Over at Effin Unsound DK (an anonymous nom de plume) has once agins railed at me because he does not like my morals. Like his friend Lee or a Repubolican campaigner, this "DK" has the disturbing ability to make up things and ascribe them to his opponents.
The other face of DK, or Lee?, is that he hyrows invectives and judgements when he has no other arguments.
He has threatened to delete my posting, so I have cross posted my reply here:
Of course I have never said, nor would I that ever said that "women 35 or older just simply should not get pregnant at all, for any reason. If they do, they are ALL guilty of wanting to harm their child" What I have said many times, despite your invective, is that by accepting her own commitment to the right to life, Palin also accepted .. or should have .. the responsibility not to become pregnant at 44. After all, this pregnancy was not simply a gift of God. , it is a choice she made.
As for 35, that is utterly out of the blue.
This may be hard for you to understand, but I respect people who believe in right to life, as long as they are consistent about the belief. My criticism of her morality s based on her claim of piety and the assumption, which could be wrong, that a pious woman of 44 married to a pious man do not have sex without understanding its consequences. Even then, I have agreed that if the sex was somehow involuntary, I would support her position.
As for the HIV example, of course it is a shocking example but why? Why is there such an easy judgement against the usually poor, generally non-white, HIV infected mothers but not against a middle class woman? Whys is it noble for Palin to have a Downs child raised by her sister and ignoble for Chandra Washington to do the same thing? Is the major difference that one mother has the reosurces to raise her child and the other does not? If Chandra were 44, without HIV, and intentionally having babies because she likes kids or wants the welfare support, would that change the moral balance?
Finally, before you poof this, we do agree on one thing here. The decision that a pro-choice family makes to brng a Downs' baby to term is a hard one. So, tell me where you would stand on that. If Sarah knew here baby was going t have Downs or Chandra knew the baby was going t have HIV, and if both were pro choice, what would you think was the moral stand for each?
Cross Posted at SeattleJew.