhan said “You did everything you could to destroy her. You lied about her, smeared her and her family (u oughtta be ashamed!), *excreted* a ton of venom, and yet you couldn’t destroy her.That’s all leftists do is excrete, or maybe we should call it “spray”. The way animals do when they guard their territory, in this case, the leftist version/mythology of feminism.Now ya’ll be careful you don’t wet yourself!

  • revbookburn

    Great article. Palin has nothing in common with the pioneers of women’s rights. She is more along the line of other wacky people like Phyllis Schafly or Anita Bryant. Now Palin is a poster person for National Psychiatric Medication Week.

  • garoth

    It’s always interesting to me that those who complain about “historical revisionism” are the ones most guilty of the practice. Palin is no exception. Her attempt to turn Susan B. into a right wing wing-nut is typical. Susan B. would be rolling over in her grave if she saw the garbage being extolled in her name. Of course, the only way these nuts can latch on to anyone with brains is by lying about the stances these people took. I guess the great thing about being a Republican is that you can make up stuff, and there are a lot of idiots out there who will listen to you, and accept it as fact.

  • YEAL9

    “Even the religious need to be realists. Birth control such as France’s birth control shot for men (good for up to 5 yrs.) should be manditory to attend public High Schools as Immunization Against Poverty. “Birth control shots for men? Scientific references are??”ONLY SOUND birth control methods can prevent abortion; Abstinance is NOT one of them.”Hmmm??From the Guttmacher Institute-FIRST-YEAR CONTRACEPTIVE FAILURE RATESPeriodic abstinence 25.3 (Masturbation) 0 i.e. 0.087 (failure rate)1,020,000 unwanted pregnanciesFrom the CDC: the average abortion rate in the USA is 1,000,000/yr.

  • Matthew_DC

    One doesn’t have to be religious to be anti-choice. Pro-choice waving of the religion card is just a distraction. For purely social and biological reasons, one can think it’s detrimental to society and human survival to toss out human fetuses when they are deemed an inconvenience. It’s really amazing that termination on demand is viewed as social progress. All it really does is take the pressure of society to address the social and economic injustices which lead too many people to think a kid is an inconvenience. Adopting a ruthlessly utilitarian view of human life in its beginnings will eventually impact how we view human beings through all stages of our development. The utilitarian answer to all social problems will be: kill the problem, and preferably outsource the killing to third parties so it appears to be a “free choice”.

  • thebump

    *** PRESIDENT PALIN LIBERATES AMERICA ***

  • celestun100

    Isn’t a “spontaneous abortion” another word for a miscarriage and couldn’t Anthony have meant that her sister had been getting pregnant too often and therefore miscarried? It doesn’t sound right that she would say, “she forced nature” meaning an abortion.

  • skinfreak

    IT’S GETTING TOO EASY TO BASH SARAH PALIN. THE MORE SHE DECIDES TO BECOME INVOLVED WITH ISSUES SHE KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT, THE MORE SHE SET HERSELF UP FOR RIDICULE. I AM AMAZED THAT ORGANIZATIONS PAY HER HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO SPEAK; AND SHE’S TEACHING BRISTOL ABOUT SCAMMING. SHE IS A FLAVOR-OF-THE-MONTH GIDGET AND HOPEFULLY, A SHORT-TIMER.

  • mibrooks27

    just love reading revisionist histories invented by true believers. First off, Ms. Anthony was an Abolitionist. Actually all of the feminists of her era were Abolitionists. It should have served as a warning before we ever gave women the vote, but I figure they hectored men until they gave in. It was a mistake. But, I digress. Ms. Anthony, in addition to being an Abolitionist nut job, was also a religious nut job. She would have condemned any woman having an abortion straight to hell… and had the government take steps to ensure that rapid “demotion”. As a radical Republican, she was one of those responsible for removing U.S. citizenship voting rights, any rights whatsoever, for any Southern White in the aftermath of the Civil War. That led to all manner of atrocities. She also was one of the prime movers behind the 14th Amendment… and with hordes of illegal pouring across our borders every day we get to see the “oops. my bad” mistakes of a semi-literate nutcase in action. Susan B. Anthony should be, would be, by people with an ounce of intelligence, thought of as one of histories mistakes along with the likes of Stalin and the worst perpetrators of the Spanish Inquisition.

  • jameschirico

    Ask Lydia Green about Sarah’s feminist bonafides. Nuff said.

  • Patfan1

    Sarah Palin should also have no say in politics.

  • RedMercury

    I liked this part:But she firmly believed that religion had no place in politics. “I dislike those who know so well what God wants them to do,” she said, “because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.”

  • shellymic

    I remember Lynn Sherr from ABC News when I was a kid. When ABC News actually mattered. I realize that Lynn is no longer with ABC, but that doesn’t diminish the respect I once had for her as a “journalist”. Lynn, I find it absolutely disgusting that you would chose to go after Sarah Palin (who holds NO government office at this present time, and therefore has NO POWER OVER ANYONE) yet, there is NO article or opinion piece from you here on the WaPo site about the current Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi and her “suggestion” to clergy that they “politicize” the pulpit. What a shock that someone who comes from ABC News is just another darned liberal. I’m stunned. LOL Not. You so-called “journalists” should ALL be found guilty of treason. Why does Glenn Beck have to do ALL of YOUR work? Maybe it’s time for some soul-searching, eh? Glenn Beck has “one-up” on YOU. LMAO!!! Journalism, a once respected profession, is DEAD and this article proves it. Lynn, where’s your “hard-hitting” piece on the fraud of the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) and all of the high-level players (including the president) involved in that scam that is going to reap TRILLIONS of dollars from Cap & Trade? Where? Where is it? I thought YOU would be interested in the truth. Wrong again…guess I’ll go “hope” for some more “change”. Keep writing that oh-so-important “play”, why don’t you…

  • RealTexan1

    Inaccurate journalism, missed or purposely omitted fact checking. Susan B. Anthony is on record as openly speaking out against infanticide. Sorry she was not the femi-nazi that modern feminists would like her to have been.

  • djman1141

    Lynn Sher was never better than third-rate as a journalist. Basically a pity-party type suited for Dateline and 20/20, if she was good for anything at all. And to see Jon Meacham on the Header of a Column titled “On Faith” is risible, since he wrote the single worst book [or had it ghosted in his name] on American politics and religion that I ever began to read. The reason Newsweek tanked two years before the allotted time the Post gave him to turn it around is pretty easy to see if you can stand examining this second-rater’s track record.Better than third-rater Sher, but not by much.

  • BlueTwo1

    All homosexuals are pedophiles. All abortions amount to infanticide. All wars in which the U.S. participates are good with God on America’s side. All taxation is bad. Less government is good. But keep your government hands off my Medicare.

  • familynet

    Anthony concludes, “She will rue the day she forces nature.” Clearly Anthony did not applaud her sister-in-law’s action, but the notation is ambiguous. Is it the act of abortion that will be regretted? Or is it being bedridden, the risk taken with one’s own life? Good historians do not seek riddles when the answer is in front of them. Obviously the criticism by Anthony involved the abortion, not the bedridden. These authors condemn this anti-abortion group for stretching facts to fit their position, yet here they are doing the same and their facts are actually supporting the group they are criticizing!As for using the name of a historical figure to support your cause, well isn’t that what Democrats do when they use Jefferson and Jackson as their figures to hold annual dinners to support causes for which neither man would have ever touched? The same with Republicans and their use of Lincoln. Frankly, I support the woman’s right to choose, but I also believe in intellectual honesty, and the writers of this article failed in that respect.

  • thebump

    The right to life is not a religious tenet. It is a universal human right.

  • BrooklynDemocrat

    You’re wasting your time attempting to apply logic and history to Sister Sarah’s utterances. Reality is whatever works for her at the moement.

  • ZebZ

    As one commentor wrote: “Frankly, I support the woman’s right to choose, but I also believe in intellectual honesty, and the writers of this article failed in that respect.”The writers certainly qualify for the Chewing the cud award, a trait that all moo cows enjoy. Governor Palin certainly instills fear in the hearts of Democrats.

  • MPatalinjug

    Yonkers, New YorkThe American people must know who and what Sarah Palin is by now.She has no problem telling brazen lies, as long as those lies resonate favorably with here audience.She has no problem claiming to be conversant in geopolitics–even though she really as no valid reason to do so.And she has no problem assuming the role of a Messiah for all those gullible tea partygoers–as long as she gets her fat fee of $100,000.Mariano Patalinjug

  • bdunn1

    “Governor Palin certainly instills fear in the hearts of Democrats.”Fear no, glee yes. She’s a sure loser, maybe even a sore loser.

  • rohit57

    The right to life is not a religious tenet. It is a universal human right.I agree. Because of the prominence of the Catholic Church in this debate, we have come to have the false belief that opposition to abortion is “religious”. It is not. It is a consequence of simple humanity.But strict pro-lifers ask for too much when they oppose the day after pill or do not push contraception or sex education. Opposition to abortion must be combined with active encouragement of milder alternatives.Perhaps some day there will be a purely secular, pragmatic, humane, anti-abortion movement in the US.

  • momof20yo

    Did Susan B. Anthony also have a 19 year old unmarried teen-mom daughter who was also charging people $15,000 to $30,000 to listen to her speak about abstinence, while she’s holding her one year old baby on her hip during the ‘abstinence’ speech?

  • momof20yo

    Did Susan B. Anthony also have a 19 year old unmarried teen-mom daughter who was also charging people $15,000 to $30,000 to listen to her speak about abstinence, while she’s holding her one year old baby on her hip during the ‘abstinence’ speech?

  • dcwca

    The real frontier ‘feminist’ was not bombarded with liberal dogma saying taking the life of an unborn child was ok. Look at history. Look at families back in the frontier days. Children everywhere. No truth in far left/liberal thought.

  • rohit57

    The right to life is not a religious tenet. It is a universal human right.I agree. Because of the prominence of the Catholic Church in this debate, we have come to have the false belief that opposition to abortion is “religious”. It is not. It is a consequence of simple humanity.But strict pro-lifers ask for too much when they oppose the day after pill or do not push contraception or sex education. Opposition to abortion must be combined with active encouragement of milder alternatives.Perhaps some day there will be a purely secular, pragmatic, humane, anti-abortion movement in the US.

  • rvndancer

    >>>Hence the problem with Sarah Palin, a politician who will cut and paste historical fact to fit current fiction. Also someone who would cut and paste the Bill of Rights to fit personal and political ambitions.

  • egw7777

    Ann Gordon & Lynn Sherv – So you can’t stand Sarah Palin? You want to call her out on an award she received that she did not ask for. I have yet to understand people that simply want to find fault with everything she does & does not do. I assume you think Pelosi is a good person & Palin is the root of all evil? Basic goodness is in Sarah Palin & she demonstrates that on a daily basis. Nancy Pelosi is basically an evil person & she demonstrates that on a daily basis. You do realize that everything may not be an exact equations but you know goodness when you see it & you know pure evil when you see it. So I do not quite understand the reason for putting down Sarah Palin who is not running for office or in a political position being a target for every liberal to take pot shots at. But a person like Nancy Pelosi who is Speaker of the House, is 2nd in line to take Obama’s place if something should happen to him & who completely ignored the American people who wanted their voices heard in regards to so many things but mostly health care that is really more of a tax for rationed health care. Now she is asking the Churches to use the term social justice in their sermons. What happened to the separation of church & state? Do you know what social justice is? Do you realize that Pelosi is helping Obama & his administration turn us into a socialized welfare state like Greece? Do you know we are being sent down that same path & in a couple of years we may be exactly like Greece? So your irate rant on Sarah Palin is not near the magnitude that you should have toward Pelosi & Obama for borrowing & spending on unnecessary things. The only kind of jobs the government can supply are government & union jobs which is someone else that is sending the United States down the river. Stand up for your country & look at the evil running it & do something about that. Stop trying to find something that is so ridiculous to pick away at Sarah Palin who is a person who is only trying to help the country get back to the American way of life. I started praying for America right after Obama got that first 787B bill passed that no one knew what was in it. Then he left town, came back & got the bill, & took it all the way out to Colorado to get a photo op with him signing the bill out there. For something that was such a rush, you knew something was going on there but couldn’t quite put your finger on it. You should have started praying then & telling your representatives not to forget they work for you, not Obama.

  • Bushwhacked1

    Caribou Barbie as “Susan B. Anthony?” Try more like “Lucy Ricardo.”

  • kjwarn

    Universal human rights apply to individuals, i.e. human beings. Embryos are not recognized as human beings in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 1 of the Declaration states: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” “Born” clearly means that the definition of human being applies to those who have left the womb. If the United Nations intended its definition to apply to earlier stages of prenatal development, it would use the term “conceived” instead.

  • gibson0

    Suggest you rename this column. Instead of ‘On Faith,’ go with the more accurate ‘On Secularism.’

  • bobmoses

    Yawn. More hyper-partisan liberals using faith as an excuse to attack people who don’t share their ultra-rigid political views.But that’s pretty much what OnFaith is about right? More liberal talking points?

  • thomp

    Thank you for pointing out her ability to paint over our history, to fit the story she thinks sounds good.Ms Palin will continue to cash in, and that’s fine, but please don’t elect her into any position outside of being a guest speaker at some convention.

  • SarahBB

    Thanks. I think it’s disrespectful to make these sorts of things up to serve your own purposes about people that you know other people respect in the hopes of riding on their coattails to get respect you really haven’t earned. That’s what Palin does. It’s a cheap trick. More people should call her on it.

  • bobmoses

    “Ugh. I wish the press would more accurately represent the proper terminology. It’s either pro-choice or anti-choice.POSTED BY: EEMARGOLIN | MAY 18, 2010 1:15 PM”Maybe in Orwell’s world. How about just being honest and say “pro-abortion rights” and “anti-abortion rights”? The “choice ” thing is an overt attempt to conflate abortion with free will. Sorry, but for now on I declare that “pro-choice” means that you favor an American citizen’s right to choose to own a gun. See how that lame “choice” crap can be applied to anything? Keep on bleating, sheep.

  • GordonShumway

    Either way, Sarah Palin is mostly sound bite and charisma, like our present used car salesman occupying the White House. No substance in history, and definitely not mainstream.

  • password11

    The question no one can really answer: Will Ms. Palin be wearing her MC HAMMER glasses when she begins her four-year residence (unless she quits) in the White House?

  • Dan78

    Go away, sister Sarah, and take your sorry brood (and “First Dude”) with you. Scurry back to Wasilla, and gosh, don’t be afraid to handle those poisonous snakes in kooky church, you betcha.

  • segeny

    Gee, I guess we’ll have to take Ann and Lynn’s word for it inasmuch as they were there with the frontier women – - or maybe they just look as if they were? These two harpies write as if they are just plain spitefully resentful of the beautiful Palin – with whom they can never compete either visually or charismatically. Gotta give ‘em credit for tryin’, I guess.

  • buckminsterj

    “So if you’re a feminist and anti-life, you should be proud of yourselves for participating in this faceless holocaust.”Faceless because they have no faces. Nor cerebral cortices and therefore no consciousness – no sensory functions, no memories, no emotional attachments. And no free will, BobMoses. Fetuses are not people. If you think they are, then what, exactly, defines a person?

  • fastaire

    How unusual! A couple of lib women with roots in academia and the main stream media.

  • Azarkhan

    “Fetuses are not people. If you think they are, then what, exactly, defines a person?”“I was watching the screen. I saw the baby pull away. I saw the baby open his mouth. .  .  . After the procedure I was shaking, literally.” So what do you think Bucky? Still want to play God and tell the rest of us when life begins?

  • poppysue85

    When I read about Palin’s comments to this particular group- I immediately thought that Susan would be rolling at high speed in her grave. The sisterhood of this group, if they wish to use her esteemed name and reputation, should do so with respect to her beliefs and her positive influence. Otherwise change the group’s name and let her rest in peace.Susan B. Anthony would not have been a fan of Mrs. Palin.

  • kjwarn

    How can embryos exercise “reason” or “act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood”? The commenter “THEBUMP” made the authors’ point so beautifully: check your sources first before floating your ideas out on a balloon of ideological hot air. By the way, the Universal Declaration provides some good advice for many people who participate in these discussion forums. Are “reason” and “brotherhood” not included in the definition of being human for some participants?

  • Azarkhan

    “One day when hauling a heavy container of fetal waste, Tiller asked his secretary, Luhra Tivis, to assist him. She found the experience devastating. The “most horrible thing,” Tivis later recounted, was that she “could smell those babies burning.” “Dr” Tiller was one of the few who performed abortions thru the second trimester.

  • jromaniello

    Yawn. More hyper-partisan liberals using faith as an excuse to attack people who don’t share their ultra-rigid political views.But that’s pretty much what OnFaith is about right? More liberal talking points?*****************BobMoses,First, your post contradicts itself. You are criticizing the authors for pushing an ultra-Liberal political agenda, yet your worlds suggest you lack flexibility as well. Kind of the pot calling the kettle black, aren’t we? Second, WHAT political agenda are they pushing?! On a side note, why is being pro-choice strictly a Liberal thing? I know plenty of Conservatives, who are pro-choice, thank you. What is being pointed out here, is how the so-called Susan B. Anthony List is skewing history. All the authors are pointing out, is that what this group claims to be true has in fact never been proven. Perhaps it is true, and maybe it isn’t. We don’t know, and neither do the historians, who pour over documents, memoirs, diaries, etc. in the quest to portray history as accurately as possible. Skewing history to push a rigid political agenda is sloppy, manipulative, underhanded, and unconscionable. I recall one incident off the top of my head, in which history was rewritten– and it was Josef Stalin who did it. He had school text books rewritten to portray him as Lenin’s protege.Lastly, Sarah Palin is one of the most politically rigid figures I’ve seen as of late, so neither she or her groupies have any right to say such things about others.

  • txengr

    Ms Palin is an honorable woman. I hate the media who bashes her. We need people with common sense in Washington. And not the scum we have from Harvard, Yale, etc. I wish abortion was out of the picture. To me it is a personal decision. The Republicans have incorrectly focused on this issue as our country has faltered. Now the Democrats want our country to be socialist or communist. We need to take our country back. Then kick the damn illegals out.

  • schmuckatelli

    My question is: why are the media obsessed with Sarah Palin? For most sentient Americans, she’s pretty much an irrelevance, relegated to the Closet of Political Has-Beens. Let her make her millions preaching to this group and that one. Nothing to see here, please move along.

  • buckminsterj

    “So what do you think Bucky? Still want to play God and tell the rest of us when life begins?”Nope, but I do want to ask when HUMAN life begins, because I’m guessing you have no problem eating burgers and wearing leather, though cows certainly have mouths to open and the ability “pull away.” And since that brief anecdote is your counterargument, AZARKHAN, I assume that a) you think anything that can open its mouth and pull away is human and b) you would not legally deny a woman’s right to a first-trimester abortion (the vast majority), in which the cerebral cortex has not yet developed.

  • jromaniello

    Still want to play God and tell the rest of us when life begins?Posted by: Azarkhan **********Azarkhan,We play ‘God’ every day. Doctors play ‘God’ by saving lives. If we left everything up to nature or God, many more people would die, because they need some form of modern medicine just to live. Premature babies are supposed to die? After all, they were born too soon and lack a lot what what we need to survive in the world. That is God’s way… yet no, we hook them up to machines and oxygen, and do our hardest to keep them alive. Do you approve of this? It is ‘playing God’. I guess you only are okay with playing the great deity when it suits you worldview, eh?

  • Azarkhan

    “My question is: why are the media obsessed with Sarah Palin?”My question is: why are leftists obsessed with Sarah Palin? Just read your swinish, classless comments on this blog (and others) about her.Since “she’s pretty much an irrelevance” why don’t you shut up and move along?

  • leafgreen

    Fun fact: Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, was an honorary member of the KKK.

  • ladyliberty1

    Abortion isn’t really about abortion. The right to end the life of child in the womb is really about sexual freedom. Those who choose abortion, really don’t want to assume the responsibility for raising a child. They don’t want their lives inconvenienced, or their careers interrupted. They want the freedom to have sex with whomever they choose, whenever they choose, including with more than one person, and outside of a committed relationship, and they want not to be saddled with the consequences. They want an antidote in case a life is conceived as a result of a sexual act. Abortion is really the ultimate act of selfishness. When abortion is readily available, one can avoid the consequences of one’s actions. Sometimes abortion is chosen because of rape, but more often than not, abortion is a desire to get rid of the evidence of unfaithfulness to a spouse, or abortion is chosen because a young person doesn’t want the parents to find out about a promiscuous lifestyle. Some women simply use abortion as their form of birth control. Indeed, abortion is the ultimate expression of selfishness. One sin leads to more sins, and teachers, who should be nurturers are reported in the papers as having engaged in sex with students. This is the downward spiral of those who support abortion on demand.

  • leafgreen

    Here’s a quote my Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood:”We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”Yep. Real pioneers, these pro-choicers.

  • ghp60

    My comment here is not about abortion, rather, on the gullibility of conservative proponents to anything that might support their, generally, poorly conceived political stances. Sarh Palin is a gift to that mentality. Their general inability to think critically on any subject is appalling. From my own experience they are, again generally, uneducated and equally energetic. From my own experience they are on the one hand Bible thumpers while on the other hand calling Jesus “stupid” (when I quote the NT back to them).

  • woodyag

    I continue to be astonished that the war between “pro-lifers” and “pro-choicers” completely avoids the fact that abortion is a purely religious concern. ‘Let’s see: Catholics and evangelicals claim humanity begins as conception- and pretty much everyone else doesn’t.My own religion, in fact, does not believe humanity starts at conception. The attempt to make a scientific judgment out of it has consistently failed; no scientist (except Catholic/evangelical ones) will make any statement about it. Because it’s not a scientific question- is a religious one.Pro-lifers are anti-religious freedom. Provably. They want us all to adopt their religious views.Yet somehow, this point never seems to come up.

  • AmericanFirst3

    Its funny to read that the authors opined that Susan B. Anthony believed that religion and abortion should not be in politics. The authors then, based on purely politial motives, cite Sarah Palin as an example of someone who is contrary to Susan B. Anthony’s beliefs. Its abundantly clear that the authors do not care for Sarah Palin and they are unapologetically liberals, yet they cannot grasp the fact that liberals are the ones who inject religion (they want all religious expression banned in the public square (i.e. can’t have a cross in the desert, banning pledge of allegiance, banning of prayers,etc.) but want to impose their religion (secularism) and its sacraments (redistribution of wealth, etc.) on all. Same with abortion–conservatives believes that this is states rights matter, not one for the U.S. Constitution. It strained all reason for the liberals on the SCOTUS to have ruled that the right to have an abortion is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Remember, for most liberals, the ends justify the means.

  • Azarkhan

    “From my own experience…”Please. Don’t make a bigger fool out of yourself then you already are. You don’t know anything about Sarah Palin or her supporters. All you know is leftist talking points. BTW, where *did* you find the crap that pollutes your mind–HuffHo or the Daily Idiot, sorry, Daily Kos?

  • sanmateo1850

    Clearly Anthony did not applaud her sister-in-law’s action, but the notation is ambiguous. Is it the act of abortion that will be regretted? Or is it being bedridden, the risk taken with one’s own life? ==========================================Typical liberal analysis! Of course in your minds the writting isn’t thinking that abortion should be banned. You think it has to do with the fact that she was bed ridden! What a joke! The writting is a clear voice AGAIST abortion! Based on this writting frontier men and women both knew what was right and what was wrong, and abortion to them was clearly wrong! So I guess it comes down to a question of morality. Do you have morals or not. If you do, you will realize abortion is something that is not the moral thing to do. If you do not have moral you will fight to ensure there are laws allowing you to have abortions whenever, whereever you want them!And the point that abortion has no place in politics works both ways. Liberals should also stop making it a political issue if it has no place!

  • thought4

    Azarkhan, are you and others willing to adopt and raise all of the children who are born to Mothers who do not want them? I find it ironic that Pro-Lifers are against abortion but are very much into in-vitro. What do you think happens to the fertilized eggs that are not implanted? I guess you can choose to play G-D when it is convenient to you, no?

  • trident420

    These people are the same great minds that open every last piece of junk email and infect the entire office network with malware. Repeatedly. Just like the African Prince and his random promises of treasure, they believe everything they read on the internet.

  • jcmale14

    Comparing Susan to Sarah is a joke. Susan was unmarried no children – a loveless feminist!

  • theFieldMarshall

    Anthony concludes, “She will rue the day she forces nature.” Of course, what is missing in the analysis is the horrendous mortality rate for females who DID give birth.

  • tripferguson1

    So, Cap-And-Trade isn’t a religion?

  • Gary12

    Sarah Palin is nothing more than a modern day carpetbagger.

  • John1263

    I’d be willing to bet that palin never heard of Susan B Anthony……

  • Pillai

    Same with abortion–conservatives believes that this is states rights matter, not one for the U.S. Constitution.Oh right – since the cons believe it, we all just have to agree. What tripe.State Laws are almost always without a vision, and almost always bad for the minority – and so thank God for Federal statute.

  • ThePoliticalStraycom

    Feminists fought for women’s freedom, including the right to choose whether you had children or not. The fact is that more “well-married” women that already have children but cannot afford another is one of your most common situations in abortion. Women’s freedom included the right not to die on some butcher’s kitchen table. Women’s rights included the right to decide who runs this country. In order to rise above the oppression still pushed by both sexes, women formed a sisterhood that belies the ugly words I see on this page.

  • agapn9

    In the past many women who conceived late in life died in child birth.Many women and their friends assumed that when a woman got pregnant in her 40′s she would die, since most did.Yet even some of those that we might call less than virtuous – like Voltaire’s benefactor bravely gave birth – Now childbirth is relatively risk free in the United States. While birth defects have been reduced thru vitamin supplementation genetic problems persist.However, the birth rate for european based americans is down to 1.87. So europeans will basically disappear from this country in another 75 to 100 years. While we all applaud women’s rights the process of self-elimination isn’t a pretty one either.Now granted Sarah Palin is a joke but national security isn’t and when we approach women’s rights from the standpoint of it’s abuse leading to the destruction of the middle class then the consequences of a woman’s freedom to abort become apparent.There are only two absolute rights – the right to survive and love God – and encompassed in that is justice and freedom of speech and religion but when someone else’s so-called entitlement threatens this nation’s right to survive its not a right.In abortion is a particular ugly expression of someone’s sense of entitlement.

  • Pillai

    My question is: why are leftists obsessed with Sarah Palin? Just read your swinish, classless comments on this blog (and others) about her.———————————She is classless – the same mouthpiece who called a Presidential candidate a friend of the terrorists. Among many other stupid crap.I call that eminently classless – but you need some class to understand. Instead you swoon over her. Because oh she is so pretty, a quitty pretty.One more thing – we will call her out for the phony that she is. Incessantly. You know why – her insults, her utter lies about the President or in general, the Left, reaches our ears, however much we try to shut out that nasally ‘nails on the slate’ whine of hers. And when it does, it astounds that people actually pay to listen to this drivel.But hey, as the saying goes, a fool and his money soon part ways. Have at it – but let me tell ya, we find it enormously entertaining to call idiots out. She aint the worst idiot & she knows how to make money off the rest – that is why she’s got a following. Nobody is shutting up here, Azar Khan.

  • rschroeder1

    leafgreen wrote:Here’s a quote my Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood:”We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”Yep. Real pioneers, these pro-choicers.

  • minco_007

    This is the same Sarah Palin who thought Africa was a country not a Continent. The very same who had a African Witch Doctor protect her from evil spirits and Witches? Looks like the veil has been lifted from the Susan B. Anthony society!

  • jaxas70

    Isn’t this just another indicator of just how utterly vapid and stupid Sarah Palin really is. Susan B. Anthony–who would be classified by the right wing propaganda machine on Fox News and Talk Radio as a looney liberal–is here hero. Yeah right.It is also an indicator that American IQs have really gone downhill in recent years that this woman–so profoundly ignorant of simple basic history–was somehow nominated as a Vice Presidential candidate. I believe that was the first real evidence that John McCain had entered the realm of dementia.

  • ZZim

    Well, I don’t see what the problem is here.Abortion wasn’t a political issue in Susan’s day, so she didn’t pay any attention to it. Then some pro-life feminists decide Susan should be their mascot. So what? It seems to me that either side of this issue could claim to be Susan’s followers and be just as legit.I agree with one of the earlier posters, the writers of this article are Liberals who think they “own” Susan B. Anthony and don’t want other Susan B. Anthony followers to stray from Liberal orthodoxy.Too bad, so sad..

  • ZZim

    Do you really believe you can extrapolate Sanger’s beliefs from the early 1900s to all pro-choicers today? I am personally against abortion, but this is a ridiculous argument.Posted by: rschroeder1=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=–=-Well, Planned Parenthood originated as a eugenics organization. Their original purpose was to reduce the number of children produced by poor people and minorities (this is in fact the primary societal benefit of legal abortion). I don’t see anything wrong with bringing that up. .

  • Azarkhan

    “Now granted Sarah Palin is a joke…”Really? Actually, if Ms. Palin was a Democrat, promoted abortion, and was unpatriotic, she would be a feminist icon. Unlike the “feminist” *Hillary*, who rode on the coattails of her philandering husband, and then didn’t have the guts to divorce him, (what’s the song? Oh yeah-Stand by your Man), Sarah Palin is exactly what she says she is: a tough, gun-toting, pioneering feminist.She just doesn’t believe that the current Politburo that runs NOW and other so-called feminist organizations should be able to dictate to women in particular and Americans in general what they should see or think (e.g., see their attempt to censor the Tebow Super Bowl ad).Of course leftists have no problem with censorship. They’re all about political correctness and groupthink. And that is why they will always abhor and fear a free thinker like Sarah Palin.

  • hvbeazley

    It is my understanding that Susan B. Anthony was raised a Quaker, but in her adult years she moved away from the faith. While living in Rochester, NY she attended the Unitarian church.

  • gmt1e6

    Not that I have a dog in this fight but why the “always attack on Sarah Palin” but everyone, liberals and conservatives alike turn an eye on Hillary Clinton and what or who she represents? Here is a woman who lives a lie everyday (with her husband) and we talk about values? Double standards maybe but certainly not values? Hmmmmm. Get a life and take care of your own families.

  • ZZim

    My question is: why are leftists obsessed with Sarah Palin? Since “she’s pretty much an irrelevance” why don’t you shut up and move along? Posted by: Azarkhan=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=–=-I’ve wondered that myself. People really get fired up over Sarah Palin. I mean, really, really fired up. I didn’t understand it 2 years ago and I don’t understand it now.She gives a pretty good speech, but that’s about it.She IS pretty much an irrelevance, except for the fact that every tiny thing she does causes peoples’ heads to explode. I just don’t understand, lol..

  • ravensfan20008

    I always believed feminists wanted equality between men and women – as one example, the principle of self-determination available for all. In other words, choice.How does outlawing abortion further that?

  • ladyliberty1

    This is the same Sarah Palin who thought Africa was a country not a Continent. The very same who had a African Witch Doctor protect her from evil spirits and Witches? Looks like the veil has been lifted from the Susan B. Anthony society!Well, Sarah probably misspoke about Africa.Michelle Obama, OTOH, has both knowledge of and ties to Africa, and referred to Kenya as Barack’s home country at a speech given while campaigning for her husband. That is far more interesting than Sarah’s slip. AS to Sarah and witch doctors and African religious practices — you must be thinking of Marion Robinson, Michelle Obama’s mother. She is the one who riled the president when she was caught practicing voodoo at the White House. Gotta control the message, don’t cha know?

  • Azarkhan

    “[Sarah Palin] who called a Presidential candidate a friend of the terrorists. Among many other stupid crap…I call that eminently classless”"Obama and Ayers first met in 1995, when Ayers and Dohrn hosted a small gathering at their home in the Hyde Park section of Chicago.”I call that eminently truthful. But then, what would a leftist know about truth?

  • Bulldeazy

    Does anyone else see this as indicative of the lack of critical thinking taking place throughout our political system?

  • Pillai

    “Now granted Sarah Palin is a joke…”Oh that’s a crackup. LOL. Listen – she will never be promoted in Democratic circles. We are just a lot more sensible than that. We need intelligent talking points – not that ‘Family, Flag and FFFFF’ ,’heartland’ crap. We know all about it. America is a lot more complex than apple pies and baseball.You wish you had some one as intelligent as Hilary. Wellesly, Yale Law. Bet you didn’t know she was the President of the College Republicans in Wellesly. She was Goldwater Republican, before the RParty started going down the drain. Instead you have a washed out beauty queen who quit everything, including 5 colleges and a governorship. And she just learned there is a lot of money to be made out here from just ‘talkin to the common people’ and playing on their fears. Great comparison, sparky.

  • MaryMeehan

    Years ago I had occasion to research the question of early feminist views on abortion at the Library of Congress–in a publication called The Revolution that Susan B. Anthony and two colleagues started in 1868. The paper listed Anthony as both proprietor and manager. It listed Elizabeth Cady Stanton as one editor and Parker Pillsbury (a leading abolitionist during slavery times) as another. In that era, editors often used only their initials as bylines. It seems reasonable to assume that “E.C.S.” meant Stanton and “P.P.” meant Pillsbury. The Revolution carried anti-abortion comments by both “E.C.S.” and “P.P.” And it published an article referring to abortion as “child-murder” (July 8, 1869) that was signed by “A.” If “A” was not Susan B. Anthony, then who was “A”? The Revolution also carried anti-abortion comments with the full names of feminists Eleanor Kirk and Mattie Brinkerhoff. It published an approving (unsigned) item about Dr. Charlotte Lozier, who was asked by a man to abort a young woman. Dr. Lozier responded by having the man arrested.Other research also shows strong opposition to abortion from early feminists. Please see Mary Krane Derr and others, ed., ProLife Feminism: Yesterday and Today (Feminism and Nonviolence Studies Association, 2005). The historical case is overwhelming.

  • leafgreen

    Here’s a quote by Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood:”We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”Yep. Real pioneers, these pro-choicers. How about “so racist they make tea partiers look tame”?

  • EdSantaFe

    Susan B. Anthony must be spinning in her grave with Boob Palin invoking her name for an agenda Anthony would certainly NOT have supported. Palin is an imbecile, and her attempts to turn prohibition and anti-choice into CHOICE is downright retarded.

  • rschroeder1

    zzim wrote:Well, Planned Parenthood originated as a eugenics organization. Their original purpose was to reduce the number of children produced by poor people and minorities (this is in fact the primary societal benefit of legal abortion).I don’t see anything wrong with bringing that up.How far are we going to take this extrapolation? Are Republicans STILL racist because their first President, Abraham Lincoln, believed that whites were superior to blacks? He was in power only 50 years prior to Sanger.

  • seasail

    Why every week do you give space and credence to that half-wit, half governor, the weasel from wasilla? You religious nut jobs need to more on to some more important things like why is Texas allowed to alter history with some christian lala land concept of history?

  • ripper368

    The hard truth is this.

  • Pillai

    “[Sarah Palin] who called a Presidential candidate a friend of the terrorists. Among many other stupid crap…I call that eminently classless”-AZARKHAN.Oh right – when Obama was 8 years old, Weatherman Ayers claimed to have set off bombs. Never convicted, but apparently this terrorist is now teaching, a distinguished Professor of Univ of Illinois-Chicago, and is a board member of many anti-poverty groups. Why don’t you go make a citizen’s arrest of him, if what she said is so “eminently truthful”?Bet you won’t. Are you supporting terrorism within this country now?And so – she uses this piss-poor connection to tar a man and to conflate his ‘percieved Islamism’ due to his Muslim middle name, as hanging out with terrorists.Oh so classy.

  • leafgreen

    “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”-Margaret Sanger. Founder of Planned ParenthoodDoes this mean abortionists are all racists (you know, like you accuse Tea Party members of being)

  • dgloo

    Why does the Washington Post allow their comment threads to get so off-track? So many personal insults, back-and-forth squabbles, irrelevant references, and total falsehoods. What a waste of technology.By the way, I appreciate that the scholars who wrote the article took the time to share their knowledge with us. Thanks!

  • Azarkhan

    “Listen – she will never be promoted in Democratic circles”THANK GOD! Don’t you get it, Sparky? Democrats/leftists are despicable. If you fools adopted her, I’d have to disown her.

  • Azarkhan

    “Ayers participated in the bombings of NYC police department headquarters in 1970, the US Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972, Read much? Guess not.

  • EdSantaFe

    Palin is the dumbest thing on 4 legs.

  • leafgreen

    Susan B. Anthony quotes proving her pro-life status: “Guilty? Yes. No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death; But oh, thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime!” Abortion was referred to as “child murder.”"We want prevention, not merely punishment. We must reach the root of the evil…It is practiced by those whose inmost souls revolt from the dreadful deed.” “All the articles on this subject that I have read have been from men. They denounce women as alone guilty, and never include man in any plans for the remedy.”

  • Athena4

    “Look at history. Look at families back in the frontier days. Children everywhere. No truth in far left/liberal thought.”Comparing apples to oranges again, huh? People in frontier days needed to have a lot of children to work the family farmstead. Nowadays, less than 5% of our population works on a farm, and what used to be manual labor is done by machines – or Manuel. The infant mortality rate in frontier days was very high, due to lack of access to medical care. If you were lucky, you had a local woman who was a midwife. Also, the differences between “liberal” and “conservative” were much different then than they are now. As much as people would like fantasize about going back to the frontier days, I challenge them to REALLY live the like pioneers did. They’d be running back for their medical care, televisions, and Internet access within a week.

  • arancia12

    The right has rewritten history so that Nazism is now a socialist-liberal institution. Why not rewrite Susan B. Anthony too?Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.

  • jameschirico

    While I dislike her positions, her religious beliefs (pray for a pipeline, creationism), her rhetoric ramping up the hate (gunsights and take them out), I applaud her quitting, cashing out from rubes creating a better life for her family.

  • WhitneyDavid

    Well as our esteemed Senator from New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, says, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts”. Obviously another case where Palin didn’t read all of the material she was given and opened her mouth once again proving her ignorance…

  • ZZim

    zzim wrote:- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -Nothing wrong with bringing it up, but there is something wrong with implying that pro-choice Americans today are in favor of eugenics. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-They should be, if they have any sense. The primary social benefit of abortion is that it reduces the number of unwanted children. Unwanted children tend to grow up to be criminals, welfare dependants, low wage workers and other burdens on society. We are better off without them. Sanger was not trying to encourage African-American abortions due to racism, she was just trying to penetrate a market segment and recognized that it would take a specific approach to get a foot in the door in that particular market in order to spread her message.Nowadays, with eugenics in ill-repute, the pro-abortion forces concentrate their outward rhetoric on the least important segment of the abortion market – well-off suburban girls who would rather “choose” a demanding career instead of motherhood. That’s why they call it “pro-choice” these days – it’s a marketing tool. But the eugenics reasons for legal abortion are still understood and form an unspoken part of the movement’s motivation..

  • Pillai

    Ayers participated in the bombings of NYC police department headquarters in 1970, the US Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972, Who says he didn’t? Ayers himself said so.But how about the M.O.V.E incident when Philly cops dropped a bomb on (yeah, with plastic explosives) a house that killed 11 people including 4-5 kids? Think all the cops who participated in it are classified as ‘terrorists?’Like I said – if Ayers is a terrorist now, go arrest him. If not, you have a poor defense of that appaling woman.

  • utahmink

    It is a sad commentary that media will print and recite as truth and stupid statement that Palin, Beck and Limbaugh espouse as being true. Back in the day, newspapers and presumably TV news would only report a story as factual when they had three sources verifying the story. Now they print any mishmash just to grab attention resulting in Tbaggers and other ill-informed believing statements that are untrue.

  • leafgreen

    Observe this quote by Margaret Sanger. In one paragraph she advocates for racial genocide and intervention by Church in public affairs:

  • ZZim

    AS to Sarah and witch doctors and African religious practices — you must be thinking of Marion Robinson, Michelle Obama’s mother. She is the one who riled the president when she was caught practicing voodoo at the White House. Gotta control the message, don’t cha know?Posted by: ladyliberty1=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-There was a guy from Africa who was traveling to different US churches soliciting funds for his work back in Africa. He led a prayer in which he asked that Palin be protected from witches and curses, etc. It was on Youtube.In Africa, belief in witches is very widespread. I read recently that some 10,000 African “witches” are killed every year. So it’s a real concern to an African. It’s also a real concern not to be accused of witchcraft, since that can get you very dead very fast.So the prayer was really a two-fold blessing – protection from witchcraft and protection from accusations of witchcraft. I think we can all agree that one of those protections is indeed a real concern..

  • leafgreen

    Observe this quote by Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood. In one paragraph she advocates for racial genocide and intervention by Church in public affairs:

  • milsbest90

    Oh Lord…two liberals preaching at us about the context and facts of history – I suppose there’s no concrete facts to denounce Obama as a Marxist, either.

  • kiler616

    truthfully…does anyone believe Sarah Palin knows who Susan B. Anthony was?

  • ZZim

    Observe this quote by Margaret Sanger. In one paragraph she advocates for racial genocide and intervention by Church in public affairs:Posted by: leafgreen=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Leafgreen, this is a bunch of crap and you know it. Sanger wasn’t trying to “exterminate the Negro population,” she was trying to spread the benefits of birth control and abortion to a minority population. Her concern was that clever opponents of birth control and abortion could scare people away from her clinics with the FALSE accusations that she was trying to “exterminate the Negro population” when that was not the case.She was trying to exterminate poor people, stupid people, unwanted children and other drains on society – regardless of the color of their skin..

  • schnauzer21

    She just doesn’t believe that the current Politburo that runs NOW and other so-called feminist organizations should be able to dictate to women in particular and Americans in general what they should see or think (e.g., see their attempt to censor the Tebow Super Bowl ad).

  • password11

    Does anyone know if she’ll be wearing her MC HAMMER glasses when she serves eight years (or less if she quits) as our president? Does the HAMMER know?

  • rschroeder1

    zzim, my point is that many people are pro-choice because they believe the government does not have a right to dictate what women can do and can’t do with their own bodies. I’m not saying that belief is right or wrong, but I believe many people hold that belief.I can’t prove this with any hard evidence, but I think that many pro-choice Americans believe that abortion is not a good thing; that we should work to reduce abortions, and that they should be an option of last resort. Nevertheless, the government still doesn’t have a right to tell a woman what to do with her body.Not my belief, but I feel like that is how many Americans feel. Their support for abortion has nothing to do with eugenics.

  • Freestinker

    I wonder if Palin also looks up to Elizabeth Cady Stanton … the avowed atheist?Maybe Katie Couric will ask her that one next time?

  • ZZim

    zzim, my point is that many people are pro-choice because they believe the government does not have a right to dictate what women can do and can’t do with their own bodies….Not my belief, but I feel like that is how many Americans feel. Their support for abortion has nothing to do with eugenics.Posted by: rschroeder1=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-That’s almost certainly true. Few people know that eugenics was a mainstream political ideology in this country for the entire first half of the 20th century. Most abortion supporter probably can’t even spell “eugenics”, much less explain it’s role in the early population-control movement.Fewer still are aware of the massive population improvements that have resulted from legalized abortion and other forms of birth control..

  • hurleyvision

    As a lifetime registered Republican, I would really like for the Republican leadership to keep their noses out from between women’s legs.

  • juke2

    Palin is an empty suit and her speeches to the American public are laden with half-truths…her representations are akin to Fox News disinformation.

  • ZZim

    HOW are liberals different from conservatives again?- - – - – - – - – - – - – - – They also don’t photoshop a picture of Margaret Sanger into a limo with Hitler. And pass it around in e-mails as it was a real event. It wasn’t even a good photoshop job.Posted by: James10 |Oh come on now!You know very well that liberals are just as good as conservatives and making derogatory photoshopping. Remember the picture of Sarah Palin wearing a bikini and holding a gun? Photoshopped. Remember the photo of a donkey with a but that looked like Condoleezza Rice? The list goes on. Liberals are equally guilty as conservatives when it comes to photoshopped political satire..

  • ZZim

    I would really like for the Republican leadership to keep their noses out from between women’s legs.Posted by: hurleyvision =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-I agree. They should delegate that job to me. I’m sure the women in question would appreciate it and – tip of the hat to Ms. Sanger – there are also eugenics factors to consider.The Republican leadership isn’t exactly top-shelf genetic material..

  • BornAgainAmerican

    If you are against abortion, then don’t get one, otherwise mind your own P’s and Q’s.Too many people view these issues through a black and white partisan lens. Take a step back and see the world is very grey. It’s a nice day out, get off the computer and go enjoy this short and blessed life. regards

  • DaveHarris

    This has been the problem with Sarah Palin all along. As the McCain staffers complained during the 2008 campaign, she is “truth-challenged”. Or, more bluntly, she “makes stuff up”. Since she doesn’t know much history anyway, it probably doesn’t seem like a big deal to her. But it never occurs to her that someone else might know the truth, or at least look it up. But then her followers don’t seem to care either.

  • ZZim

    If you are against abortion, then don’t get one, otherwise mind your own P’s and Q’s.Posted by: BornAgainAmerican=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-BornAgainAmerican, you have a very weak argument here.Let’s try your argument on a related issue, see how well it works for us, shall we? “If you are against child brides, don’t marry one, otherwise MYOB.”Or how about this one: “If you are opposed to slavery, don’t buy one, otherwise MYOB.”I’m not sure that one flies, either, BornAgainAmerican. Perhaps while you are outside enjoying your short and blessed life, you might consider the plight of the defenseless. See if you think there are “shades of grey” there..

  • lifeonmars

    “I dislike those who know so well what God wants them to do,” she said, “because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.”Well said, and enough said. If indeed there is a God, she is insane with frustration and anger at those who claim to know her mind.

  • rmk1122

    she’s making the “buddy christ” pose!

  • massmedia77

    “Well said, and enough said. If indeed there is a God, she is insane with frustration and anger at those who claim to know her mind.”I’m pretty sure that, as an omnipotent, omniscient being, God has no gender. Humans are backwards, we like to apply our principles on things that we know nothing about.

  • lifeonmars

    I’m pretty sure that, as an omnipotent, omniscient being, God has no gender. Humans are backwards, we like to apply our principles on things that we know nothing about.In addition to being a pro-choice feminist, I’m an atheist. Thus the “if there is a god” bit. The gender of a mythical being is not really the important part – my comment was addressing the absurdity of humans claiming to know absolutely the mind of the (mythical) omnipotent being.

  • ankhorite

    @ZZIM, you bring up slavery. I’m glad you did, because what’s the only word for a woman forced to bear children against her will?That word is SLAVE.I look forward to a pro-choice argument based on the Thirteenth Amendment someday soon.Or even the Third Amendment. If the government cannot force a family to host adults in their homes, how on earth can the government force anyone to host a fetus in her own body?

  • NHEngineer

    missingwisc Wrote: “Most likely Palin would not even accept Anthony’s ideals if she were alive today.”If who were alive today, Susan B. or Sarah Palin???

  • leafgreen

    Observe this quote by Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood. In one paragraph she advocates for racial genocide and intervention by Church in public affairs:Posted by: leafgreen=====The difference is liberals don’t misrepresent the meaning of that quote. She wasn’t advocating genocide and that quote doesn’t say she was; she was concerned that idiots would misconstrue what the intentions were. Which was birth control.They also don’t photoshop a picture of Margaret Sanger into a limo with Hitler. And pass it around in e-mails as it was a real event. It wasn’t even a good photoshop job.You talk a good piece, but she was also an honorary member of the KKK, which makes your assertion that she was “misconstrued” a strained argument at best.

  • ZZim

    @ZZIM, you bring up slavery. I’m glad you did, because what’s the only word for a woman forced to bear children against her will?That word is SLAVE.Posted by: anchorite=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-I think that’s a pretty weak argument. Next thing you’ll argue that the 13th amendment requires the Federal government offer to adopt all children. And men who are forced to pay child support because some woman decided to skip her birth control pills (so she could trap a husband or baby daddy) are having their constitutional rights violated?Nah, I’m not buying it. .

  • HiloBob

    The more Palin shouts out to her double digit I.Q. base the more polarized the GOP (God Owned Politics) becomes.You’ve got to love it. Bristol wouldn’t be out there on the abstinence lecture circuit if her boyfriend hadn’t run out on her. Even he couldn’t stand the family when it got up close and personal. That should be a hint.And since when was “God” a he or she?? Jesus despised hypocrites.

  • leafgreen

    The more Palin shouts out to her double digit I.Q. base the more polarized the GOP (God Owned Politics) becomes.You’ve got to love it. Bristol wouldn’t be out there on the abstinence lecture circuit if her boyfriend hadn’t run out on her. Even he couldn’t stand the family when it got up close and personal. That should be a hint.And since when was “God” a he or she?? Jesus despised hypocrites.More personal attacks from the left. And what do you call the Penn primary? Seems Dems booted centrist Specter in favor of hard core lefty Sestak. I’d call that polarizing.But enough about them, lets discuss your racist hero, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger. You know, the one who advocated to use churches to quell any “rebellious” members of the black community who opposed Planned Parenthood’s aim to “exterminate the Negro population” (her words, not mine). Between advocating church involvement in politics and racial genocide in the same sentence doesn’t she sound a lot like the right wingers you hate so much?

  • JilliB

    Like I said, compared to geniuses like you, I’m just poor dumb white trash. But ma’am, I’m trying to get better…I really am!—At least you’re somewhat capable of seeing reality and admitting what you are. Your posts certainly had me doubting the possiblity you sound like you’re from some alternate reality – Bitterville, USA.

  • tom75

    Let me see if I’ve got this straight. This is a faith-based floating column whose purpose is to slam Sarah Palin 24/7?Wasn’t aware that dishing Palin was one of the ten commandments, seven sins, or top five barfy and unfunny letterman-list inanities. But hey, live and learn. Sounds like a classic liberal take on faith and charity. Their Jesus must have taken daily laps in snark-infested waters. How better to understand his holiness…

  • denise4925

    Keith, you said:”3) The idea posited on this forum that the writer must be referring solely to infanticide (i.e., killing a child after birth) rather than abortion is not substantiated. In “Marriage and Maternity” the author writes: “rather than bring into the world such miserable children, rather than perhaps give life to a daughter to suffer all that she has endured, destroys the little being, as she thinks, before it lives”"*********

  • Athena4

    “Well, Planned Parenthood originated as a eugenics organization. Their original purpose was to reduce the number of children produced by poor people and minorities (this is in fact the primary societal benefit of legal abortion).”Again, selective reading of history here. Prior to the excesses of the Nazis, eugenics was quite a popular theory. Proponents included Teddy Roosevelt and the founder of Kellogg’s cereal. Margaret Sanger and other women who founded PP saw other women – including their own mothers – dying of childbirth in filthy tenements because they had no birth control, nor access to medical care. Did they want to “eliminate poor people?” Yes. They knew then that when women have less children to take care of, they can better support the ones that they do have. Did they want to “eliminate imbeciles and retards?” Yes, because back then, people with developmental disabilities were not potential wage earners, but burdens on their families. This was before the social safety net that LIBERALS put into place.

  • Athena4

    “Remember the picture of Sarah Palin wearing a bikini and holding a gun? Photoshopped.”Much to the dismay of many Republican males.

  • ZZim

    Again, selective reading of history here….Posted by: Athena4=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-I’m sorry, Athena, but I don’t see anywhere that you disagree with me.How is that a “selective reading of history”?.

  • ZZim

    “Remember the picture of Sarah Palin wearing a bikini and holding a gun? Photoshopped.”Much to the dismay of many Republican males. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-I’m not a Republican, but I am a pro-2nd Amendment man. I was horrified when I saw that picture. I mean, doesn’t she know what chlorinated water can do to a rifle?.

  • ZZim

    …. it’s hard to tell if she’s speaking on abortion or infanticide. Posted by: denise4925=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-That, in a nutshell, is why the abortion debate is so difficult and cannot be resolved. Because the baby develops seamlessly from fertilized egg to person, there really is no “bright line” at which one can say “on this side is a person, on that side is a clump of cells”.For pro-life partisans, there IS no difference between abortion and infanticide.For pro-choice partisans, they cannot answer this question either, which is why their arguments try to draw attention away from it..

  • Pillai

    “If you are against child brides, don’t marry one, otherwise MYOB.”So, how many of adopted kids do you have?Anyways – you cannot convince me that the life of the fetus is more important than the life, preferences or wisdom of the woman carrying it, or of an already born person in this world. So your arguments about child marriage, slavery etc does not hold much water, as they all affect the girl getting married, or the slave, breathing this air, walking among us.

  • ad4hk2004

    What I find almost hysterically funny is the way the liberal/socialist folks wet their pants in panic the instant that Sarah’s name is mentioned… Since the Tea Party is a merely a bunch of irrelevant gun waving whackos, and the Republican conservatives are people hating fossilized dinosaurs, and a moderate Democrat is is a traitor, why do you keep going on and on about them? Don’t mention them! Continue to explain to those of us who are intellectually challenged how adding two trillion dollars to the national debt in mere 17 months is going to bring us prosperity… Remind us that making the top executives of Goldman Sachs into Billionaires by handing them tax money while the suckers, errr ‘mortgage holders’ who bought their junk bonds are filing bankruptcy is good… Obviously us challenged folks need all the re-education camps you can set up – perhaps the Viet Cong can give you a hand on that, being experts and all…dr. o

  • uncivil

    I’m so sick of this broad! Enough! Disappear!

  • ZZim

    “If you are against child brides, don’t marry one, otherwise MYOB.”…. you cannot convince me that the life of the fetus is more important than the life, preferences or wisdom of the woman carrying it, or of an already born person in this world. So your arguments about child marriage, slavery etc does not hold much water, as they all affect the girl getting married, or the slave, breathing this air, walking among us.Posted by: Pillai=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-I do NOT think that “the life of the fetus is more important than the life, preferences or wisdom of the woman carrying it, or of an already born person in this world.”I say that if the mother doesn’t want it, then we should allow her to decide that it should be killed. I don’t want it either.But that wasn’t my point.BornAgainAmerican put forth the argument that if you can choose to avert your eyes, then it’s none of your business. I disagreed. The ability to choose non-participation does not make an activity none of my business. For example, I choose not to rape children, that doesn’t make pedophilia none of my business.Pointing out that someone else has made an invalid argument in favor of abortion does not mean that one opposes abortion..

  • uncivil

    Use birth control/contraception ladies & make your bf/husband/one night stand use one or he ain’t getting access to the Promised Land. Not like you live in the middle of the Amazon jungle, 5000 miles away from the nearest pharmacy or supermarket.No reason why intelligent, college-educated women should be getting pregnant when they DON’T want to have a baby.

  • rj2008

    Palin doesn’t need to know history or anything else, Republicans will pay anything just to hear her say what they want to hear, whether its true or not they don’t care.

  • jlbliemeister

    Sarah really gets to you guys doesn’t she lol.She’s no Jack Kennedy either lol.

  • leafgreen

    Observe this quote by Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood. In one paragraph she advocates for racial genocide and intervention by Church in public affairs:

  • KeithW2

    denise4925,Thanks for reading through my long 8-point post and commenting.At this point I think you and I have read through the original source material in context and looked at some other evidence brought up using Web sources and perhaps we just have to disagree. I think it is clear that many early women’s rights leaders believed abortion was “evil” and similar if not identical to infanticide, and that probably (but not certainly) included S B Anthony. I think it is also clear that their emphasis was not on punishing women for abortion but on changing the cultural factors that lead to abortion by strengthening women’s rights. Also it seems clear that abortion was not their emphasis, but it was one of many social/cultural problems that they were aware of and trying to ameliorate through fighting for women’s rights. Does this make them “pro-life” in the sense that we use that term today? I’m not sure, since that term is a label and not strictly defined. But I have concluded that Ann Gordon and Lynn Sherr did not present anything close to a complete picture and were incorrect to cite this as evidence for “the erosion of accuracy in history and journalism”.It’s easy to criticize Sarah Palin and I certainly don’t respect her as a social commentator or public policy thinker, but in this case the criticism of her speech is unfounded.

  • RobertCurleyJacobs

    This article says at first that Anthony wrote nothing about abortion, and then it turns around and says that Anthony didn’t approve of her sister-in-law’s abortion…To me everything seems like brainwashing. Why would anyone think it appropriate to kill their child via abortion? I know I use to think abortion was okay and now understand not to do such things.Palin my be pro-life, but I would bet a shinny nickel that she is a closet-liberal (which means she believes that most liberal views are correct, but spouts out conservative rhetoric).

  • Pillai

    HOW are liberals different from conservatives again?Quit already. The biggest insult is when people ignore you. Have enough sense to either post different material each time, or learn when you are being ignored.This was a notice towards latter, since you obviously are incapable of the former.

  • Moley2

    ZZIM since you are talking about Slavery. Venture over to toyotarunaway org and check out the photo of the tortured slave. They also prove that Slavery is still legal in the U.S. under the right circumstances.

  • steve-2304

    Can we stop with the “pro-life” label?What they need to be called is what they are: pro-birth.The HUGE majority of people who call themselves pro-life are really only pro-birth. They could care less what happens to that child after it’s born.They’re anti-health care for all, anti-social programs, anti-education spending, anti-everything else that would help that child (who most likely would be born into a challenging environment) have a chance to succeed. And when that kid grows up, they have no problem shipping him to kill or be killed in some bogus war. Or, if he ends up committing a crime and killing someone, they think he should be killed by capital punishment.So can we please stop with the feel good label of pro-life when it is highly inaccurate of the majority of people?

  • Azarkhan

    “Remember the picture of Sarah Palin wearing a bikini and holding a gun? Photoshopped.”Wow-who knew?Remember all the pictures of *Hillary*? Not photoshopped. Much to the dismay of everyone.

  • ZZim

    Slavery is still legal in the U.S. Posted by: Moley2=–=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-I doubt it..

  • Azarkhan

    “her representations are akin to Fox News disinformation.”You got that right! But fortunately we still have ABC-CBS-NBC-CNN-MSNBC-PBS-HLN–AP-NYTimes-WashPost-LATimes to make sure we get the “correct” information.

  • jackvandijk

    Would it be helpful to learn how other countries handle the desire for abortion in a civil way?

  • denise4925

    But they were clear that abortion is “evil” and “murder” (their words not mine, see my post below.) And Gordon and Sherr seem to have deliberately or accidentally avoided this evidence, making their article ironically an example of inaccurate journalism.It is not clear at all. The word “abortion” was not mentioned, but infanticide was mentioned several times. So, we have no idea what she was referring to was evil.

  • Azarkhan

    Infanticide: 1) the killing of an infant. Hey, I’m sure Susan B. had no problem with it. In fact, I’m sure she would approve of the current Chinese government killing female infants. After all, Chairman Obamao obviously has no problem with it. Otherwise, why would the swinish Michael Posner equate the Arizona immigration law to Chinese violations of human rights?

  • denise4925

    I wish abortion was out of the picture. To me it is a personal decision. The Republicans have incorrectly focused on this issue as our country has faltered. Now the Democrats want our country to be socialist or communist. We need to take our country back. Then kick the damn illegals out.************Does the country only belong to the Republicans and Teabaggers?

  • thought4

    Of course leftists have no problem with censorship. They’re all about political correctness and groupthink. And that is why they will always abhor and fear a free thinker like Sarah Palin. One might fear a free thinker like Sarah Palin if she were in fact a thinker. Unless you are talking about another Sarah Palin, other than the one who needs to write notes on her hand to give a speech and can’t remember the last time she read something. Not sure there is much thinking going on there….

  • Maddogg

    If Republicans cannot run for office on the issues of anti-abortion and pro-religion they’d have nothing to run on. I do not see where they carry these attributes into office however.

  • Maddogg

    Infanticide: 1) the killing of an infant. Posted by: Azarkhan | May 19, 2010 5:46 PM

  • Azarkhan

    “Someday all nations will have mandatory abortion and intercourse laws.”Can we start that right now for American leftists? Let’s see, mandatory abortion for leftist couples. Over time that would raise the collective IQ of the US. Check!Mandatory not having sex for leftists. Hmmmm. I don’t think that’s necessary. Leftists spend so much time being angry at Sarah Palin I doubt they have much time left over for sex.

  • Chelsea1

    “was written by someone other then Anthony. Untold? Unproven.” –other THAN Anthony.. thanks

  • kayjay503

    I’m surprised the rest of the commenters here continued to joust with AZARKHAN after his 7th or 8th troll post.The only other thing I have to add to the conversation is to note that Sarah Palin, in her speech to the SBA List, outlined what must be the 20th permutation of her 8 week…er, month “pregnancy” with the child known as Tri-G.The investigative blog Palingates.blogspot.com has most of them documented, but since Palin’s Fables are over a period of 18 months, you have a lot of reading ahead of you.

  • Zatti

    This is an excellent article. The bottom line is that no matter what can be proven, what we know above all else is that Susan B. Anthony was not a religious right activist who sought to outlaw abortions or change constitutions in order to give the unborn rights over women. Small detail these anti-abortion groups continue to leave out. It is beyond dishonest. The historical revisionism needs to be continually exposed.

  • mac7

    We know Sara knows nothing of present day let alone past history. Betcha she didn’t even know who John McCain was when he came a’calling.

  • schmitt_fam

    Liberal PDS-Palin Derangement Syndrome. It does nto matter what Sarah Palin says you will denigrate her. The same people who make fun of Palin and look down on her allowed Edwards to tell his story of family tragedy constantly and did not say anything. Allow Obama to say stupid things about Europe being a country and that there are 56 staes in the US. Get a life Liberals, Palin is human and makes good points and makes mistakes. When you have nothing to intellectually disagree with attack the person, typical liberal drivel.

  • Azarkhan

    “I’m surprised the rest of the commenters here continued to joust with AZARKHAN after his 7th or 8th troll post.”You know, *sniff*, that really hurt my feelings.”The only other thing I have to add to the conversation…”Actually you added nothing, except another inflammatory, (what was the word?) “troll” post. But if you want to try again and respond intelligently, without sliming Sarah Palin, here is a previous post of mine-Susan Anthony was no fool, and no dupe for male chauvinism. While her conscience may have prevented her from advocating abortion, she realized men were equally responsible, if not more. And it was the male patriarchy that kept women there.However, this does not mean that Sarah Palin may not also claim Susan Anthony as an example to pro-life advocates.So Kayjay503, based on the above, and your own extensive readings on Susan Anthony, why can’t Sarah Palin and pro-life advocates also claim Susan B as a model for their wing of feminism?

  • Alyosha1

    I recommend people go to the website of Feminists for Life where they have dozens of quotes (with proper citations) from early American feminists deploring abortion. I will take the word of these Anthony scholars that there are reasons to question the quotes attributed to Anthony herself, but their assertion that there was no strong opposition to abortion among the early feminists is simply innacurate. (And I have a hard time believing that scholars who have studied this period don’t know that.) Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Alice Paul, and many others spoke quite clearly about abortion: they thought it was bad for women and they opposed it.www.feministsforlife.org

  • Sadaam

    $arah Palin, like George W. Bush, are both highly intellectual individuals that offer deep meaning and insight into….BAWAWAWAHAHA…I couldn’t type with a straight face….they’re both flaming idiots that deserve to belong to the Republican party. Palin is just a Dubya with lipstick.

  • ZZim

    The 2 hypotheticals you pose are not relevant to the issue of choice.=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-That is certainly true. However, both arguments presented directly parallel the invalid argument presented by BornAgainAmerican.As I further explained in a later post, “BornAgainAmerican put forth the argument that if you can choose to avert your eyes, then it’s none of your business. I disagreed. The ability to choose non-participation does not make an activity none of my business. For example, I choose not to rape children, that doesn’t make pedophilia none of my business.”I was attempting to show the weakness of his argument by posing two equally specious arguments.My personal viewpoint is that if a prospective mother doesn’t want ther child, then that child is likely to become a burden on society. As I do not deserve to be burdened by her unwanted child – or be endangered by her unwanted child – for the rest of my life, I support her having the right to terminate it. Since only the pregnant woman is capable of determining the level of unwantedness of the child, then only she should be making that decision. Since society also does not want the child, society does not get to decide for her.

  • ZZim

    Would it be helpful to learn how other countries handle the desire for abortion in a civil way?Posted by: jackvandijk =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Agreed.Thank you Jack.PS – I like your drug laws too..

  • Alyosha1

    from The American Feminist (Spring 1998):[Anthony's] 1875 speech “Social Purity,” reprinted in Ida Husted Harper’s 1898 Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony, specifically discussed abortion and postnatal infanticide—along with rape and prostitution—as male wrongs against women. Anthony argued that laws pertaining to these matters, made and enforced exclusively by men, further victimized women while absolving men of all responsibility. Yet she declared: “The work of woman is not to lessen the severity or the certainty of the penalty for violation of the moral law, but to prevent this violation by the removal of the causes which lead to it.” “Social Purity” is remarkably similar, even identical in places, to an earlier piece focusing specifically on abortion: “Marriage and Maternity” (The Revolution, July 8, 1869). Anthony was almost certainly the author of this piece, which was signed “A.” Anthony was often called “Miss A.,” and The Revolution staff commonly signed articles with their initial (if they signed at all).

  • BaloneyGuy

    It’s too bad the authors weren’t aborted. Then we wouldn’t have to hear this trash.

  • rplat

    Who are these to writers and why should anybody care what they believe or think? This entire newspaper is nothing but a left wing propaganda rag.

  • michaelneedsgrace

    What I find so deliciously ironic is that feminists have claimed Susan B. Anthony as their own because she was a suffragette. They missed the fact, however, that she was a suffragette who was proudly pro-life. (Reminds me of Margaret Sanger, the racist eugenicist founder of Planned Parenthood. Ooops.) Anyway, she wouldn’t have interjected herself into politics because, surprise, killing unborn children wasn’t legal at the time. Had she come of age in 2010, some 40 million dead aborted children later, half of them women, (so much for being pro-woman) she would have been compelled to speak out because you can’t be neutral in a holocaust.I love liberal hypocrisy. They boast political correctness and their phony allegiance to tolerance and inclusion, what a crock, but when you look at how they treat Sarah Palin, you see nothing but a bunch of leftists drunk on their own “Haterade.” They are anything but tolerant and inclusive. That’s a ruse if I ever saw one. Will the real haters please stand up and raise your leftist hands.

  • josefkhen

    “I think we’ve outgrown racial smears, don’t you?”Since the teaparty gantlet that greeted the African-American congresspeople after the health care vote? That was quick.

  • Azarkhan

    “Since the teaparty gantlet[sic] that greeted the African-American congresspeople after the health care vote?”Stop with the pathetic lies. Nothing racial was said to those fools. But you’re right in one sense. There is racism in America, and the vast bulk of it comes from blacks, who are the most racist ethnic group in America. Don’t think so? Move your silly a@@ to a black neighborhood, send your kids to a black public school, and see how you are treated. Of course, since white leftists despise themselves, you might actually like the abuse!

  • Athena4

    “I’m sorry, Athena, but I don’t see anywhere that you disagree with me.Because things were a lot different 100 years ago than they are now, and you’re taking Margaret Sanger’s quote way out of context. She was not a racist any more than any other white person who lived in 1910 was a racist. 100 years ago, people weren’t “mentally disabled”, they were “slow” or “retarded”, and were institutionalized. Black and white women were bearing too many children and dying in childbirth at young ages. The only difference was that blacks were doing it mostly in the Deep South, and whites were dying in tenements in Boston, New York, and other major cities. Taking words said 100 years ago, or 2000 years ago, out of context doesn’t mean squat in the modern world, where we have medical care, birth control, an information-based economy as opposed to an industrial or agricultural economy, etc. To me, Margaret Sanger is a hero, because she stood up for the rights of women when men wanted to keep them barefoot and pregnant.

  • ZZim

    “I’m sorry, Athena, but I don’t see anywhere that you disagree with me.Because things were a lot different 100 years ago than they are now, and you’re taking Margaret Sanger’s quote way out of context. She was not a racist any more than any other white person who lived in 1910 was a racist. … Margaret Sanger is a hero, because she stood up for the rights of women when men wanted to keep them barefoot and pregnant. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=Athena, perhaps you are responding to someone else’s post, rather than mine? I didn’t call her a racist.I said that she wanted “to reduce the number of children produced by poor people and minorities (this is in fact the primary societal benefit of legal abortion).”I think I made it clear that I approve of this goal. I apologize if you thought I was criticizing her.Legal abortion has a huge number of positive effects on society. Most social ills (crime, drug abuse, disease, welfare dependency, etc.) are dramatically reduced simply by cutting off the supply of unwanted babies. This is a good thing and I think it is clear from the record that Margaret Sanger helped a lot in bringing it about..

  • Athena4

    Sorry, I was responding to other person.

  • ZZim

    Sorry, I was responding to other person. Posted by: Athena4=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-That’s cool. A lot of crap appears on these forums and it goes pretty fast. Skimming is the answer, but sometimes leads to confusion.I was agreeing with the “other person” regarding Sanger’s eugenics motivations, but disagreeing with him regarding his (probably intentionally deceitful) assertion that Sanger was a racist. I also took him to task on that pretty directly.Due to the activities of the openly racist and eugenicist Nazi party, eugenics has been equated (inaccurately) with racism in the public mind. This is another potential source of confusion, which dishonest debaters will often attempt to capitalize on..

  • Zatti

    @Alyosha1: few would honestly argue whether some of the early feminists held personal views about abortion. I know of no pro-choice feminist writer that has denied the possibility. The real question I hear is this: were Anthony and other early feminists single-issue zealots who sought to outlaw abortion and criminalize women or pregnancy? No, the early feminists were not of such a mind.I have read some of these early writings in context, which the Feminists for Life organization often leaves out. To attribute to early feminists some agenda in line with today’s anti-abortion activism is as absurd as it is dishonest.

  • Athena4

    It’s my understanding that the early feminists like Susan B. Anthony were more concerned with the right to vote rather than abortion (illegal or otherwise) or birth control. Since the Women’s Movement grew out of the Abolitionists, it was natural that disenfranchised women were more concerned with their power at the ballot box. It was only later, around the turn of the 20th century, that they became concerned with birth control and/or abortion because of the influx of lower-class and immigrant women whom many felt were “over-breeding”. Anthony, Stanton, et. al. were upper-class or middle-class women. To them, having a child out of wedlock, or having an abortion, would be a scandal. Mary Wollstonecraft had an out-of-wedlock daughter, but that was in England.

  • ZZim

    The real question I hear is this: were Anthony and other early feminists single-issue zealots who sought to outlaw abortion and criminalize women or pregnancy? Posted by: Zatti=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Zatti, that’s certainly NOT the real question. Nobody with any historical comprehension would pose that question. As Athena wrote below, suffrage was the main issue. Read Athena’s post, it’s excellent. In SBA’s day, abortion simply wasn’t a political issue yet, much less a feminist issue. However, based on the scanty evidence available, many scholars believe that SBA held a negative view of abortion..

  • YEAL9

    What Susan B might have said if she were alive today and what Sarah P should have said but didn’t:It is obvious that intercourse and other sexual activities are out of control with over one million abortions and 19 million cases of STDs per year in the USA alone.”Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain STDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psychological consequences of STDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs associated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars.”How in the world do we get this situation under control? A pill to temporarily eliminate the sex drive would be a good start. (Andy Rooney of 60 Minutes, 4/18/2010 described them as anti-desire pills). And teenagers and young adults must be constantly reminded of the dangers of sexual activity and that oral sex, birth control pills, condoms and chastity belts are no protection against STDs. Might a list of those having an STD posted on the Internet help? Said names would remain until the STD has been eliminated with verification by a doctor. Lists of sexual predators are on-line. Is there a difference between these individuals and those having a STD having sexual relations while infected???Note: No Sarah P. references to god were or are needed to address the situation.

  • farnaz_mansouri2

    Palin has as much in common with Susan B. Anthony as Brad Pitt does with Gandhi. Actually, less. Palin is a hick opportunist whose knowledge of geopolitics is limited to what she can see from her house in Alaska.Anthony a national leader involved in struggles for civil and human rights. She was also gay, had long term affairs of which we know, and was, unsurprisingly not out. She died more than one hundred years ago. Word has it that Palin passed earlier, but this has not been confirmed.Unlike Anthony, who appears never to have slept with a man, Palin has. It is doubtful Anthony had the social imagination to make all the different kinds of judgements, we are in a position to make today. The same is certain of Palin. However, since Palin’s status as human woman is still up for debate, she must be considered as of the species and gender until scientifically proven otherwise.That said, until men are willing to end the murder of infants, children and adults, by mandating male bone marrow transplants, blood donations, nonvital organ donations, men have nothing to say. And I haven’t even mentioned war, genocide, etc.

  • Athena4

    Thank you, ZZim. The check’s in the mail. ;)

  • sladeod

    Much rubbish has been included in the above posts.

  • ZZim

    Actually, Athena, I’m concerned about where the Obama Economy is headed.I prefer to receive gold, Thanks!.

  • sladeod

    As a sop to all abortionists,my only regret is that they were not ABORTED!

  • Zatti

    @ZZim: My question is legitimately directed at those who are, in fact, ignorant of the main activism of Anthony and others which was NOT abortion. You actually made my point for me. Anthony held a negative view of abortion? I know of few people who view it positively, so I have no problem with that being the case for Anthony. In fact, I completely oppose abortion but support decriminalization. If a stranger were to read my remarks about abortion, the act, and my focus on seeking alternatives but did not ask my actual view of the *law*, my words would mistakenly be attributed as supporting a radical anti-choice agenda. There is something to be learned from this.The point stands no matter what Anthony’s view is that can be proven, we cannot honestly project today’s extreme anti-abortion politics on her or the suffrage movement.

Read More Articles

colbert
Top 10 Reasons We’re Glad A Catholic Colbert Is Taking Over Letterman’s “Late Show”

How might we love Stephen Colbert as the “Late Show” host? Let us count the ways.

emptytomb
God’s Not Dead? Why the Good News Is Better than That

The resurrection of Jesus is not a matter of private faith — it’s a proclamation for the whole world.

noplaceonearth
An Untold Story of Bondage to Freedom: Passover 1943

How a foxhole that led to a 77-mile cave system saved the lives of 38 Ukrainian Jews during the Holocaust.

shutterstock_148333673
Friend or Foe? Learning from Judas About Friendship with Jesus

We call Judas a betrayer. Jesus called him “friend.”

shutterstock_53190298
Fundamentalist Arguments Against Fundamentalism

The all-or-nothing approach to the Bible used by skeptics and fundamentalists alike is flawed.

shutterstock_178468880
Mary Magdalene, the Closest Friend of Jesus

She’s been ignored, dismissed, and misunderstood. But the story of Easter makes it clear that Mary was Jesus’ most faithful friend.

shutterstock_186795503
The Three Most Surprising Things Jesus Said

Think you know Jesus? Some of his sayings may surprise you.

shutterstock_185995553
How to Debate Christians: Five Ways to Behave and Ten Questions to Answer

Advice for atheists taking on Christian critics.

HIFR
Heaven Hits the Big Screen

How “Heaven is for Real” went from being an unsellable idea to a bestselling book and the inspiration for a Hollywood movie.

shutterstock_186364295
This God’s For You: Jesus and the Good News of Beer

How Jesus partied with a purpose.

egg.jpg
Jesus, Bunnies, and Colored Eggs: An Explanation of Holy Week and Easter

So, Easter is a one-day celebration of Jesus rising from the dead and turning into a bunny, right? Not exactly.

SONY DSC
Dear Evangelicals, Please Reconsider Your Fight Against Gay Rights

A journalist and longtime observer of American religious culture offers some advice to his evangelical friends.