Another pro-life feminist foremother was embraced -- perhaps "absconded" would be a better description -- by the pro-choice activists who honored her yesterday at the unveiling of a memorial in the nation's Capitol.
The accounts I have read in the WashPo http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/28/AR2009042803936.html?sub=AR and on pro-abortion blogs praised the life of Sojourner Truth, acknowledging her activism for abolition, against the death penalty and for -- as they reported it -- the vague "women's rights."
Now we all know that when those two words are mentioned in public, a pro-abortion stance is implied. The reporters and attendees of the memorial conveniently failed to mention that Sojourner Truth -- like every single one of her feminist contemporaries -- was against abortion.
I thought it interesting that one of those pro-abortion blogs quoted Truth's most famous speech, not recognizing the obvious pro-life feminist message:
"That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain't I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain't I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man - when I could get it - and bear the lash as well! And ain't I a woman? ...I have borne thirteen children, and seen them most all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother's grief, none but Jesus heard me. And ain't I a woman?"
Sojourner Truth knew the strength of women. She knew they could do anything -- that childbirth and motherhood would not preclude them from accomplishing great things. She knew women did not need to dispose of their children to achieve equality. She knew that those who do not acknowledge the humanity of the preborn are just like those who denied the personhood of black slaves. She called abortion what it is, and decried it as the evil it is.
So it was disheartening to see the likes of the uber-pro-abortion Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi acting as if they are deserved to honor this great champion of the oppressed. And when Michelle Obama declared that she thought Truth would have been proud of her -- a descendant of slaves -- as First Lady, she was only partly right. Sojourner Truth would have been pleased at the position, but appalled at the abortion agenda that helped put Obama there.
I think it's disgustingly arrogant that Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and Michelle Obama should even dare to suppose being worthy of the approval of Sojourner Truth. Ms. Truth EARNED her right to be humbly proud of who she was and I for one believe she would have been repulsed by the proud humility of the likes of Clinton, Pelosi, and Obama.
Posted by: Kanisha Turner | April 30, 2009 at 04:51 PM
Well said, Kanisha. Thanks!
Posted by: Colette Moran | April 30, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Wow. So if one is pro-choice, then that person is not worthy to acknowledge the good works of Sojourner Truth? I've not heard that one before.
Posted by: Pat | May 01, 2009 at 08:10 PM
Wow. The point is, they stand up there and praise her accomplishments while totally ignoring a very important aspect of what she stood for.
Fine for them to be there, but to act as if they are somehow of the same mind as Truth is ridiculous.
It would have been better for the proceedings to have been run by Feminists for Life, a group that stands for all the ideals that Truth did.
But of course the faux feminists would never have allowed that!
Posted by: Colette Moran | May 02, 2009 at 11:25 AM
And might I add, I can't count the number of times that "outrage" was expressed when a conservative was chosen to honor a liberal.
It seems the Left feels only they have the right to honor their own, but have no hesitation to stake a claim to those with whom they have fundamental disagreements if they simply don't mention those discrepancies.
They want to perpetuate the notion that all those who seem to be good people to the public at large are just like them and are on their side about everything, of course! (see Abraham Lincoln -- a founder of the Republican Party -- and MLK who also was pro-life.)
Posted by: Colette Moran | May 02, 2009 at 12:09 PM
If Jesus thought like you did, I wonder what would have become of poor Mary Magdelene.
I doubt Mrs. Obama "staked a claim" to Sojourner Truth. I think she just enjoyed honoring her. Not everything has a political agenda.
Do you have liberal neighbors who've offended you? You seem so angry at any and all liberals.
Posted by: Pat | May 02, 2009 at 07:45 PM
Also, there are occasions for which two disagreeing parties should be able to come together for a common goal without political posturing. It seems that honoring our historical greats would be one such occasion.
By the way, although MLK was pro-life, it is also widely noted that he was an adulterer. Should those of us who've remained faithfully married never honor him?
Posted by: Pat | May 02, 2009 at 07:54 PM
One more thing...Archbishop Desmond Tutu has placed his support firmly behind President Obama. His thoughts on Obama's presidency have been published in magazines, including the non-partisan Rotarian.
Do you think he's any less of a spiritual leader? Not trying to be antagonistic, just wondering...
Posted by: Pat | May 02, 2009 at 08:17 PM
And do you also suppose that you, as a white woman and a Feminist for Life, would have more right to publicly honor Sojourner Truth than Mrs. Obama, who is a black woman descended from slaves?
Posted by: Pat | May 02, 2009 at 09:03 PM
Gee, Pat -- sure you're finished?
***Mary Magdelene was penitent and humbled herself before Christ. Nancy Pelosi and her ilk are unapologetic for their actions, most notably clinging to an abortion policy that has left over 30 million children dead and countless women wounded and has done nothing to better the world for women. I argue that it has made our position worse.
***If you read more of my posts, you will understand that I have been outright attacked by liberals. I do hold ill will for those actions, and have no respect for the lefties who are intolerant of differing opinions.
I would not say I am angry at all liberals by any stretch. Those who are open-minded enough to carry on a constructive conversation have no problem with me, nor I with them.
***I totally agree that those from both sides can come together to honor great women. So where were the pro-life women of all colors at this ceremony? -- notably absent, or at least not heard from.
***I know people who take issue with MLK because of his infidelity. The big difference of course is that he didn't march around acting as if adultery was a sacred right that is needed to secure the empowerment of men. HRC and MObama act as if abortion has been a great thing, and have worked fervently to maintain abortion on demand, claiming it is necessary for women's freedom. Sojourner would have heartily taken issue with that, too.
***Archbishop Tutu has always had his heart in the right place. There are a few things which BO and I agree on (altho often disagree how to go about it) that I'm sure Tutu sees in him, too. I'm afraid his faith in BO is unfounded, but we'll see...
[btw The Dalai Lama was asked who he admired when he spoke in the US recently. He said George W. Bush. The silence in the room and from the media was deafening.]
***I'm sure we could have found a woman who was a decedent of slaves amongst our diverse membership in FFL. *That* would have been most appropriate.
Posted by: Colette Moran | May 03, 2009 at 04:20 PM
Right, Mary Magdelene was penitent, but before that, Christ saved her from the judgmental crowd that wanted to stone her to death for being a harlot. So the perfect one who was Christ saw worth in the imperfect one. When you argue that Mrs. Obama was an inappropriate person to honor Sojourner Truth, don't you understand that you are like the crowd with the stones? You've taken the abortion issue and run with it, and that's all the Obamas are to you, just one big "abortion loving" family. As far as you're concerned, they have no worth other than to be criticized on that one topic. At least that's how it seems as I scan through your blog.
If FFL was better suited to honor Sojourner Truth, then where were you guys? Did the FFL have any ceremony honoring Truth? If not, then complaining about those who took the initiative seems a day late and a dollar short.
(And I'm glad the Dalai Lama said he admired Bush. Even Bush deserves his honorable mention.)
Posted by: Pat | May 03, 2009 at 08:20 PM
That is not to say that you, exclusively, are judgmental. We all are. But my point is that you've gone pretty far in your assertion that Mrs. Obama shouldn't have honored S. Truth.
And that goes for Pelosi, too, although I don't care for her much either.
Posted by: Pat | May 03, 2009 at 08:24 PM
Comparing me to a stoning crowd. Who's being judgmental?
Excuse me, but the Obamas *are* one big "abortion-loving" couple, no matter what lip service they give to reducing abortions. All of his policies so far work to *increase* the number of abortions. And every day, as he screws up the economy more and more, women are becoming more desperate and are seeking more abortions. (This is admittedly anecdotal, but is according to abortion providers.)
Name a single thing that the President or Michelle has done to support the "choice" of life. The black community is hit hardest by abortion, yet he has not acknowledged this at all. A single speech at an adoption agency that would encourage those who are desperate to make this loving choice, or a even a *single sentence* during a speech about the economy urging young women not to lose hope -- could make a HUGE difference. But he has not said or done a single thing to try and actually ameliorate the over 3,000 deaths PER DAY. (That's a 9/11 every single day.)
And believe me -- I have more than that single issue that I disagree with them on. Try more than just scanning. (Yes, being pro-life dominates, but there is so much more to dislike.)
But I was speaking specifically about Sojourner Truth's statue dedication ceremony, as a member of FFL -- a group that has been so shut out by the radical feminists that we had to purchase the home of Susan B. Anthony in order to truly represent her legacy as a champion of the rights of the preborn and the value of motherhood.
I don't know for sure if FFL tried to be a part of this dedication to Truth -- it all caught me by surprise -- but we have been shut out before, and I don't doubt we were turned away if the leaders of FFL did try.
No, I don't think that declaring MObama, a woman who -- unlike SBA and SJ and all the original true feminists -- believes that women should have to sacrifice their children, gives in to the patriarchal notion that raising children is a burden that precludes you from being truly free...
No, I do not think that she and Hillary and Pelosi represent the values and ideals that Truth stood for, so yes they were an inappropriate honor guard. Not allowed to speak? Never said that, and to the contrary, I talked about inclusion... unlike the past record (and, it seems, this current example) of the liberals.
Would you have had Nancy Reagan and other conservative leaders in power at the time -- and no one else -- dedicate a statue to Helen Gurley Brown or Gloria Steinem just because they were women, white, or shared a similar heritage? I'm thinking no...
Posted by: Colette Moran | May 04, 2009 at 12:33 AM
If someone finds a reason to honor another, even if the honorer has fundamental disagreements with the honoree, I wouldn't be so arrogant as to tell them they shouldn't.
and I feel sorry for those of you who are...
Posted by: Pat | May 04, 2009 at 07:56 AM
I repeat -- I didn't say she shouldn't have been ONE of the speakers. I said it was a travesty that the liberal triumvirate acted as if they were sincerely representing Truth and what she stood for. And they simply DO NOT.
No need to feel sorry for me...
Posted by: Colette Moran | May 04, 2009 at 01:28 PM
Can you please provide a direct source that states or demonstrates Truth's position on abortion? I have not been able to find evidence that Truth spoke to this issue to the extent emphasized in this post. Thanks.
Posted by: Chani | August 21, 2009 at 01:12 AM
Whether liberal, conservative or otherwise, it's silly to speak for long dead people who weren't in the position of confronting contemporary issues. No one knows what Sojourner Truth would have thought if she lived in America, in the last 60 years.
This is sillier than the fallacy of appeal to authority. It's appeal to reading an authority's mind.
Posted by: Michm | July 29, 2010 at 03:34 PM