Monday, September 08, 2008


In my humble (I have no children and have never served) opinion, the reason why the arguments that Gov. Palin should be at home are all wrong is this:

When one is called to "serve," then sacrifices are demanded of both the individual and the family.

Whether a call to arms, a call to ministry or a call to political service (especially high office), then one is required to serve to the detriment of the immediate family for the good of the nation. This is different from a person who decides on a career that deprives family for the sake of the dollar though I certainly have no understanding of Gov. Palin's motives...they could be ill indeed.

I mean this whatever one's political persuasion (to the extent any of my right- sided brethren have denounced men or women for the same, shame on them).


Stephanie said...

Help me out, Scooter. I'm not quite following. I know what you're saying that some vocations require putting service above family. And I think you're saying we should or typically do recognize that as a noble sacrifice. Are you then saying that some people fail to see Palin's choice as noble, when we see it as noble when others make the sacrifice, and that's what's not fair?

BTW, I haven't really heard people saying Gov. Palin should stay home. I do hear/read resentment that she's trading on credentials of being Supermom when we have no idea whether she is a super mom and there's some evidence that she may not be.

Scooter said...

You're exactly right about my position. We copuld argue if you want that a VP nomination is noble vis a vis family, but I can't. To me that's clear.

There have been attacks that she should "stay home." Your not knowing about them is a credit to your sources. If they aren't making that attack then good for them.

Any supermom arguments...fair game.

Anonymous said...

Not original, but where was the outrage over RFK running? Or was it ok bc he had so much money?