This guy wants to run our country, yet he can't figure out that abstinence-only education = higher teen pregnancy and abortion rates. Yeeaaahhhhh.....he's what we need, all right...
if we want to become a third world nation!!!
As someone who didn't find the sexism in the Newsweek cover photo flap, I believe there is no doubt that the reason York only questioned Bachmann on submission had everything to do with her gender.
York's question was: "In 2006, when you were running for Congress, you described a moment in your life when your husband said you should study for a degree in tax law. You said you hated the idea. And then you explained, "But the Lord said, 'Be submissive. Wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands.' "
"As president, would you be submissive to your husband?"Yes, Ronny, it is a question of gender! This question would not be posed to a male evangelical candidate. Why? Because the bible doesn't instruct husbands to be submissive to their wives. Nucklehead!!! He goes on to say,
When we look at many of the vital issues facing this country -- a rough economy, massive unemployment, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a continuing battle against terrorism, a fierce climate change debate, and a battle to get the nation's debt under control -- who in their right mind would waste time during a nationally-televised debate asking the only female GOP candidate about whether she would submit to her husband in the White House?Hmmm.....could it possibly be because, if she became President, we would all wonder who was really running the country? I would wonder whether or not Marcus (her 'pray-away-the-gay' hubby) is President in all but name. He continues,
I don't think for a second that a woman questioner would ask such a question in a presidential debate.Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! If I were a journalist, right now, with the opportunity to interview this nutbag candidate, not only would I ask her the 'submission' question, but I would also question her about her belief in 'the end times'. As a potential President, with the possibility of having control of nuclear launch codes, I would ask her about whether or not her belief in the 'rapture' would affect her decisions. Would she create an apocalypse, or another world war, in order to bring about the rapture?
Should a sensible person vote for an atheist? That seems a difficult question since an atheist denies, despite the evidence, the existence of the most important part of reality: God. The Christian, however, is wise enough to know that a mistake in one area does not necessitate mistakes in other areas. Humans are capable of compartmentalizing their errors. It is not good to be wrong, but it need not be fatal.Which evidence is that? And what's with the "sensible person" line? Is he suggesting that only those who believe as he does are sensible?