Democrats Finally Embrace the Bible, Shut Out the Woman, and Repeat History

By Erick Posted in | | Comments (12) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

While I feel a bit of pity, mixed with glee, at the tragic fate of Hillary Clinton, I think the Democrats should be applauded for following the Bible. "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent," the Bible teaches in 1 Timothy 2:11-12. Likewise, the next chapter makes clear that overseers, or leaders, should be men, not women.

The Democrats have taken to the Bible.

Of course, in the history of this country, women have always taken it on the chin in favor of not just the man, but the black man. We could not expect the Democrats to defy history.

We would do well to remember that women were on the verge of getting the right to vote before the Civil War, but the war interrupted the movement. Women sat by patiently for the end of the war.

1870 looked promising. The nation had before it the 15th amendment giving all citizens the right to vote. Except the amendment decided to make citizens and voters equal to men only. The women's movement protested and fought, but they were outmaneuvered by an eloquent black man named Frederick Douglass.

And black men won the vote leaving all women out in the cold.

In 1914, things looked very promising. In 1916, Jeannette Rankin of Montana became the first woman elected to the congress. But then war broke out. From 1918 to 1920, women again sat on the sidelines while the men took care of business.

In 1920, women got the right to vote. Fast forward to 2007. Hillary Clinton was set to become the first woman elected President of the United States, finally capping the long struggle for equal rights. Though deeply unpopular with a lot of the country, people were still willing to vote for her for President. Of course, students of the women's movement should have seen it coming, but they didn't.

An eloquent black man came on to the scene and talked people out of a giant leap for womankind. And just as it happened so often in this country, yet again women's hopes have been crushed. I await the feminists new strategy of scrapping affirmative action, except for women.

Ladies, back to the kitchen please. Mr. Obama is hungry.


« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims?Comments (2) | Obamomentum - End-of-the-Primaries EditionComments (15) »
Democrats Finally Embrace the Bible, Shut Out the Woman, and Repeat History 12 Comments (0 topical, 12 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

This seems to be blatant race/gender baiting.

The first women's rights convention meets in 1848, and they were on the verge of getting the right to vote by 1860? Your one source doesn't support that statement.

Also, Frederick Douglass was a vocal supporter of women's rights; he attended that first convention and several following, and was respected by the women's rights movement. Susan B Anthony called him a "women's rights pioneer" in 1888, although she disagreed with his support of the 15th Amendment back in 1870.

If you are attempting to compare Obama to Douglass in order to make the case that this is a repetition of history and so women should not support him, you might have made a comparison that wouldn't treat Obama so favorably.

Am I being serious, or am I just gleefully rubbing salt into the wounds of the feminist movement?

Fight On!

(1) is, to be blunt, rather idiotic.

Depending on how much was intended as satire, this could be one of the most subtle and oddly brilliant parodies I've read this campaign season, but the response suggests that it was largely unintentional and mostly just a blatant swipe at Hillary supporters.

one week wonder.
Obamabot Troll?
Moby?
Guess? Anyone, anyone, Bueller?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Just a typical, small town, British-American girl...

This reads like something Richard Cohen might have written, if he knew anything about history, and if he wasn't in luuuuuv with Obama.

Shape up.

Sorry, this was supposed to be a reply to the original article, not to SNP.

Obama might need that woman or at least her support to win the election. True.. just as the in the bible, man can't do much without his partner, woman.
Obama is going to have to drum up a lot more supported in Hillary dominated groups, such as blue collar works and Jewish people, if he wants to win the general election.

http://www.greenfaucet.com/hanlons-pub/aipac-speech-highlights-a-big-oba...

either that, or just take her on as his running mate- a highly unlikely scenario

Just a typical, small town, British-American girl...

it was the civil rights movement that perpetuated gender discrimination, white men had nothing to do with it, and black women obviously don't exist. McCain might remember this since I think he was about 30 in 1870.

family

She kept them in that church.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service