Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle with some help from the media takes the American public into a quagmire of heated moral debates with strong religious overtones. On July 10th of this year, Angle came forward with some strong opinions about a sensitive topic, abortions for teen mothers who have been raped by their father’s. Angle’s angle, “I think that two wrongs don’t make a right. And I have been in the situation of counseling young girls, not 13 but 15, who have had very at risk, difficult pregnancies. And my counsel was to look for some alternatives, which they did. And they found that they had made what was really a lemon situation into lemonade” (Stein 2010)
The real issue here is not truly about abortion. As stated earlier, the question was a leading one that would force anyone answering it directly to side one way or another. How else could a conservative Republican who has consistently partied on a pro-life platform answer? Thus, there are two problems with the way Angle answered, first that she took the bait (hook, line, and sinker) and even went into detail trying to give out different quotable lines. She might have missed the memo that told politicians abortion is not an issue one gives quotable remarks to.
Secondly, Angle missed the issue. Let us repeat the question, “If a 13 year girl was raped by her father…” That is where you stop the question. Then, you calmly ask for clarification of the words said thus far. After, this suitable repetition of the key words for clarities sake, one can give a well-thought response.
The following is a suggestion: the issue before the abortion question is, and will continue o be about what kind of family creates or allows the situation of incest? Furthermore, how prevalent are such families? Even one is too many. What situations allow such awful, degrading, and un-American things to happen to children? Then, people may and should speak of solutions.
The fact that these situations happen is sadly that, a fact. Therefore, the correct response would be one that would seek to better this fact—make it less established. One cannot make families and lives better arguing simply over abortion, which is more often than not an after-effect decision people make when raised around poor influences. One must go back further to the real issue—poor family life. Furthermore, if a government seeks to control the choice for or against abortion, it would be irresponsible of that same government to not take a hand in bettering family lives.
So, the criticism for Angle would go as follows: you have been irresponsible in your thinking about this topic. You fell for the trap, making a decisive answer people expected from you and you made the grave mistake of adding catchy lines, “Two wrongs don’t make a right,” and “lemons into lemonade.” Granted, you did some wonderful work with those fifteen year olds and saved those two lives possibly more. It would be nice to assume that you also saw those two teens in better home situations than what created their problem in the first place. Hopefully, all can agree that no fifteen year old child should have to make such a difficult choice. There is the problem, you did not even seem to give a thought to the idea of home life.
Angle never mentioned their home lives or any plans to see that such a home life is endangered. This is not to say that you did not do anything about those girls’ home lives, but for all intents and purposes, you chose not to bring it up. It was not important. Here is a golden idea, campaign for safer families. Look at what institutions the government controls, funds, and regulates that safeguard American families. Where they are lacking but able to be fixed, fix them. Where they are irrevocably damaged, terminate them. Where they are doing a good job, hold them up as what they are, a success to be admired and emulated; “a shining city on a hill” (Reuben 2010).
She had said earlier in the interview that she believed that the crux of this issue can be traced way back to the intentions of the forefathers and “God’s plan.” Yes, if one is to accept God’s existence, they must also accept that He has a plan for everything He does, which is ultimately everything. It should be proposed, however, that maybe His plan in allowing terrible situations like incest to exist might be to say that someone needs to do something about this.
Reuben, Paul P. (2010 July). “Chapter 1: John Winthrop.” PAL: Perspectives in American Literature- A Research and Reference Guide. http://www.csustan.edu/english/reuben/pal/chap1/winthrop.html
Stein, Sam. (2010 July 10). “Sharron Angle’s Advice for Rape Victims Considering Abortion: Turn Lemons into Lemonade.” The Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/08/sharron-angles-advice-for_n_639294.html