Abstinence-Only Education is Hilarious!

Been reading the Abstinence Clearinghouse blog and need a little humor to cleanse the pallet? Go watch this Daily Show clip over at Feministing!!

Love it.

The response to my post about Hillary Clinton continues, though I don't always catch it immediately.

In a dictionary or psychological manual somewhere, this post is being used to define passive-aggressive behavior. I guarantee it.

Just to make this clear

Corey at Black Marks on Wood Pulp, an Obama supporter, has this to say about the Democratic primary:

I’ve wondered aloud many times why someone would vote for anyone [other than Obama]. Why someone would choose the politics as usual approach of those other two viable candidates. How someone could listen to his speeches, dissect his stands and compare them with their own values and not be swayed.

I see this attitude pretty often among Obama people, so I thought I would take a moment to explain why I'm voting for Hillary Clinton, particularly now that the primary is sneaking up on us.

I think she's the best candidate. She has a track record of working hard to make concrete improvements in people lives. She doesn't just talk about universal health care; she's the only candidate left who has a universal health plan on the table. (Elizabeth Edwards will be touring North Carolina with her because of this.) Hillary Clinton has been working on this issue for almost as long as she's been in the national spotlight, she still thinks it's important, and she's still willing to fight for it. Her plan for the home foreclosure crisis is by far the most interesting one out there. I never, ever wonder where she stands on women's issues and LGBT issues, and, furthermore, I'm confident that she will be willing to spend political capital as president to advance issues that are important to women and LGBT people. She's a critic of corporate agriculture, and her proposals for green collar jobs will expand economic opportunities for rural Americans, as well as residents of the old industrial centers of the East and Midwest. She's proven herself to be whip smart, an incredibly hard worker, and someone who doesn't shy away from the tough issues. I was lucky enough to see her speak when she was in my city a few weeks ago, and the bulk of her time was spent taking unscripted questions from the audience, something very few politicians are willing to do in 2008. After the event, she stayed behind, shaking hands, taking photos, autographing, and talking to voters one-on-one. I've heard all of the candidates speak, I've read their stances on the issues, and I've determined that Hillary Clinton's proposals most closely match my values.

Those are just a few of the reasons why I'll be voting for her in June.

And, Corey, Cory, Todd, and the others - you'll notice I said all of this without making disparaging remarks about Barack Obama or the people who support him. You might want to try that sometime.

Organsm? Anyone?

Apparently Dakota Values says there's 'proof' that life really does begin at conception. But, I'm confused: what's an "ORGANSM?"

A South Dakota Pragmatist

It's pretty rare for me to really like a letter to the editor on either side of the abortion debate. Generally, it seems to be recycled campaign language or the same tired arguments that do nothing to move anyone on the greater issue. When I read the recent letter in the Argus Leader from Jack H. Mueller from Chamberlain, however, I was refreshed that someone (whose name I don't recognize, even) had such an intelligent perspective. I thought I'd make it easy and post the whole thing. Read on. It's a great letter.

And in the comment section, note that Voices Carry weighs in. Man, I think I outta switch jobs to 'pastor' and then I can just sit around all day and blog my little heart out! Also, thanks jwede. Your comment was a hilarious virtual Leslee slap. Enjoyed.

Some concepts and questions need discussion before South Dakota is forced onto the slippery slope of criminalizing abortions.

Let's say some girl or woman you know gets pregnant. She finds paraphernalia and instructions on abortion on the Internet. She ends up bleeding in an emergency room, only to be arrested because the hospital was required by law to summon the police. She ends up in court along with any accomplices.

Who will be allowed to serve on the jury? Will the jury pool be asked, "Has anyone here ever had an abortion?" Will someone who protested or recorded license plate numbers at an abortion clinic be seated? Will pro-choice and pro-life organizations be subpoenaed for their membership lists? Will verdicts be overturned because jurors did not disclose their prejudices? Will the news media pounce?

Look at the myriad of laws against other crimes and know that similar variations will follow, pushed by those whose obsession is prohibition. Just like the government, the pro-life organizers still will need to justify their existence and jobs. And they'll be stirred up by the next wave waiting in the wings: the anti-contraceptive lobby.

That is the nature of government. Pass one prohibition law. Then every year the Legislature inevitably will be passing more laws, trying to tie up every loose end.

More laws. More investigations. More court cases. More penalties. More personal information on the Internet to follow people the rest of their lives.Where are the taxes going to come from? You.

Remember, the government is broke and needs your money.

"A can of worms" doesn't begin to describe this.

Grab Your Garlic, SD Media

The Vote Yes zealots are back…and they seem to have a beef with the media.

Voices Carry has posted a painfully long video from last Sunday’s Celebration Party. And when I say “painfully,” I mean it. This sucker’s 24 minutes long. Save yourself the time and if you’re in a crunch, skip down to my “Hilarity Awards” for the gems. Obviously the video is a cornucopia of crazy (per usual), but this whole media-hating situation has me interested...and perhaps a little concerned.

Leslee Unruh (I mean, who else?) to the audience:

And tomorrow if the South Dakota media does what they should
do, in all the newspapers across South Dakota, they’ll show your face, not mine.
So if you see my face, you’ll know that’s not the way this was supposed to
go. [...] We didn’t want the media to focus on my face or the campaign
people’s face. We want them to focus on who made it happen…and that was
you.

The next day on the Vote Yes Prayer Blog:

Please ask for prayer that fairness be given to this campaign by
everyone in the media. KELOLAND was not fair when they gave us hardly any
coverage of the celebration last Sunday. Also, today SD PUBLIC RADIO set up
an interview with Dr. Allen Unruh and a representative from the other side and didn’t get Dr. Unruh on the program until the other person had been on for almost 5 minutes.

So, I guess the media better watch out, because VY seems to have a strange vendetta here. I’m not sure what they’re trying to do, but whatever it is, the media IS NOT cooperating. My advice would be to load up on garlic and earplugs. (I guess you can skip the earplugs if it’s red-tape-over-the-mouth day.) You hear that, Lou Raguse? Run while you can!


The Hilary Awards
1. Did they have a live trumpeter? Really?
2. Allen’s tangent about their “volunteer army,” saying “we didn’t pay people to get petitions” yet minutes later, they welcome the “staff” of the campaign. Staff? Otherwise known as EMPLOYEES? Also, most of the other people are pastors or Alpha Center/Alive/Fleet for Little Feet/Abstinence Clearinghouse folk, so let’s be honest: technically they’re on the payroll.
3. Allen Unruh tells opponents like myself “You can just go take a nap,” rambling on about how completely UNTIRED the Vote Yes camp is. Leslee later says that before their campaign kickoff, everyone needs to rest. But I thought you all weren’t tired? Which one is it?
4. Leslee admits she’s hard to work with. Yikes, I’ll bet!
5. Leslee says how she’s opened a new bank account, oh my bad, I mean “chapter” of her life.


Finally: The Vote Yes team talks a couple of times about the tactics they employed while gathering petition signatures. Asking “Do you like killing babies?” or “Do you like babies?” is hardly allowing an opportunity for anyone to comfortably decline. I’ll expect that 50% of those signatures came from pro-choice individuals. Next time, don’t stand glossy-eyed, have a baby in your arms (nice touch at the event though, Les) and intimidate people into doing something that they don’t believe is right.

Who Decides What South Dakota Is?

Not too long ago, Dakota War College reported that according to Coastal filmmakers, Iowa makes a better South Dakota the South Dakota does. Not surprisingly, New Yorkers don't think we're idyllic enough. While I might normally just assume this is another example of lame Coastal elitism and ignorance, but it looks like their might be a little more to the story. The movie claims to "addresses the many sides of the abortion issue without judgment," which honestly always seems like a big red flag to me. Especially when the producer is apparently a contributer to the Sam Brownback campaign (so much for those Hollywood liberals). This post also raises some questions about where this dude might be coming from.

This is another exciting phenomenon that seems to go hand-in-hand with the attention that comes with our high profile role in the abortion battle: outsiders (journalists, filmmakers, etc.) that feel like they understand the essence of South Dakota better than we do, and that they can use us to push whatever crazy agenda they have. Man, I cannot wait for seven more months of this crap.