Friday, August 29, 2008

Sarah Palin for vice president – an inspirational choice

Cranmer is rapturous that Senator McCain has selected Sarah Palin to be his vice presidential candidate, no doubt swayed by the many effectual fervent prayers of the faithful. She is in her mid 40s and really quite beautiful. But it is not for her aesthetic qualities that Cranmer is delighted by the choice (though they help), but because this remarkable women manages to combine having a large family (five children – one with Down’s syndrome) with a successful career, first as Mayor and then as Governor. Her eldest is in the army, and her youngest is still mewling and puking. She can clearly multi-task, being adept at running Alaska, carrying a baby and bringing up a family simultaneously.

And Governor Palin is a Protestant Evangelical Christian. Moreover, she is strongly ‘pro-life’, not like the à la carte Catholic Joe Biden who supports abortion. It will be difficult for any ‘pro-choice’ group to attack her on this, not least because she lives every day with the very real difficulties of bringing up a Down’s child – a child which the vast majority of pro-choicers would have denied the right to life. And not only is she pro-life; she is pro-marriage, hunts, fishes, and enjoys dog sledding and drilling for oil.

While she has an undoubted reputation for reform - indeed, she has been called the American Thatcher - it cannot be ignored that the principal qualities she will bring to the Republican campaign are enhanced by her being a young woman of conviction. She is the very antithesis of the old man of relativity, Joe Biden.

A female Republican VP candidate is every bit as progressive as a the Democrats’ Afro-American presidential candidate. Both give a nod to the next generation, and both are the embodiment of change. She neutralises the Obama 'minority' narrative, and also neutralises his youth appeal. She is three years younger than Senator Obama but, unlike him, she has executive branch experience: she heads a highly successful state government and maintains personal approval ratings in excess of 80 per cent.

Cranmer is convinced that this will assure John McCain of victory in November. Not least because her candidacy rather trumps Senator Biden’s bid for the Catholic vote, the majority of which went to President Bush in 2004. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

‘Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life...

‘You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish...

‘The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation...

‘Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being...’

So how will Roman Catholics vote?

A few weeks ago, a survey across a broad spectrum of opinion revealed that, for the first time in US history, a majority were of the opinion that churches should stay out of politics. The results suggest a potentially significant shift among conservative voters in particular. In 2004, 30 per cent of conservatives said the church should stay out of politics while today 50 per cent of conservatives today express that view. Conservatives are now more in line with liberals when it comes to their views on mixing religion and politics.

And yet while there is a constitutional requirement for the separation of church and state, there is still a very significant contingent – made up largely of Roman Catholics and Evangelicals - who do not believe in the separation of faith and politics. And since, for the majority of these, the issue of abortion outweighs all others, it is most certain that they will now flock to the McCain-Palin ticket.

Barack who?


Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have to admit that Sarah Palin is pretty hot (remember she was in the Ms. Alaska Pageant) and MUCH BETTER on the eyes than Joe Biden. Oh and wait until you see the "bikini" pictures. Not bad for a mother of 5.

29 August 2008 at 17:06  
Anonymous oiznop said...

'a young woman of conviction' versus 'the old man of relativity'.

Brilliant, Your Grace, brilliant. You should do this for a living.

29 August 2008 at 17:13  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"a child which the vast majority of pro-choicers would have denied the right to life"

I am appalled that you suggest that someone who is pro-choice would have aborted a baby, you make them sound like evil monsters lacking morals.

29 August 2008 at 17:38  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

While a dynamically orthodox Catholic, I find it difficult to vote for the McCain/Palin ticket solely for the abortion issue. Obviously, it's difficult to vote for Obama/Biden as well, but don't we currently have a pro-life president in office now? Yet the law has not changed. The Church, and I are oppossed to the war in Iraq and yet McCain is committed to remaining there as long as possible, which will certainly mean death for many more innocent people. While the issues are different, thy are related. I do not see McCain/Palin as the only option for Catholic, including faithful Catholics. It's a difficult choice.

29 August 2008 at 17:53  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"a child which the vast majority of pro-choicers would have denied the right to life"

What a ludicrously inaccurate caricature of the pro-choice position. Sarah Palin chose to have her child - good for her, and as I am pro-choice I support that choice.

Another woman in the same position who made the difficult decision to have an abortion - I support that choice too. But I wouldn't have advocated either decision - that's the whole point, I am for the woman's right to choose.

Fair enough not to share that position but please don't pretend that pro-choice means cheering at abortions.

29 August 2008 at 17:56  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Why are all the above anonymous (with the gracious exception of Mr Oiznop)?

His Grace does not respond to anonymice.

He is, however, dumbfounded that his suggestion that the majority of pro-choicers would abort a Down's baby is a 'ludicrously inaccurate caricature'.

Can these people not hear the truth? Is this anonymous communicant insisting that the majority of pro-choicers would give birth to a Down's baby? That, surely, is the ludicrous assertion.

If anonymous communicants wish to engage in dialogue, please at least manifest the creativity of spirit to give yourselves a name. 'Colin' is presently available.

29 August 2008 at 18:07  
Anonymous dearieme said...

"don't we currently have a pro-life president in office now? Yet the law has not changed." Tricky; after all, abortion in the US isn't really a matter of law, in the sense of legislation. It's a result of a whim by the Supreme Court, which then affected to find justification in the Constitution, a deceit that presumably fooled no-one.

29 August 2008 at 18:17  
Blogger dizzyfatplonka said...


29 August 2008 at 18:51  
Anonymous Colin said...

Anyone who calls their children Track, Bristol, Willow, Piper and Trig gets my vote.

She is original and genuine. God bless her.

29 August 2008 at 19:20  
Anonymous Bosco said...

I had heard a little about the Gov. of Alaska and how she is really cleaning up the state. But the more I learn about her and the more she speaks, I like her even more. Great choice for VP.
I also feel in these times, the serious issues our nation faces that the main concern STILL seems to be to ensure the right to rid oneself of an unwanted pregnancy. With all of the many, easy, long- term birth control options available today, ie..(NuvaRing, Mirena, (protects for 5 years), the patch etc....... this is a no- brainer. Wake up! If you want to have sex like a grown-up then be grown-up enough accept responibility that comes with having sex and use protection. Those who choose to abort because their child may have Down syndrome and is less than perfect in their eyes, I believe will have to answer to a higher authority, not to me or to our government. Roe vs Wade has not been overturned and I don't think it will be. This is not, nor should it be considered a main issue.

29 August 2008 at 19:27  
Anonymous G Eagle Esq said...

"...[Anon] give yourselves a name. 'Colin' is presently available...."

Your Grace

Tony is peut-etre a little passé

and Kenneth has not met with recent Electoral Favour (err favOr, for your Grace's US Readers), at least outside Venezuela

but What's wrong with George ???

Your Grace's obedient servant etc


29 August 2008 at 19:29  
Anonymous Nothos said...

You seem to gravely misunderstand the thoughts of someone who is pro-choice.

Being pro-choice is not about choosing abortion in every single pregnancy, it's about having the option to do what she wishes with her body and her life.

Someone who is pro-choice is not a monster who would abort a child simply because it will have a disability that might be seen as inconvenient for the parents.

Take myself for example, I am generally pro-choice, I am however vehemently against the current abortion law when it comes to the aspect of abortion on the grounds of disability. I would never abort a child if it were disabled, unless the child would have a terrible quality of life, or whatever was wrong with it would be extremely degenerative.

So I must say that I find your assertions regarding pro-choice supporters not only absurd but rather offensive.

29 August 2008 at 19:38  
Blogger Santiago Chiva de Agustín said...

I think it is a very good choice. If I were an american citizen, I would not hesitate: McCain+Palin. Obama sells smoke. This woman sells facts: married to a man of another race, mother of five children, and a son with Down syndrome.

Santiago, Granada (Spain)

29 August 2008 at 19:45  
Blogger Cranmer said...

I would never abort a child if it were disabled, unless the child would have a terrible quality of life

Mr/Miss/Mrs/Ms Nothos,

Could you please explain to His Grace how you would discern if the child would consider that he or she had a 'terrible quality of life' before he or she could articulate any opinion on his or her own behalf.

His Grace knows many disabled children (dozens, actually), and not one has expressed a view to him that they wish they had never been born (though some of the parents certainly wish to the contrary).

29 August 2008 at 19:47  
Anonymous Christopher Johnson said...

For my part, I find nothing morally admirable at all in "While I'd never terminate the life a Down's Syndrome baby, I support your right to terminate the life of your Down's Syndrome baby if you want to" stance. Of course, the idea has a long pedigree in this country. In the early 1800's, many here applied the same reasoning to owning slaves.

I thank Your Grace for your time.

29 August 2008 at 19:49  
Anonymous Nothos said...

Well your grace, the people you speak of are those are the disabilities which do not affect quality of life, anywhere near enough to warrant killing the foetus, especially late term.

Illnesses such as downs syndrome, cystic fibrosis, cleft palate (and especially odious "justification" for aborting a foestus, I must say), autism or physical disabilities are not, in my mind good enough reasons to abort a foetus.

But say, your grace, if you are informed that the foetus will be born with a degenerative disease which will cause it to have a short and pain filled life, do you not feel that it would be fairer to allow the foetus to not have to suffer that?

And your grace, I feel that you are trying to argue specific points out of context, as the statement you quote was part of an argument against the current abortions laws when it comes to disability which are absolutely deplorable, which I think we can both agree with.

29 August 2008 at 20:01  
Anonymous the recusant said...

Outside of emergency powers the US President cannot change the law on his own behest. It takes congress to make the law and in the case of abortion it is guaranteed under the US constitution and it take the US Supreme Court to Change that.

However the President does have control over financial aid and assistance to foreign and relief agencies including the UN. In this regard President Bush had done just what one would expect from a Pro Life position,

He has withheld funds from United Nations Population Fund for the seventh time since 2002 saying that the organization indirectly supports China in carrying out its one-child policy and thereby assisting in coerced/forced abortions and sterilization. This makes the total amount of U.S. support withheld during the Bush Administration $235 million.

Now if Obama gets in, he will restore this fund to the UN, see comments by Anika Rahman, President of Americans for UNFPA:

“We are already well on our way to ensuring that our next President is knowledgeable about the importance of global women’s health. Together, we stand a good chance of ending the stunning disregard our government has shown the world’s women.”

Efforts are already underway to ensure that FY ’09 State Foreign Operations Appropriations includes restored support for UNFPA.

“Americans for UNFPA is poised to rally our supporters and urge the next Administration to not only fund UNFPA, but also begin to make up for the $235 million withheld since 2002,”.

So Although the USA is the single largest contributor to the UN, ($423,464,855 Ann) closely followed by the UK in Silver ($104,563,268 Ann) well ahead of China, France and Russia.

Who does pay for the UNFPA and what do they spend it on, no prizes Your Grace, it is the UK, in 2007, the UK was one of the funds largest contributors (only exceeded by the EU [who’da guessed]), that’s our tax pounds, and we contribute to the EU we have the honour of paying twice.

From the ‘Report On Contributions By Member States To Regular And Co-Financing Resources For 2008 And Future Years’ UN Document DP/FPA/2008/9.

Table 4: Contributions to UNFPA co-financing resources (2006–2007) as of 31 December 2007 (in millions of $)

Donors 2006 Donors 2007
European Commission 39.0 European Commission 41.8 (#1 Contributor)
United Kingdom 5.5 United Kingdom 24.4 (#2 Contributor)

That’s a percentage increase for the UK contribution (Your going to love this) of 343.63 Percent in one year. Har Hady Har Har the lunatics have taken over the asylum!

Table 6: Co-financing contributions received for the thematic fund for reproductive health commodity security (2006–2007) as of 31 December 2007 (in millions of $)
Donors 2007
United Kingdom 9.8 (#1 Contributor)
(Spain 6.7, Netherlands 6.0, Canada 2.2, Ireland 1.4, Luxembourg 0.6)

While some of the money spent is on worthy projects Gordon Brown is not so forth coming on why he is raising our taxes year on year when it is spent in other more PC areas. You won’t get this on the BBC or in the Guardian/Independent

United Kingdom - Bangladesh - Advocacy on Reproductive Health & Gender Issues through the Training Institute of Ministry of Home Affairs $326,907.50

United Kingdom - Nicaragua - Joint Fund for Gender Equity and Sexual Reproductive Rights $196,463.65

And the list goes on…

The sad fact is if the Tories get in next they will not change one iota of our contributions either to the EU or the UN.

What is a dynamically orthodox Catholic anyway?

29 August 2008 at 20:26  
Anonymous Iohannes said...

Your Grace,

Many thanks for your commentary. A question still bothers me about the Republican ticket, to wit, Is the family wholesomeness Mrs. Palin brings to the ticket adequate to offset the rather unwholesome family record of Mr. McCain? Would not the Church of England historically have frowned at the circumstances of Mr. McCain's second marriage?

29 August 2008 at 20:27  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

29 August 2008 at 22:13  
Blogger Justin Hinchcliffe said...

Your Grace, a brilliant post and I agree with it.

What I don't understand, though, is when you say that Governor Palin is 'pro-family'. I hope you would agree that gay men and women are in families - as, for example, brothers, sisters, dads, mothers, uncles, aunts etc? In that sense we are all pro-family. I hope she - and you - recognise the roles of gays within the family structures?

PS. Have you read ?

God bless you.


29 August 2008 at 22:43  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Hinchcliffe,

You are most welcome to His Grace's blog of intelligent and erudite comment upon matters religio-political.

From what His Grace has read, he wholly accords with Governor Palin on this matter. And on the question of families, he awaits the day when the amendment proposed by Cheryl Gillan MP to the Civil Partnership Bill enters the Statute Book.

29 August 2008 at 22:50  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This news is awesome! It will get so many more voters out this year as well now! McCain and Palin ticket in 2008 is where the vote is at!!!

30 August 2008 at 03:18  
Anonymous taylor said...

If you are a practicing catholic, although there are many issues raised in this election, we have been called by the church to vote for those pro-life, for the most important issue in our time as a Catholic is to protect innocent life.

30 August 2008 at 04:02  
Anonymous USpace said...

Very well said Your Grace! Even more Hillary supporters will go for McCain now. Obama is no longer a near certainty.


Heaven forbid something happens to McCain, but I believe Palin would rise to the occasion. She has the right attitude. Everyone knows Obama is NOT ready for POTUS, Palin is only for the VP. Look at Dan Quayle.

YEY SARAH PALIN! YEY John McCain! Great pick! The 1st woman for the GOP VP? SCORE!

She's conservative! SCORE! She's a Governor! SCORE! She's pro-drilling! She's a hunter! SCORE! She played hockey in school! SCORE! She's pro-life! And she respects women! SCORE! She fights corruption! SCORE! She's high-energy! SCORE! She's tough! SCORE! She's got 5 kids! SCORE! Her son is going to Iraq in the Armed Forces! SCORE! She's married to a Blue-collar professional! SCORE! She's smart! SCORE! She's young! SCORE!

And she's a Hotty to boot! SCORE! The Left is going to go nuts! SCORE!
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
never elect a woman

who's a conservative
she's just a gender traitor

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
just HOPE to pay more taxes

DREAM about high fuel prices
CHANGE PROGRESS to move backwards

All real freedom starts with freedom of speech. Without freedom of speech, there can be no real freedom.
Philosophy of Liberty Cartoon
Help Halt Terrorism Today!


30 August 2008 at 05:40  
Anonymous tiberswimmer said...

Your Grace, would one of your 'pro-choice' communicants be so kind as to explain why, if abortion is morally acceptable, the making of the decision to have one is so often described as being 'hard'.

30 August 2008 at 08:09  
Blogger mckenzie said...

The very word 'Pro-choice' sickens me, and is indicative of the depraved and narcissistic personality which formulates such words.

30 August 2008 at 08:42  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In defence of anonymouse your grace , Is your name really Cranmer?

30 August 2008 at 12:28  
Anonymous Terry said...

whie justin hinchcliffe may be a superb bloke to go out and have a drink with, we have to be very kind but forthright in rejecting the idea he puts forward - basically rewriting family to include homosexual couples. A family is the traditional heterostructure whereby a male and female produce children in the ordinary way - ideally married, but the fact is that unmarrieds do naturally produce familes - homsoexual couples are only families in the sense that someone (rather than the natural way of things) has decided they are

30 August 2008 at 14:14  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This race is about good vs Evil. Obama is evil he is a hater and wants to destroy the USA. He voted for all abortion bills this man is the most dangerous threat to the USA. We must stop Obama.

30 August 2008 at 15:50  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was brought up as a Catholic, abandoned the ancient faith that is so out of touch with modern times, had 3 abortions, and am very proud of not bringing unwanted children into the world. How many of you have adopted unwanted children? There are plenty of all ages, races, and disabilities available. I am a stauch supporter of a woman's right to control her own body and fate, no matter how late in pregnancy, no matter the consequences. Palin makes me sick.

30 August 2008 at 18:15  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Using abortion as a means of birth control is a very sad state of affairs to say the least!

30 August 2008 at 18:21  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So you are proud of having murder 3 of your unborn children and your approve to kill the unborn at any stage you are sick person may god have mercy on your soul some day.

30 August 2008 at 18:24  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This says it all:

30 August 2008 at 18:34  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What about rights of the unborn child?
This must be the ultimate denial of human rights,to be snuffed out in the womb.

30 August 2008 at 18:42  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A fetus is not a person

30 August 2008 at 19:37  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

a fetus is an impersonal term for a human being.
You were a fetus once! your life was treated with a little more respect!

30 August 2008 at 20:16  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm sorry, she's YOUNG? I was expecting someone, er, younger than middle-aged.

30 August 2008 at 23:32  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you really want another 4 years of George Bush - his failed policies, his war mongering, his non-diplomacy, his disregard for justice and decency, etc etc?????

31 August 2008 at 05:28  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Addressing the dynamically orthodox Catholic anonymous can there be a comparison to the thousands of babies killed every single day..going on now for decades to the deaths in Iraq? I mean, if you don't have the right to even make it into this world safely, all other rights in this world can't even get on the radar for that poor soul..

31 August 2008 at 12:41  
Blogger Chalcedon said...

Palin was a brilliant choice. Catholic women will vote for her. The Chipster will become president.

31 August 2008 at 18:05  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


This female reminds me of my EX wife. Which please believe me, if she is anything like her in personality and the republican candidate wins, is about the worst news imaginable.

Unless you believe that having a vice president of the US of A, more suited to pouring poison gas into pretend shower facilities, while dressed in a military uniform and sporting a waistband of shrunken human heads, is not as bad as it may appear to be. Please feel free to PANIC.

Needless to say my ex wife was also a highly qualified social worker, strident atheist, owner of a very large superiority complex, and so therefore a life time committed socialist.

A marriage made in heaven NOT.


31 August 2008 at 23:29  
Blogger veggiedude said...

She is not qualified.

Gavin Newsom is the Mayor of San Francisco. He governs a city that has 200,000 more people than the State of Alaska. That should put things into perspective.

McCain has never been a mayor or a governor. Does that make him less qualified than Palin?

Nonsense. Like McCain, Obama was a state Senator.

Qualifications of Obama:

Why you can't vote for McCain:

1 September 2008 at 13:05  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Joe Biden isn’t nearly as bad a pick as Sarah Palin…..She’s so conservative she thinks that birth control is killing the child. She’s Anti-Condom….That explains the 43 year old pregnancy that lead to a down syndrome baby (Common among later births)…I wonder if she’s against masturbation because technically you could be killing children that way too.

Oh yeah and her 17 year old daughter is 5 months pregnant. Good parenting and good job putting your child on birth control! Go Camp Mccain! That stuff was common a generation or two ago and has no excuse for our generation, unless you are oblivious to a 17 year old wanting to have sex. We all know teenagers never want to have sex.

A republican ticket with a leading republican being a divorcee and his running mate with a 17 year old daughter, 5 months pregnant soon to be in a shot gun wedding.

I’ll vote the republican ticket for their high family values.

“Does anyone in this party know how to pull out?” - Mahr

1 September 2008 at 20:15  
OpenID frogcatcher912 said...

Sarah Palin gave birth to a baby with Down's Syndrome at the age of 44.

Is anyone else appalled at this?

The risk of giving birth to a baby with Down's Syndrome is extremely high in women over 40 (and even higher when the father is also over 40).

Sarah Palin "opposes the use of birth control pills and condoms even among married couples".

I am disgusted by this irresponsible behaviour. To give birth at age 44 to a baby with Down's because you refuse to use birth control inexcusable. Ignoring the dangers that you expose yourself and your baby to by refusing to use birth control after 40 is negligent and careless. To believe that a woman like this has the opportunity to become Vice President of the United States of America in 2008 makes me ill.

Does anyone else share this opinion?

2 September 2008 at 03:56  
Blogger Adrian said...

Ms Palin is hypocritical (anti teen sex and anti sex education) and irresponsible (unprotected sex in mid-40s). Are these high on your list of virtues, your grace?

4 September 2008 at 02:34  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think it is horribly irresponsible to have 5 children in the first place, to have a child that late in life with the high risk of problems when they already have 4 children, and to have a Down's syndrome child when it could have been prevented. I also think it is horribly irresponsible to consider being VP with a special needs child. Who will care for that child? Who will take him to the countless doctor visits, hospital stays, therapy, etc that he will need? Not the oldest daughter, who will be saddled with her own bundle of joy. Not the father 24 hours a day as he works. The child obviously will need lots of care. Right now per all the tv coverage, we have seen that the baby is not near normal, appears to have a bad case of Down's. I too am totally disgusted with Palin's behavior and what she has done to her children. She is a terrible role model. And all this besides her stands on gun controls, the environment, energy/oil, etc etc

4 September 2008 at 06:34  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is worth reading:

4 September 2008 at 07:30  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the sad part about those many who profess to be Christians is they dont take God seriously. Read the book and you will discover God clearly is against the pagans who were killing their children. Is it any different than abortion? God said to Jeremiah "before i formed you in the womb i knew you and appointed you a prophet to the nations." God knows each person before they were conceived! Each one is valuable to Him. Do those who profess to represent Christ really heed His words? Do you not see God comes not only against a person but against a nation for their unrighteousness. Its not only the person breaking His laws, its a nation as a whole who will suffer because God Himself determines the times, nations and boundaries. In case anyone thinks they are in control, think again! He is the One in control and time is ticking because we are in the last days. Humans dont think you are so in control! Don't wait till the door closes.
Honor God and He will honor your country. Honor Him by doing the right thing. Put Him first.

15 September 2008 at 21:21  
Anonymous saved by grace said...

Mr. Adrian how do you know if she had unprotected sex? You dont know what God's purposes are for bringing this child on the scene. Doctors used to starve these babies to death not too long ago because they didn't see any worth in them. Arent you glad God sees worth in you and your mommy didn't abort you?

15 September 2008 at 21:27  
Anonymous the prophetess said...

oh yes and i am not pro-life catholic. "do not be hearers of the word but doers of the word also. If you wear the title of Christian then you should be in the Kingdom and the Kingdom of God is a theocracy not a democrary. The widegaters are going to have problems entering into the Kingdom. There is a war goign on between good and evil-a spiritual war.

15 September 2008 at 21:33  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older