Why Is Pam Keller’s Roe v. Wade “Celebration” Relevant?
Last week I published a blog post on Pam Keller’s pending participation in a Roe vs. Wade “celebration”. Several commenters responded with angry challenges to the post, asking why Keller’s stance on abortion is relevant to Fullerton and her upcoming attempt at re-election.
First off, the post itself was not about her stance on abortion; rather, it discussed her participation in a political event… a highly-politicized event that boasted an attendee list of political figures at various levels of political importance – certainly nothing beyond the scope of a political blog. Regardless of how you feel about abortion, participation in a “celebration” of such a contentious nature is certainly news.
Second, who can say that a national issue will never become local? Almost every federal matter eventually makes it’s way to the local level in some inane form or another. War memorials, gun laws, medical marijuana come to mind. It was only a few months ago that abortion became an issue at the county level. Americans live under at least four basic levels of government, all of which have ever-expanding jurisdictional tendencies. It would be naive to pretend that we know about every issue that will come before an elected over the course of four years.
And finally, there are plenty of voters who consider abortion to be a simple issue of respect for basic human rights, a concept that transcends all levels of government. For those individuals, the post may serve as simple news of Pam Keller’s stance on the issue. If Pam didn’t want voters to consider her position on abortion then she would not have included her name in the press release.
Another point is that many voters consider the fact that local electeds often become state electeds – or even federal.
A few weeks ago ffff speculated about a Keller challenge to Ed Royce. I would be very surprised if Keller didn’t have ambitions for higher office.
My guess is that most liberals would probably never vote for a local candidate who was pro-life, or gun rights – they just won’t admit it and hide behind “it’s not relevant.”
Leave it to an elementary school teacher to support the murder of children.
Well, if you are going to insist that a position on abortion is relevant to an elected city council position, then I guess it is as long as you and enough of the electorate think it is, but I’d still like to hear why. Is the council going to say that abortions cannot be performed in Fullerton? What do our city council candidates think about the war in Iraq or the WTO? Are they relevant issues for a city council person? I’d just like to see the streets paved and the city finances run well. I will tell my Congressperson and Senators what I think about the other issues.
Did you actually read the article? Honestly go read it again and then post.
Travis stated that this issue was brought to bear at the county level. MANY LOCALLY ELECTED OFFICIALS TRY TO ATTAIN HIGHER OFFICE!!!! This is important to voters like myself. I START AT ABORTION……….IF SOMEONE IS WILLING TO MURDER AN INNOCENT LIFE…………………………………………………….. HOW CAN I TRUST THEM WITH SIMPLE DECISIONS?
Maybe you can justify this as a non issue. However I am left with little else in this “civilized world” where governement sanctioned murder is allowed……other than my vote.
The blood of the innocent is on YOUR hands, not mine.
Jefferson Thomas
Jeff,
I did read the article. When Pam Keller declares herself to be a candidate for higher office I will consider it relevant. So far, I have seen only rampant speculation on this blog that she intends to run for anything other than re-election to the city council. She’s already held a fundraiser for it. Do you have other info to the contrary?
Yes, the issue of abortion was taken up by the OC Board of Supervisors when they voted to ban funding for Planned Parenthood even though none of the funding was to be used for abortion services. That particular instance just proves my point, I think, that abortion was irrelevant to the issue at hand.
Your personal unwillingness to even consider any pro-abortion rights candidate, no matter how irrelevant the issue might be to the office, only reinforces my point that the original article was was meant either to castigate Pam Keller for her position or pander to voters like you.
Matt,
1. Understand this is BY FAR……….THE most important issue to me and most voters. How can I trust ANY candidate that agrees with slaughtering an innocent child? (I stated before in the previous post, heart beat stop = dead all over the world, heart beat starts at 21 days in the womb, therefore LIFE.)
2. I could care less about seeking higher office, how can I trust any candidate for any office that murders children to make any educated choice?
3. Many of us will NEVER budge from this concept. The sanctity of life is the MOST important issue on any Ballot, in any position. To celebrate murder needs to be pointed out. Ms. Keller should chose her stance on murder with a better regard for human life, then maybe people wouldn’t post articles pointing out the fact that she celebrates……murder…..all the while running on the “kids for Keller stance, for goodness sake as an Elementary school teacher!” That in itself should prove that she is unqualified to govern at any level.
4. I and many like me consider this the #1 thing to vote on before moving to any other candidate stance. Imagine me asking you, if you supported slavery? Should we have allowed women to vote? What about serving a King? Are you ok with any of these?
Hence my stance.
I will state this again, the screaming children in the womb sucked with a vacuum in order to end their life……..that blood is on your hands…………..Pam’s hands, and any of those that support this barbaric practice…….not on my hands…….your hands.
Jefferson Thomas
barbarella jane fonda margo rusty susan spells you are a rich man who lives in fullerton
Matt, I feel like I’ve already made every attempt to answer your question.
There are viewpoints on certain issues that cannot be compartmentalized – I bet that I can think of a few inciteful examples that would keep you from voting for a local candidate even though it would never come up at a city council meeting. Do you want an example?
Carpetbaggers?