The flaw in the argument
Bookworm on Sep 11 2008 at 1:34 pm | Filed under: Abortion, Sarah Palin
James Taranto puts his finger on something that’s been bugging me about the malevolent attacks leveled against Sarah Palin for choosing to have, rather than to abort, Trig. After citing to three such attacks, he has this to say:
This is worse than tasteless or even unhinged. It is depraved. It represents an inversion of any reasonable conception of right and wrong, including liberal conceptions.
Fowler uses Palin’s motherhood to disparage her accomplishments, an obvious betrayal of the principle of women’s equality. And although proponents of permissive abortion laws nearly always claim to support not abortion but “a woman’s right to choose,” here we have three of them rebuking Palin for choosing not to abort her baby.
He has other excellent arguments attacking these varous points these liberal luminaries make, but this is the one that strikes me most strongly, because I’ve been aware of the huge flaw in their reasoning, but unable to articulate the problem. Taranto, thankfully, did it for me.
Related posts:
- A beautiful argument exposing the fraud of identity politics
- A perfect bootstrap argument
- Worst argument of the week award
Email This Post To A Friend
8 Responses to “The flaw in the argument”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Good piece!
For the past two weeks, every day has brought a new low. At times, I have had to turn off the computer, TV, or radio and just not be exposed to it because the rumors, claims, and innuendos being made against Palin’s family and personal life are just nauseating. I don’t mind the discussions on her political achievements or short-comings (real or perceived) but the overwhelming majority of the comments have focused on things that should never be part of a discussion, particularly this issue regarding their youngest son. He is a precious soul and as worthy of life as anyone else.
I do realize that all of this works to her and McCain’s favor but still, I’m really ashamed of a lot of folks in America right now.
Deana
Don’t feel low, Deana.
The Palin family is pretty Alaska-tough! And, the more these depraved idiots on the Left rant, the more solidly they ensure Palin’s election, which more and more is beginning to look like a foregone conclusion.
I’ve talked to quite a few people – apoliticals, fence sitters, Democrats and independents here in the Midwest that are listen very quietly and making up their minds to vote for Palin.
Palin’s accent, by the way, is very common up and around these parts.
So, remember…there are lot of really good people out there. A clear majority, in fact.
Governor Palin’s first interview segment has been aired on ABC. (I watched it at someone else’s house…)
My impression is that she did perfectly fine, handling quite tough questions. She showed special political skills in handling Gibson’s question about whether she believed in the Bush Doctrine or not. She sounded him out for exactly what he meant, and answered the question, and most importantly did NOT provide meat for Obama campaign commercials.
For example, she could have said something like “I agree wholeheartedly with the Bush Doctrine as it relates to…” which would have given them the soundbite: “I agree wholeheartedly with the Bush doctrine.” That particular set of questions was quite impressively handled.
I think she was probably nervous, as her trademark humor was nowhere to be seen… Compared to Obama’s endless series of “uh,oh,uh,uh” fumblings and surprising gaffes, Governor Palin’s first non-teleprompter national interview, a tough one, was splendid. Home Run? You decide.
Oops, I also meant to be relevant; other segments of the Gibson interviews will surely cover abortion and childrearing.
Isn’t it interesting that feminists, who originally claimed solely to want the freedom to choose to have an abortion, are actually criticizing Governor Palin because she did NOT? Wow.
And these same feminists, who originally claimed solely to want the freedom to work outside the home, or to be both working woman and homemaker, or just homemaker if desired, now criticize Governor Palin for not staying at home to raise her children. When did the world get turned upside down?
Various bloggers and commenters have said that the liberals have been shocked that conservatives have not criticized Governor Palin for not staying at home to raise her children. Now they are hollering hypocrisy.
They are, unfortunately and as usual, simply out of touch.
I have seen statistics that as of twenty years ago, about 75% to 80% of evangelicals believed that a woman was to stay at home and raise her children. Over these decades, those numbers have been dropping, and dropping, and dropping. I believe that percentage is now sitting at 25% or 30%, if I remember the report correctly.
That’s still a significant voting bloc; and they have been mostly or completely silent lately. Perhaps they too are rethinking their position, as has that huge number over these decades that have switched or simply grown up in this newer world. But I guess I would have expected there to be a FEW evangelical national voices saying, yes, a woman’s place is in the home. But there haven’t been. Does anyone know exactly why?
What with the feminist left angrily demanding that women must stay home to raise their kids, and with the evangelical right being perfectly fine allowing women the freedom to make whatever choice they choose… the world has flipped its axis completely, and the sun will be rising in the West, and setting in the East, from this day forward. Wow. Who would have thought the angry left would end up where they are – trying to force women to stay at home! Pressuring and criticizing them bitterly when they do not. Wow.
Here’s a funny…!
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2008/09/talk-about-politically-incorrect.html
Sarah Palin has ripped the mask off of many pretenders. I hope she is just getting started.
I thought she did well in the interview. She was very cool in the face of an adverserial interviewer. Her ability to string together a thought, and answer a question in understandable sentences far surpasses that of Obama. As to Biden; Gibson would only have had time to ask Biden one question after his resulting solliquy.
Two things bother me. First, it was obviously very heavily edited. When they are editing they can clearly play games with the content; and given Gibson’s condescending attitude I don’t doubt they will. Gibson also misrepresented some facts. Her alleged statement about a “mission from God” being most notable. Since it was not live, I wish she had stopped him right there and cleared up the premise of the question; forced an exact quotation.
Secondly, and it is already happening, the MSM can mischaracterize her answers. Once the false impression is out there it becomes hard to negate. Example: I see multiple leads saying she leaves open the prospect of war with Russia. (She of course was answering a question about a hypothetical attack if were directed at a possible future NATO ally). The Left Wing blogs have taken that and built a big lie out of it.
I have a big hearted, ultra-liberal daughter who works long, long hours. Whatever news she gets comes in snippets provided by MSM and maybe a few left-wing blogs (considering some of her talking points). She buys it hook, line and sinker. The only unbiased truth she gets is from her father (LOL). I am afraid there are a too many people like her.
Here, I always thought NATO was a military alliance. Of *COURSE* if Russia attacked a NATO country, the other countries would be compelled by treaty to intervene.
Then again, we are talking about the EU. Perhaps NATO is now nothing more than a wet paper bag. Perhaps words, signed in holy agreement to protect and defend each other, now mean nothing, and can be safely ignored by the spineless.
I hope NATO still means something. If the lefty bloggers are in a froth, it’s clear that for them, NATO is just a means of, I don’t know, enforcing global warming edicts and trade barriers.
Governor Palin’s answer was perfectly correct.
I don’t mean to hijack the thread, but I want to add a response to Oldflyer’s comment, based on tonight’s Nightline portion of ABC’s Palin interview segments.
Oldflyer said:
“Two things bother me. First, it was obviously very heavily edited. When they are editing they can clearly play games with the content; and given Gibson’s condescending attitude I don’t doubt they will.”
And that is the problem for the mainstream media. They’ve lost our trust.
If you compare the afternoon segment with this Nightline segment, you can see via what is repeated and what is not, just how HEAVY the editing actually was.
And, for me, some of her repeated responses came off differently, based on what was shown. I am not accusing them of slanting – yet – because both response flows were perfectly acceptable to me. But now I have to wonder, what was left out, and why? The Nightline episode is clearly edited as well.
Due to my mistrust, I’m going to have to withhold final judgment until I get to see the entire flow of the interview. I’m very disappointed in ABC for this. I can see segmenting the interview – and showing the entire flow of a segment in its entirety! – but I really am uncomfortable with the heavy editing inter-question.
Disappointing. But Governor Palin held her own! The Nightline portion, with a more complete flow, was even better than the afternoon one.