Time Magazine on John McCain's VP pick:
She [Palin] is Christian and pro-life, but also a supporter of birth control: she's a member of Feminists For Life (FFL), an anti-abortion, pro-contraception organization.
http://www.time.com/...
However, Feminists For Life say on their web-page that they have no position on contraception.
What is Feminists for Life's position on contraception?
Feminists for Life's mission is to address the unmet needs of women who are pregnant or parenting. Preconception issues including abstinence and contraception are outside of our mission. Some FFL members and supporters support the use of non-abortifacient contraception while others oppose contraception for a variety of reasons. FFL is concerned that certain forms of contraception have had adverse health effects on women.
http://www.feministsforlife.org/...
Clearly, the Time Magazine profile on Palin is wrong. Does anybody know how you go about correcting this type of factual error in the mainstream press? A letter to the editor seems kind of lame, but I think this is a very important issue.
For me, one of the primary questions raised by McCain's VP pick is: what types of contraceptive choices will the Republican ticket impose on people who do not share their ideology?
A personal choice by a person based on -- well, whatever -- religion, ideology, is just that, a personal choice.
A Catholic who eschews birth control in his or her private life because that is his or her religious belief cannot really be criticized. The question when a Catholic is elected to public office becomes "Will this public official impose his or her religious beliefs on me?" This was essentially the issue that RFK had to address.
And I think here, again, this is the issue. There are many people who will agree that the choice of whether to use birth control, and whether to allow teenagers to have information about birth control, is a personal choice (although I think the issue gets a little sticky when you're talking about parental consent of parents to minor children who are nonetheless sexually mature and likely to want to have sex, but on the whole I would give that power to the parent, because the family is the family, and we tamper with it at our peril).
So, what is the real problem? It is whether a person who is likely to become a public official will extend his or her personal beliefs to persons who do not share them. And that is something which is mis-addressed in the Time Magazine profile, and something on which we do not still have full enough information.