Archive for January, 2010
Sarah and Bristol Palin appear on the cover this month’s In Touch magazine. What strikes me about the caption the word “chose.” Does this mean that Sarah Palin is Pro Choice now? She must be, since she is proud of the choice she made.
This is why she is a political/public figure that cannot be reasoned with. The will likely maintain her position of Pro Life even though she touted her choice on a national magazine cover. She cannot be reasoned with because if she gets what she and other Pro Life people want, there will be no choice anymore. If she gets what she wants, the caption would have to be rewritten as something like:
We’re glad we have babies.
Thanks for the babies.
This illustrates again the genius (if you want to call it that) of naming the political position they share “Pro Life.” It implies that the opponents of Pro Life are Pro Death. I can’t speak for everyone, but I know that most people who are Pro Choice are not Pro Death. People do not want to have the right to kill babies just for the sake of it. People just do not want to be forced to have babies in many situations where it would not be wise to do so.
In any case, it just infuriating that they have the gall to say that they are glad to have made a choice when it’s exactly that freedom that they want to take away from all women.No comments
Cairo, Illinois is the triangular part of Illinois where the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers meet and the Mississippi continues south. The town itself is a bit run down and depressing but shows some of it’s former prominence in the buildings around town.