Are Working Women "Detrimental to the Family"?
By anniepa
@anniepa (27955)
United States
October 28, 2009 4:57pm CST
Do you think government policy should favor married couples over "cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators"? Do you think the 1972 Supreme Court decision legalizing the use of contraception by unmarried couples was "illogical"?
If you live in Virginia and vote for Robert F. McDonnell for Governor next week you'll be advocating those beliefs!
"At age 34, two years before his first election and two decades before he would run for governor of Virginia, Robert F. McDonnell submitted a master's thesis to the evangelical school he was attending in Virginia Beach in which he described working women and feminists as "detrimental" to the family. He said government policy should favor married couples over "cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators." He described as "illogical" a 1972 Supreme Court decision legalizing the use of contraception by unmarried couples.
The 93-page document, which is publicly available at the Regent University library, culminates with a 15-point action plan that McDonnell said the Republican Party should follow to protect American families -- a vision that he started to put into action soon after he was elected to the Virginia House of Delegates.
During his 14 years in the General Assembly, McDonnell pursued at least 10 of the policy goals he laid out in that research paper, including abortion restrictions, covenant marriage, school vouchers and tax policies to favor his view of the traditional family. In 2001, he voted against a resolution in support of ending wage discrimination between men and women. "
(End of excerpt) Read more here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/29/AR2009082902434.html
About that controversial thesis he's said, "Virginians will judge me on my 18-year record as a legislator and Attorney General and the specific plans I have laid out for our future -- not on a decades-old academic paper I wrote as a student during the Reagan era and haven't thought about in years." He's added, "Like everybody, my views on many issues have changed as I have gotten older." He said that his views on family policy were best represented by his 1995 welfare reform legislation and that he "worked to include child day care in the bill so women would have greater freedom to work." What he wrote in the thesis on women in the workplace, he said, "was simply an academic exercise and clearly does not reflect my views."
However it was McDonnell himself who brought up the thesis during an interview with the Washington Post saying, "I wrote my thesis on welfare policy."
So, in my opinion, he's bringing attention to his thesis when he thinks it will benefit him but downplaying it as something that happened years ago when he feels it will hurt him! I have no doubt that many, if not most, people in their fifties have changed their views on some of the things they may have written about in a college thesis; that's why I don't put too much stock in things like these during political debates and campaigns. I mean, I can't see holding something over someone's head that they said, wrote or did when they were in their early twenties. However, while 34 is still "young", relatively speaking, I'd guess most of our philosophies and ideologies are set by then. A chauvinist at 34 isn't likely to become a champion of equality for women at 44 or 54, in other words!
It would be great if there were someone from Virginia weighing in here but everyone is welcome to do so! Are you - or would you - vote for McDonnell? Will or would your vote be BECAUSE of or DESPITE his past views? I have a feeling most of you know where I stand on this...lol!
Annie
3 people like this
10 responses
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
29 Oct 09
I think I know where you stand, you stand in Pennsylvania where the governor of Virginia has no legal authority. Neither does the governor of South Carolina for that matter. I suppose that it's up to the voters of Virginia to decide if this fellow is the right guy to lead their state.
A while back, when John Holdren was appointed Obama's "Science Czar" a lot of people became concerned because of his co-authorship of a book that proposed such things as forced abortions, trying to sterilize the population through drinking water and the concept that children are not really human until the age of two, and therefore, infanticide would not really be killing a human being. The answer most often given in response to these fears was "oh, he wrote that 30 years ago". Yes, thirty years ago this man advocated forcing single women to have abortions or seizing their children for adoption.
The difference? Heck if I know.
Oh yeah, I remember. The governor of Virginia is only going to affect people living in Virginia, and by their own choice while Obama's wacko nutcase has power over all of us, power unchecked by the Congress or anyone else and without our vote or consent.
I find myself less concerned about the governor of Virginia all the time.
1 person likes this
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
29 Oct 09
I'd like to see more third party/independent candidates running in a lot of races in every state. It's time they realized that the people don't want party politics, they don't want politics as usual, they want real representation.
1 person likes this
@Koriana (302)
• United States
30 Oct 09
I've gotten into the habit after bush turned out to be so disappointing to me. I won't for any candidates if I think that are gonna do more harm than good. If I vote, it will be for something like, Mickey Mouse, or Goofey, or whatever...
but, I kind of see it that if I vote for someone, I am throwing my support, my energy their way....so, well, after harm they do after that, I am partially responsible for.....
yes, I want more alternatives!!!
@cobrateacher (8432)
• United States
28 Oct 09
This is ridiculous! Has this guy been lost in a time warp? Most families need two or more incomes to scrape by these days. There's a lot to be said, also, about the self-esteem a woman or man gets from earning their way...
1 person likes this
@amyjolenesmith (21)
• United States
29 Oct 09
Either that or the person who wrote the article was lost in a time warp. Or, possibly, that person just didn't read the thesis paper that he or she was commenting on.
2 people like this
@cobrateacher (8432)
• United States
29 Oct 09
Annoying little possibilities, those!
1 person likes this
@Bd200789 (2994)
• United States
29 Oct 09
I live in Virginia, and I couldn't believe anyone could say this. I would never vote for McDonnell. The election is next week, and I hope Creigh Deeds wins. My mom has always had to work, and I don't know how we would have made it without her.
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
1 Nov 09
I don't live in Virginia but, what planet is this guy from? Aren't men suppose to be for women more when their younger than older?
1 person likes this
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
29 Oct 09
Well people do mature as they get older. And as you get older you get wiser or at least you are suppost to. My views have changed ALOT from my teens to my twenties. I am now in my thirties and they have changed a lot from my twenties. Why? Because I grew older...I became more confident in myself. I stopped trying to fit myself into boxes with labels on them that our society tries like hell to put us in and I became comfortable with myself and thinking for myself...even if my opinions were not PC or what the statis que thought. I guess I stopped caring about what other people thought, and cared more about what I thought.
It is a part of growing and changing.
But who knows about him....he is a politican so it very well could be just all for show.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
29 Oct 09
Lil, you're about the age McDonnell was when he wrote his thesis. Now, obviously none of us can see the future but do you expect your core views to change significantly between now and the time you reach your mid-fifties? I know "stuff happens" to all of us and there's always a chance that something will make us rethink our views on various issues at any age but barring anything unforeseen, how do you see yourself 20 years from now? Will you go from being conservative to being liberal? Will your views on women's roles in the family and in the nation and world do a complete 180?
My views also changed a great deal from my twenties to my thirties but mine had little to do with what anyone else thought or with being PC but more to do with learning from life experiences. I DID become more outspoken and confident in myself instead of being afraid to disagree with anyone.
With McDonnell I'd say he's the typical hypocritical politician; he uses his thesis when it suits his purpose but ignores it when it doesn't.
Annie
@meganpratz (9)
• United States
29 Oct 09
I am a student but my family lives in Northern Virginia and my mother is very torn about this man and his platform. She is a fiscally moderate social liberal with concerns about women's rights, gay rights and other human rights. I think it's interesting to have this man claim that this is not how he believes anymore and that he should be forgiven because it was so long ago. However, not once has he indicated that he does NOT think that women should remain in the home, that contraception should be illegal or that marriage should not be open to every person,I think we should all be taking this at face value. This man would not be good for Virginia, particularly as we are poised to enter a new phase in our state. For the first time in several elections, President Obama held the electoral college votes of Virginia. That's progress. Bob McDonnell will send us back. The only problem? Creigh Deeds doesn't have any idea what he's doing. And if McDonnell wins by default, Virginia will suffer.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
29 Oct 09
That's what Democrats here on mylot kept saying during the 2008 election. Have you forgotten that so soon? Any woman who isn't at home in the kitchen and doing laundry is choosing her career over her family. Come on Annie, you supported it when democrats said it. What's the difference now?
As for my opinion on the race, both candidates stink. I'm glad I don't live in Virginia because it doesn't even look like there's a third party candidate in the race. Either way, based on the Rasmussen poll shows that McDonell has a 13 point lead with only a week remaining. That's pretty much it. With a lead that big in the final week, he could be friends with a domestic terrorist, go to a church run by a racist pastor, and criticize the small town Americans in his state and it wouldn't hurt his campaign.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
29 Oct 09
Who were they talking about, Taskr, Hillary Clinton? 
1 person likes this
@opalina143 (1240)
• Morristown, New Jersey
29 Oct 09
Excuse me- I can't remember ANY democrat ever saying that.
ONE OR TWO people mentioned that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin might be concerned about caring for her mentally challenged baby that had just been born - you know, the Down Syndrome infant who was still not even on solid food? I can see their point, though I never agreed with them.
How do you get "Women should be home in the kitchen" from that? Are you kidding me? I have heard lots of outrageous statements and logical leaps from Republicans on this forum, but this is one of the craziest!
1 person likes this
@greenfeathers (1206)
• United States
29 Oct 09
I guess I'm more than a little naive but I've never understood the argument of working women vs traditional family values..If any legislator is truly in favor of traditional family concepts, why do they feel the need to condemn the woman/mother who needs to work to keep the family unit solvent? Like so many other times in this country, it looks to me like they are condemning the victim.
If such a person were truly in favor of 'traditional family' then they would do what was necessary to ensure its safety by providing for the 'wage earner' the proper wage to be able to support his family without the need of a second income. Of course, we know that's never gonna happen, but, in truth, it is that need for a second (sometimes third) income that has destroyed the traditional family concept, not the actions of those who need to provide it..
That having been said..and to dissuade the hate mail (my email is already glutted in agony)..I am not against ANYONE pursuing a dream, career, pocket money, whatevah! But the family value argument, for the aforementioned reasons, has always been a conflict for me.
If the government (in general) wants to ensure the 'sanctity' then it needs to provide the means by which it can be acheived rather than catering to those who cause the economic problems and condemning those who are victim of it..All else is just rhetoric..
@amyjolenesmith (21)
• United States
29 Oct 09
What I would like to know is - have you read the thesis that you are judging this man on? Are you confident that the Washington Post article that you cut and pasted (good job of citing, btw) gave an accurate summary of McDonnell's writing? I'll tell you, because I just did read it, that it is another classic example of words being taken out of context in order to twist the meaning to something else that is not quite true.
If you will actually take the time to read it, you should put it into a little bit of perspective. It was written in 1989, Right after a good long stint of Reagan Republics, and at the beginning of the first Bush's turn. What were the defining political issues of the day? This paper was written as a thesis at an evangelical school, founded by Pat Robertson. When you actually read the paper, and get a grip on the message he was trying to portray, the next thing you should do is ask yourself: "Is this surprising?" Because, quite frankly, he doesn't say much different than any family value Republican of the time.
And after actually *reading* this thesis, I gotta say, I kinda like this guy. Granted, it would take some tweaking from his 1989 viewpoints to make him practical in today's environment, but, ummm, yeah, I'd probably vote for him.
Just a couple quotes from his thesis, to give you more of his "flavor":
"it poses a fundamental question for political leadership: Must good government affirmatively respond to any needs the people express, or should leaders begin with an evaluation of what is constitutionally permissible, and what can be better accomplished by other societal institutions?"
"Republican concerns for fiscal austerity are easily impaled by an additional $1.3 billion a year in expenses. Surely the leadership recognizes that existing federal child-care programs already cost more than $6.9 billion in 1988."
--Remember when $1.3 billion was cause for concern?
"Once differential tax rates and benefit distributions are accepted in principle, there is but an arbitrary legislative line that inhibits the slide to socialism."
"the Democrat's vision of government is to spend more of your dollars on programs that don't work, and take it out of your pocket rather than to let you exercise your own will with your earnings for your family purposes."
I have to add that I think what the Washington Post did here, and what many "news" outlets seem to do on a regular basis, is entirely irresponsible. I'd challenge anyone here to do a little more research on any article you read, to test the accuracy of the content.
