Home 2013 races Top Cuccinelli Backer Compares Women’s Health Rights to “Returning Slaves to their...

Top Cuccinelli Backer Compares Women’s Health Rights to “Returning Slaves to their Owners”

100
4
SHARE

From the Democratic Party of Virginia:
  
Richmond, VA – Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is getting big support from anti-women's health group The Susan B. Anthony List and its President Marjorie Danenfelser.
 
The group has pledged $1.5 million to Cuccinelli's gubernatorial campaign and touts him as one of the greatest hopes for their agenda of eliminating a woman's right to make her own health care choices, even in cases of rape, incest and a threat to the woman's health.
 
The enormous benefit Cuccinelli is reaping from running on an agenda so closely aligned with the Susan B. Anthony List's raises the question of whether he agrees with the statements below, made by Dannenfelser during a panel at the Conservative Political Action Conference, where Cuccinelli was a speaker as well. Speaking of the movement to eliminate women's health care rights Dannenfelser said:
 
"We have all the ingredients of the child labor movement success, the suffrage success, the abolitionist success. We have all the elements. There's one thing that could be missing, and it has been, and that's a champion. We must have a champion on the national level that communicates this. I think we're actually watching that happen.
 
"But at the point . there's a point when you become culpable in the killing of other people, because of what the government is making you do. And that is one of those tipping point moments-tipping point moments. It happened in slavery when slaves had to be returned to their masters. When we-when our hands are bloodied by this, it becomes a whole 'nother thing."
 

Democratic Party of Virginia Executive Director Lauren Harmon responded to these remarks saying, "Ken Cuccinelli should condemn his backer's ridiculous and offensive comparison of a woman's constitutional right to make her own health care choices with the atrocious institution of slavery. Virginians need to know that, despite his close ties to this radical organization, Cuccinelli rejects this awful rhetoric. He should condemn it today."
 
Several minutes after making her outrageous comments, Dannenfelser reiterated her strong support for Cuccinelli's campaign, saying, "I've heard people talking about the governor's race in Virginia and we feel that's the first step and a template for what we do in midterm elections. We need to get it right, we need to show not only how well a candidate can do in articulating the issue, but also how advantageous it will be in the outcome in making sure that those votes don't leave the table."

  • One of the most extreme, tinfoil-hat-wearing, far-right-wing politicians in Virginia, Michael Farris, has endorsed Pete Snyder for Lieutenant Governor. This really says it all about Snyder. Here’s a bit of background on Farris:

    In 1993, Farris ran unsuccessfully for Lieutenant Governor of Virginia and was defeated by Democrat Don Beyer 54%-46%. However, fellow Republicans George Allen and James Gilmore were elected on the same ballot as Governor and Attorney General, respectively. Farris’ close connection to conservative leaders like Jerry Falwell of the Moral Majority, Pat Robertson of the Christian Coalition and Phyllis Schlafly of the Eagle Forum, as well as his adherence to the Quiverfull movement[1][5] stirred deep-seated feelings about religion and politics. These concerns inflamed by negative ads by Beyer to portray him even more radically, likely caused alienation of enough moderate voters to lose him the election.[6] Prominent Virginia Republicans like U.S. Senator John Warner supported Beyer ahead of Farris.

    Farris was the founder and chairman of the Madison Project, a political action committee. He is also the founder of Generation Joshua, an organization for the mobilization of Christian youth to participate in politics and get out the vote. In 2007, he founded ParentalRights.org, a parental rights advocacy group.

    Farris was featured on CNN‘s Anderson Cooper 360° on December 7, 2012 as a leading opponent of U.S. ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, modeled after the Americans with Disabilities Act. The treaty, already ratified by 126 countries, encourages other nations to give people with disabilities the same protections they have in the United States.[7] Despite strong support from groups such as Veterans of Foreign Wars and the Vietnam Veterans of America, the treaty failed on December 4 to garner the two-thirds vote in Congress necessary for ratification, largely because of opposition from HSLDA and Heritage Action for America.[8][9] Host Anderson Cooper noted that during the campaign against the treaty, Farris stirred opposition by making the questionable claim that U.S. ratification could give the UN control over American children who wore eyeglasses.

    During the CNN broadcast,[10] Cooper played a segment of a radio interview in which Farris said: “The definition of disability is not defined in the treaty, and so my kid wears glasses; now they’re disabled; now the UN gets control over them.”[11] Farris had made the statement during an interview on Today’s Issues, a radio program of the American Family Association.

  • NotJohnSMosby

    Republicans believe that they can kill several birds with one stone with this new strategy, which is to represent the pro-life movement as a “civil rights movement”.  Civil rights for zygotes, basically.  

    They feel that if they claim the mantle of “civil rights”, then more people will support it.  You can’t be against civil rights, can you?  Especially a Democrat?  If you are a Dem who supports civil rights, then you must support civil rights for the youngest people, which are zygotes.  Right?  So, they attempt to link in the civil rights struggle for blacks as an attempt to link abortion to slavery or the women’s suffrage movement.  Whatever it takes to obfuscate the truth.

    It’s the latest attempt to deflect the fact that being “pro-life” is a function of a particular religion, and nothing else.  They’ve basically lost the argument from a religious viewpoint.  They never had a leg to stand on from a medical standpoint, although they still constantly say that zygotes and fetuses feel pain and are aware of their impending “death”.  

    So, the new angle is “civil rights”.  It’s laughable, but the most cynical of the Republican bunch are claiming it’s their reason for opposing abortion.