Do you think Sarah is a step forward or a step backward for women?

Question

Pro-life, Pro-creationism (please...), Pro-big oil, and a beauty queen to boot!

Answer 1

and you consider yourself a step forward i'm sure. i don't buy it, the pic.

Answer 2

She is an anti-choice, ignorant creationist, homophobic, gibberish screaming fundie.  

She, and people like her, want to take the USA back to the Dark Ages.

We must vote the ignorance of fundamentalism out of our government.

Answer 3

Though a woman she is a step backwards in her train of thought.

1: Pro-Life..so she feels a woman does not have the right to do what she wishes to her own body.

2: Pro-creationism...well that train of thought was rampant back in the dark ages..as was the thought that maggots grew from rotten meat

3: Pro-Oil...well that's just a financial thing not relative to her place as a woman in politics.

If she was the first woman to be chosen to be a VP candidate..that would be a step forward.  However, that honor went to Geraldine Ferraro.  If she actually had to work towards getting this honor (Being picked to be a VP doesn't require any hard work.  McCain could have picked Mr. Ed the talking horse or any random name from the phone book) unlike Hilary Clinton who spent hours campaigning and winning over thousands of people to her ideas...then perhaps it would be a step forward.

Answer 4

Forward

And whatever you say, just sounds like cur-ap.

Have a nice day.

:D

Answer 5

Many steps forward.  

Answer 6

You don't like her because she does not hold your views? How sad...

Answer 7

20 steps forward

Answer 8

That's one small step back for McCain, one giant leap backwards for the Republicans - back to the stone age!

Answer 9

It's a step backward.

For no other reason than that she's an appointee, after another person (Hillary) did the work.

So what's been shown? That women can't get votes, they can get appointed. They can get somewhere if a man selects them.

That seems like a step backward.

Answer 10

The mdeical encyclopedia states that down syndrome is defined as the most common cause of mental retardation and malformation in a newborn. It goes on to say that down syndrome occurs because of the presence of an extra chromosome.

It is pathetic for any woman to go back to work 3 days after giving birth for any reason other than she is the sole provider and can not make her child and her rocovery her number one priority. To leave a 3 day old down syndrome child out of a personal desire only raises more questions to her priorities. If a mother that brings a child into the world through her body does not then make that child her priority, then who?

Answer 11

She is EVERYTHING that I stand for.So she's beautiful since when is that  crime? I do believe that JFK was considered  our most handsome president.

Answer 12

She is a step back for this country and an embarrassment to women and men alike.  The policies and ideals she supports are the same type of thinking that has made it hard for women to get to her position.  She is where she is at today thanks to tough progressive educated women UN-like herself.  

What a disgrace that this woman is on a "serious" (major) party ticket!!  

Answer 13

Backwards.  She wants creationism to be taught in school alongside evolution.  We know by now what the fundamentalist/biblicalist view of the woman's role is.

She's "pro-life" which  means that she doesn't think any woman should be allowed to choose to terminate a pregnancy.  Well, actually it means that she thinks that women who do choose to terminate a pregnancy should not have access to safe means of doing so.

The beauty queen aspect is just too funny to even discuss.  Feminists in general don't look at pageants as particularly empowering events for women.

I guess the bottom line is that feminists would want to vote for a candidate who would do something FOR women, not necessarily for one who happens to BE a woman.  There's a big difference.

Answer 14

Forward you are afraid of your natural abilities that is fine this woman is not for you , she is showing an image of strong independent women who take no bull and get the job done. She is empowered within herself and she set the ethical standard for BP they have to be ecologically sound, So she doesn't like to kill babies (personal choice)  full term abortions as some parties suggest is murder. Creationism is proved in quantum science. so it is indeed a science , it holds a different perspective than the bible or the evolution line tells. Again remind me of your point here?

Answer 15

no i think putting i women in the white house would be a step froward for woman...

just because she doesn't think what you think doesn't mean its a step back.

a woman that doesnt wanna kill baby's.. probably a better mother  

Answer 16

Her political career has just started so she will determine her own fate as a politician and as a woman.I think she has made a unique accomplishment by capturing John McCains attention with so little experiance.Thats all good for her,working your way to the top is good for anybody.Starting at the top is a differant story.Correct me if I'm wrong.

Answer 17

People who dog her for being a beauty queen lose all credibility. Basically you are discriminating against people who participate in beauty pageants and judging them as being unable to do anything else but look pretty. And I personally do not ever watch beauty pageants and have never been in one myself.

Many Americans are pro-life and pro-creationism .... don't we have equal rights to have our choice in a vp candidate? There are lots of politicians in office who support pro-choice agendas ... why can't we have the same opportunity to have our position fought for?

I try no to be negative but it seems like the pro-choice people are only for the rights of the far left ... not equal rights for everyone.

p.s. I don't agree with the far right either.

p.p.s. for the person who said voting for her will likely take America back to the dark ages .... American wasn't a country in the Dark Ages.

Answer 18

Its a huge step for baton twirlers across America! I can see the future Miss America pageants now..."When I grow up, I want to be an old coot's VP choice!"

Answer 19

she is the Republican version of Affirmative Action.  I would imagine anyone would say that is a step backward.

Answer 20

If she breaks the patriarchal glass ceiling for the Presidency and appoints

Supreme Court Judges that roll back the rights of women then what we have is a "token" in office.  If she is a smiling, pretty face VP at the front desk of an older man, well, then she is playing the usual social role for women.  Let's she what she does.   She looks like a good girl who got her goodies by playing her part just right.  It works for her but does it work for the rest of us who have to worry about getting equal pay for equal work and raising our kids alone?

To appoint a woman who is not qualified to be President when she might well have to assume these duties, is pandering, plain and simple.  Let's hope she can raise to the occasion..Her husband is an Exxon oil PR man so expect more of the Petro Political big bullying going on around the former republics of the USSR to continue.

Answer 21

A step all the way forward!!!! She is going to be an excellent Vice President!!!

Answer 22

now that's a woman!!

Answer 23

If you're pro-life, pro-creationism, like I am, and maybe even a little choice in between, I think it's a step backwards for women.

I'm sticking to, if a female was raped and it obviously wasn't consensual and became pregnant because of some idiot male of the population, I say go ahead(also if effects the life of the female). The fact that the actual Sarah case was consensual and people were misinformed and didn't communicate clearly with one another, I'd say no.

The girl in that case was 15 and living with her fiance when she got pregnant and died because of unlucky complications. It takes two people to make a child, so it's both their faults and not the outcome, the child's fault when it had no even an understanding of what air was before it was aborted. This is going backwards.

Not to mention that this country was founded on the morals of freedom of religion from Catholic persecution, first and foremost then freedom of everything else, throws us back to the beginning of nothing if she wants to promote evolution alongside creationism. That is an abomination! The line has to be drawn in several different places and not just the abortion.

Anyone for pro-big oil will lose in the long run because we all know it's being sucked dry.

Oh, exactly when did beauty have anything to do with politics? If you're voting for someone just because of what they look like and not even their policies, just wow.

Answer 24

Who cares?  This isn't about women.  It's about an entire nation, men and women, boys and girls.  It shouldn't matter that she's a woman.

Answer 25

One step forward for women, several steps backward for women.

She is not an advocate for women and women's rights. Quite the opposite and women will see through this attempt to "trick" us this election season.

Answer 26

Neither.

She will be but another footnote in history like Ferraro. (no offense to Ferraro meant)