“The Marriage Vow: A Declaration of Dependence upon MARRIAGE and FAMILY”
There’s a new pledge in Republicanville, “The Marriage Vow: A Declaration of Dependence upon MARRIAGE and FAMILY” (emphasis in the original), and Michele Bachmann is the first to sign! Most of the pledge is typical Christian-Conservative, but this part is both crazy and offensive:
Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President.
Wow! Never mind that slave families were routinely broken up and sold off – and murdered, raped, and abused. This statement is beyond offensive.
BTW, she’s also signed onto banning porn and calling homosexuality a choice.
The ninth step calls for the banning of “all forms” of pornography. The pledge also states that homosexuality is both a choice and a health risk. You can read all the details of the pledge here.
Know what else is a choice? Religion.
Update: She’s also a real ‘merican:
CARL QUINTANILLA (CNBC): Does it strike you that as the unemployment rate goes up that your chances of winning office also go up?
MICHELE BACHMANN: Well, that could be. Again, I hope so.
Priceless.
Tags: GOP, Michele Bachmann
Good. Let her lead with her religious social conservative stuff, and turn into Christine O’Donnell.
It is good to see that private contractors will still be free to “expose American wives and daughters to rape or sexual harassment, torture”
‘banning of “all forms” of pornography’
it sounds like MB has backed off on her support of the US Constitution, and that inconvenient free speech ideal.
I’m glad that’s settled!
The headline alone… “Bob Vander Plaats, Iowa Social Conservative Kingmaker”
That is who is picking the Republican candidate.
“here, look at this shiney gay object whilst I rape your finances, land and water.”
R-r-rubes
A caucasian baby born in these times is probably more likely to be raised in single parent home than an AA baby born in 1860, as far as that goes. And it’s all a product of the Welfare State. No accountability. No risk of street living. Just buck out an illegit and get on the dole. Mom and Pop don’t care. They don’t have to pay for it. Probably did it themselves back in the day.
I
Yeah, I’m sure it’s just like that, delbert.
Would that ‘wishing for the worst’ so it fits into your perceived view be called Unwishful Thinking?
God wants his chosen paragons of matrimonial virtue to heap scorn on everyone else. It says so in the Bible. Page 156 as I recall.
“A caucasian baby born in these times is probably more likely to be raised in single parent home than an AA baby born in 1860, as far as that goes.”
WTF? You really should learn something about slavery before inserting your foot in your mouth.
Bending reality (including historical facts) to serve the needs of some crackpot argument is a dearly held Wingnut right.
Slave babies were brought up in idyllic two parent households until Paul Revere spoiled everything by ringing his bell to warn the British.
God wants his chosen paragons of matrimonial virtue to heap scorn on everyone else.
Actually I think he wants them to heap stones on them. From the Book Of Justifications.
OK, so I looked it up. By latest stats, 24% of white non-Hispanic children are in single-parent households.
By contrast, “About half of all U.S. slave children grew up apart from their father, either because he lived on another plantation, had been sold away, or was white.” Steven Mintz, Columbia University, “Childhood and Transatlantic Slavery”
Delbert: You can look this stuff up, you know.
Well, there goes all Bachmann’s support from African-Americans and gays.
Banning ALL forms of PORNOGRAPHY?
That’s it, Michelle!
Don’t be countin’ on my vote!
As a child, Frederick Douglas barely knew his mother (the masters thought it beneficial to seperate children from their parents at a young age) and didn’t know the identity of his father, although he suspected he was the result of his master raping his mother (a fairly widespread practice then). Some of the family & “Christian” values that were present at the nation’s founding. It’s not merely stupid that people like Bachman think that things were better then. It’s psychotic.
Remember skipper…SCOTUS Has not defined porn…they couodnt
So with no definition how can it be banned..
As the man said: I cannot describe pornography but I know it when I see it….
So miss michelle is going to ban the use of the Internet too
Either DP SOUNDS Like her…or bachmann sounds like DP…EITHER WAY…its a lose/lose..
Morons…..
Wow. I can’t believe Delbert is defending that crap. Black families were better off during slavery. W.T.F. That is the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen. They were better off, if you don’t count they had no freedom, they could be sold at any time and the women were often raped by their masters. Why would that be considered better?
Here’s a link to the whole pledge (PDF).
In it they have to promise to be faithful to their spouse. I guess Gingrich won’t be signing then.
UI – Delbert believes that because he views women as chattel.
Defending what crap, UI? I merely pointed out that families of ALL races have fallen apart since the Ozzie & Harriet days. And I am right about that. My reason for it may be debatable, but it has nothing to do with slavery except that it tends to keep the bottom classes peacefully in their place; Yellow, Black, or White.
Delbert, you’re a fool. You basically stated that slave families were better off than families of today. And now that you’ve been called on your shit, you’re trying to walk it back, in typical rethuglican, teabagger fashion.
Right wing republicans want to live in 1850.
I’m trying to figure out which voters this is supposed to appeal to and the first obvious answer is white males, but after that, are there that many soccer moms left in America?
closeted Republican white males,
Family values thrive on family wages.
Anyway… Bachmann may be running a 1990s campaign with the family values grandstanding. The evangelical/family values crowd were successful as Republican shock troops from the late 70s through 2004, from Anita Bryant up until the 2004 Ohio vote, which may have been the last hurrah.
Then the same crowd locked on to the “attacking your opponent’s patriotism” thing for a while.
But national opinions are changing and that approach is less successful and is even backfiring in many areas.
That is why the tea party was created to be the new shock troops, nominally secular and focused on the Constitution and the deficit while downplaying religion, family values, and foreign policy.
The risk is that some key states which were turning away from Republicans on economic issues, may turn back based on this pledge.
Bachmann is a tea party candidate and leader. She gave the tea party’s response to the President’s SOFU address. She’s the leader of the tea party caucus in the House.
Bachmann signing this pledge is just more proof that the tea party isn’t about the Constitution, it’s about social conservatism, and it will eventually just be another republican party protesting abortion and gay rights, legislating morals and fondly remembering how good the slaves had it.
BTW, Rick Santorum has also signed the pledge. As if you’re surprised by this.
do you feel like maybe a mountain is being made out of a molehill here. i see a lot of anger in this article but not very many reasons to be angry
Not a mountain, but certainly not a molehill either. The anger comes from that feeling of being socked in the gut. That’s what it feels like when you have idealistic views about the country we live in; when we give ourselves too much credit for how civilized we are. Personally, I’m no longer an idealist. Still it saddens me. The controversial statements made in the document are uncivilized. The notion that uncivilized views can be held and public statements can be made with frequency and often fervor by often educated and sometimes powerful and/or ambitious people stuns and angers. It should also give us all a healthy fear. The slavery statement is clearly asinine. Slave families were often separated purposely. Those family bonds made slaves feel more strength, human and even civilized. This often interfered with slave master’s ability to maintain control. Another example that interfered was the ability to read and write (sometimes slave owners couldn’t do that or not very well.)Whether or not homosexuality is a choice or not, it is clear that many if not all don’t feel that it is. If one cannot see a choice in a matter it is essentially the same as not having one. And, the banning of all forms of pornagraphy is not constitutional. Whether or not we find any merit in it or no matter how much detriment we see there, this is America and the Constitution allows it.
Don’t worry. Newt Gingrich has offered his editorial services to Bob Vanderplatt to fix the oath. You can’t make this shit up.