Tweet
Good luck tossing that around on the campaign trail. We all know the wingers (especially the fundies) love their porn. Do they really want Michele Bachmann to wrest it from their sweaty hands? Via Think Progress:
BREAKING: Bachmann pledges to ban pornography |
Tonight, Michele Bachmann became the first presidential candidate to sign a pledge created by THE FAMiLY LEADER, an influential social-conservative group in Iowa. By signing the pledge Bachmann “vows” to “uphold the institution of marriage as only between one man and one woman” by committing herself to 14 specifics steps. The ninth step calls for the banning of “all forms” of pornography.
Here’s the 14-point pledge… The meat of the laughable mess:
The Candidate Vow:Therefore, in any elected or appointed capacity by which I may have the honor of serving our fellow citizens in these United States, I the undersigned do hereby solemnly vow* to honor and to cherish, to defend and to uphold, the Institution of Marriage as only between one man and one woman. I vow* to do so through my:
* Personal fidelity to my spouse.
* Respect for the marital bonds of others.
* Official fidelity to the U.S. Constitution, supporting the elevation of none but faithful constitutionalists as judges or justices.
* Vigorous opposition to any redefinition of the Institution of Marriage – faithful monogamy between one man and one woman – through statutory-, bureaucratic-, or court-imposed recognition of intimate unions which are bigamous, polygamous, polyandrous, same-sex, etc.
* Recognition of the overwhelming statistical evidence that married people enjoy better health, better sex, longer lives, greater financial stability, and that children raised by a mother and a father together experience better learning, less addiction, less legal trouble, and less extramarital pregnancy.
* Support for prompt reform of uneconomic, anti-marriage aspects of welfare policy, tax policy, and marital/divorce law, and extended “second chance” or “cooling-off” periods for those seeking a “quickie divorce.”
* Earnest, bona fide legal advocacy for the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) at the federal and state levels.
* Steadfast embrace of a federal Marriage Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which protects the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman in all of the United States.
* Humane protection of women and the innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy – our next generation of American children – from human trafficking, sexual slavery, seduction into promiscuity, and all forms of pornography and prostitution, infanticide, abortion and other types of coercion or stolen innocence.
* Support for the enactment of safeguards for all married and unmarried U.S. Military and National Guard personnel, especially our combat troops, from inappropriate same-gender or opposite-gender sexual harassment, adultery or intrusively intimate commingling among attracteds (restrooms, showers, barracks, tents, etc.); plus prompt termination of military policymakers who would expose American wives and daughters to rape or sexual harassment, torture, enslavement or sexual leveraging by the enemy in forward combat roles.
* Rejection of Sharia Islam and all other anti-woman, anti-human rights forms of totalitarian control.
* Recognition that robust childbearing and reproduction is beneficial to U.S. demographic, economic, strategic and actuarial health and security.
* Commitment to downsizing government and the enormous burden upon American families of the USA?s $14.3 trillion public debt, its $77 trillion in unfunded liabilities, its $1.5 trillion federal deficit, and its $3.5 trillion federal budget.
* Fierce defense of the First Amendment?s rights of Religious Liberty and Freedom of Speech22, especially against the intolerance of any who would undermine law-abiding American citizens and institutions of faith and conscience for their adherence to, and defense of, faithful heterosexual monogamy.
While we’re on the subject of Bachmann, get a load of her plan to address poverty:
Bachmann’s Parable For The Poor: Have Faith In God And You Won’t Need Welfare.
BACHMANN: We went from middle class to overnight below poverty. And my mother had to leave the home and get a job…and I had to go out and get babysitting jobs…to help out. … We did not go on dependency programs. And I don’t begrudge anyone who does when I say that, but we didn’t do that. We had our faith in God, we depended on our neighbors, we depended on ourselves, and we just did without. We made do, we did without. [...] And we were just grateful for what we had. We knew that one day things would be better than they were. And God was faithful, and they were better.
31 Comments
Good thing I savedAnthony Weiner’s tweets to my hard drive.
Yeah–good luck with that, MichelleShe might manage to get rid of a good deal of the porn. But I’ll warrant that her husband has his secret stash of Twink porn heavily secured away from her prying eyes!
This nut job makes John McCain look like a big liberal.
Guess we’re rejecting EVERYTHING MB STANDS FOR, then…
LOL. FOREVER.
Oh so contradictory.“Fierce defense of…Freedom of Speech” vs. banning pornography
“Official fidelity to the U.S. Constitution” vs. banning same-sex marriage, among other things.
And I wonder if this wording is deliberately precise: “anti-human rights forms of totalitarian control.” Because, of course, other forms of totalitarian control–like the right wing fundie Christian kind–are fine by “The Family Leader.”
She’s rejecting womb controlling?or restrictions on contraception, including the morning after pill?
So what constitutes Pornography?In the Ireland of my childhood, the anti-pornography laws were expanded to include the works of James Joyce, Ernest Hemingway,steinbeck, the poetry of Sappho and Natalie Barney, and many many more authors and works..
She needs to be questioned on just how far would such a ban go…
Did you notice that she also pledges to reduce women in the military to support roles, secretaties, nurses..the WWI sorts of roles women had?
And not a single word …… not one single word about outlawing divorce, the number one destroyer of traditional marriage in the U.S.
Is it me…“Recognition that robust childbearing and reproduction is beneficial to U.S. demographic, economic, strategic and actuarial health and security.”
Is it me or could this be restated as “we need babies for the fatherland’s armies”
Point 10 is interesting….“…plus prompt termination of military policymakers who would expose American wives and daughters to rape or sexual harassment, torture, enslavement or sexual leveraging by the enemy in forward combat roles.”
In other words, ban women fighter pilots, etc. Michele Bachmann just signed a misogyny pledge.
Bachmann’s Vows To Save Traditional Marriage and Her LifestyleThis idiot needs to add a vow to re-amend the U.S. Constitution to prohibit the making, selling, and consuming of alcoholic beverages. Alcohol addiction in traditional, pretend marriages is the number one reason for family dysfunctions. Her homo, opposite-sex (I think) husband and she need to really hype this re-amendment alcohol prohibition on the campaign trail. If she can regulate alcohol, it’ll reduce the numbers of supposedly str8 men from having same-sex-sex because they were “too drunk” to know better. Alcohol makes str8 men go queer. For traditional marriages to survive, alcohol must be stopped!
Brainwave!Doesn’t it seem a mite odd that this fascist group in Iowa sounds not to dissimilar than the cult of personality surrounding a totalitarian dictatorship from a southeast Asian country bordering China?
So that’s new?Bimbo Bachmann’s no different than that dried-up, shewish hypocrite by the name of Phyllis Shafly and her attempts to shove women back in the kitchen and call it “feminism”.
The irony burns fierceI find it almost funny how an extremist Talibangelical organization makes several points about “respecting women” when their own doctrine holds that women must be fully subservient to the men in their lives. And the only reason they oppose Islamic religious law is because it would make it much more awkward to mandate Christian religious law.
“Strict constitutionalists”? Those would be the ones who are very insistant on the separation of Church and State, and forbidding any religious tests for holding office of public trust in the United States, right?
And what is their problem with polygamy? That is quite biblical, and even Paul makes it clear that monogamy is a requisite only for deacons and bishops.
What idiots.
I didn’t.
I actually find that more interesting and offensive.
I mean face it, railing against the evils of porn is just something these crazy people do. At the end, we don’t think they can or will be able to follow through.
But GEEZ! Women should be forced to subordinate? Truly vile. And actually the kind of attitude that can trickle down.
Michele BachmanShe put the MENTAL in Fundamental!
The suggestionthat Michele has even heard of James Joyce, Natalie Barney and the others strikes as wildly improbable.
But then, I suppose it really doesn’t matter. The Bible is the only book that counts. As an earnest fundamentalist explained to H.L. Mencken during the Scopes trial, if a book differs from what the Bible says it shouldn’t be read. And if what it says is already in the Bible, there’s no need to read it. Who needs books, anyway? All them there fancy words and complicated ideas that actually make people think? That’s Satan’s work.
The states with the heighest pornography consumptionare the deeply religious and/or Republican ones. The more sexually oppressed people are, the more the seek other outlets. You can also see that in Islamic countries.
I always find it amusingwhen women in powerful positions state that women shouldn’t be in powerful positions. When will she resign her Congressional seat and become her man’s little secretary and help meet? This was the same problem the fundies had with Sarah Palin – they want to support a candidate who according to their beliefs shouldn’t be a candidate.
Not all of the bible.She apparently doesn’t think that Matthew 25 counts, and that’s not even in the optional pick-and-choose-to-support-your-prejudices New Testament part of it!
http://videogum.com/330692/mic…
Oops, poor editing.Old testament, not New.
Exactly.She rejects the way women are treated under Sharia law because she wants them treated the same way but under Christian law.
This is beyond irony, shame, or hypocrisy.“strict constitutionalists?
Likre the people that made corporations people with free speech and pay-as-you-go rights??
and this one: “especially against the intolerance of any who would undermine law-abiding American citizens and institutions of faith and conscience for their adherence to, and defense of, faithful heterosexual monogamy.
I just don’t understand how gay people have anything to do with faithful heterosexual monogamy, seeing as heterosexuals don’t have much to do with it, either.
They really don’t seem to like Matthew…Michele Bachmann Overdrive seems to have the popular dominionist edition of the Bible which excises the sixth chapter of the Gospel of Matthew…
“We need white Christian babies”is actually the intent
I didn’t see that in the pledgeWhere did you find it?
It’s not just the BibleIt’s whatever a particular (mis)translation she holds dear and all the rest can go hang.
And they also have high divorce rates
This line to “defend” women actually reduces women to secretarial and cleaning roles
Under this pledge, I would nave never had an at-sea commandand I am more than a bit pissed at the arrogance of another woman who would commit herself to blocking the women after me from the opportunity..
Santorum has signed the PledgeI would imagine that Pawlenty will be next.
Every woman who ever served on the armed forces is placed on notice that her service to the country is not respected by the republican party.
* Respect for the marital bonds of others.Does that include same sex marriages from where it’s legal, or will they just pretend those don’t count?