Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Dunedan
I'm curious, and this is a genuine question.
Much has been made of Mrs. Palin's beliefs in regard to matters sexual and religious. I recall in particular, an incident in which she was accused of having asked a librarian about the possibility of banning certain books. In initial reports, it was made to seem as if she'd wanted to ban the books in question. In the end, it emerged that she had no such designs in mind and, far from firing the librarian or causing her to resign, Mrs. Palin actually gave her a raise when the librarian in question categorically shot down such a book-banning scheme. Furthermore, Mrs. Palin is opposed to gay marriage, yet adamently refused to sign a ban on such when it was presented to her as Govorner, saying it was within neither her power, not that of the State of Alaska, to forbid two people from entering into a contract (which is a Constitutionally-protected Right).
Read that again: even though she opposed gay marriage on principle, she refused to outlaw it because it was not within her legal power to do so.
I have yet to see it cited (and please feel free to correct me if I am wrong) that Mrs. Palin wants AO taught as the legally-mandated and required type of Sex Ed. I -have- seen a lot of Mrs. Palin's personal opinions willfully and dishonestly, even after repeated debunking, presented as policy stances (gay marriage being the most obvious instance).
So: Has Mrs. Palin ever said, in her unmistakable and quite unequivocal manner, that AO is what should be mandated by law?
Yes or no, with citations, will do.
|
You are misleading and distorting her record. Gay marriage was and is illegal in Alaska since a 1998 amendment to to the AK constitution. So she did not veto any bans on gay marriage, and they are still in place. What happened is that, after that, legal precedent in AK said that a person is entitle to spousal benefits even without being married. As such, benefits were being given to gay couples. The legislation that Palin vetoed would have blocked same sex couples from receiving these benefits. Now, did she really think she didnt have the power to define marriage? No. She vetoed that legislation because the AK SUPREME COURT said that particular bill was unconstitutional.
Alaska Politics Blog : Palin vetoes HB 4001 | adn.com
In fact, she even signed a bill that would put forth an amendment to the AK constitution that would ban those benefits as a way of getting around the AK supreme court.
In fact, the note that accompanied her veto explicitly said that "The Governor's veto does not signal any change or modification to her disagreement with the action and order by the Alaska Supreme Court."
AP falsely suggests Palin supports benefits for same-sex partners of state employees | Media Matters for America
(the original note has since been taken down from the governor's website, so you will have to settle for a media matters quote. you can take parts of it and google it to see that it is confirmed elsewhere that that is real)
So to put her veto as principled or anything of the sort is misleading. I don't think that accepting a Supreme Court decision is notable in any way.
As far as the librarian, you are also misleading when you say she was "far from firing" her.
Palin pressured Wasilla librarian: Former Gov. Sarah Palin | adn.com
Palin did send her a letter saying she would be fired, and she was only kept on because of public pressure.
As far abstinence, Alaska is one of 22 states that offers sex ed but stresses abstinence:
http://www.kff.org/youthhivstds/uplo...d-Politics.pdf
And she explicitly said in an Eagle forum questionnaire that she supported abstinence only education:
Inside Opinion : Palin's responses to Eagle Forum questionnaire | adn.com
"3. Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?
Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support."