Tim Pawlenty earned plaudits today for refusing to sign some ultra-right document for the consumption of Iowa reactionaries. To minimize the damage, he tweeted the word-agglomeration displayed above.
Do people have 'a right' to know what candidates believe? (What specifically is encompassed by such a right?) If so, there's a great deal about which I remain unclear, as to Gov. Pawlenty's beliefs and values.
To use one's affiliation with a socially-approved fantasy-based ideological institution in order to advance a political career should be embarrassing. From within the Baptist worldview, it should be deemed blasphemous. This video is appalling: I call upon Leith Anderson for some expression of embarrassment.
In responding to the request, Pawlenty stated:
IOW, when you see a 'broken' family, Pawlenty advises you to feel moral condemnation toward the parents and compassion toward the children. Should Pawlenty be considered big-hearted for this declaration?
When we observe a 'broken' family, often the assignment of blame--for the break-up--is genuinely quite difficult. When I encounter a parent who is party to a broken marriage, then, I disagree with Gov. Pawlenty: My default setting is to extend compassion to all--and refrain from condemning anyone until strong evidence has come to the fore.
Even when a marriage has come a cropper due to irresponsible adult behavior, I doubt America is improved when I participate in any campaign of social humiliation against a once-errant parent.
Do people have 'a right' to know what candidates believe? (What specifically is encompassed by such a right?) If so, there's a great deal about which I remain unclear, as to Gov. Pawlenty's beliefs and values.
To use one's affiliation with a socially-approved fantasy-based ideological institution in order to advance a political career should be embarrassing. From within the Baptist worldview, it should be deemed blasphemous. This video is appalling: I call upon Leith Anderson for some expression of embarrassment.
In responding to the request, Pawlenty stated:
“I prefer to choose my own words, especially seeking to show compassion to those who are in broken families through no fault of their own,” Pawlenty said today.Pawlenty's ostensibly anti-sanctimony statement is quite interesting then--in that it is itself so sanctimonious. When you observe a non-nuclear family--our former Governor suggests--you should be big-hearted and 'show compassion' to the people not responsible for the family's break-up.
IOW, when you see a 'broken' family, Pawlenty advises you to feel moral condemnation toward the parents and compassion toward the children. Should Pawlenty be considered big-hearted for this declaration?
When we observe a 'broken' family, often the assignment of blame--for the break-up--is genuinely quite difficult. When I encounter a parent who is party to a broken marriage, then, I disagree with Gov. Pawlenty: My default setting is to extend compassion to all--and refrain from condemning anyone until strong evidence has come to the fore.
Even when a marriage has come a cropper due to irresponsible adult behavior, I doubt America is improved when I participate in any campaign of social humiliation against a once-errant parent.
