I've had a few days to think and reflect on this whirlwind political scene. I'm quite shocked at the nomination of Sarah Palin for vice president. My forte certainly isn't politics, and I have to admit, I hadn't even heard of Sarah Palin before last week. I watched the Republican National Convention (after watching the Democratic one last week) and I though her speech was motivating and what the Republican party needed to hear. I wonder why McCain's staff convinced him to choose Palin when, in fact, he wanted to choose Joe Leiberman. Could it be because this was a breath of fresh air and change for the Republicans? Could it be that this would be the only way to have an advantage up on the Democrats- a first woman V.P. running against the possibility of Obama's being the first black president? Could it be that they felt that the women who supported Hillary, but not Obama would now support McCain with a woman V.P?
But, there's one issue that keeps coming to my mind. How can this woman be vice president of a superpower like America and take care of five children, the youngest of which is an infant with Down's Syndrom? I have a very close freind whose daugher has Down's, and she needs so much extra care, because it takes her so much longer to reach milestones, some of which she may never reach. Who will care for this baby that will definately need full time care, not to mention the other children? How could she possibly juggle that with the demands of a job like Vice President of America?
Sarah Palin seems like a really neat person. I don't dislike her at all. She seems so much like an ordinary mom that I could laugh with at mom's night out, or the kids' sports practice. But, I do not think that God intended her to be in this role with young children that need to be cared for. It has been brought to my attention that in the Bible when the men didn't lead, Deborah and Queen Esther stepped up to get things done. I'm not sure that's even comparable here. We aren't told, and have no evidence of, these women even having children at this time. Deborah refers to herself as a "Mother in Israel" (Judges 5:7)but there is no evidence that this means with natural children. I do know that God does not contradict himself. He says in Titus 2 for women to be "workers at home". And, he does give many clear pictures of women who stayed home and raised the next generation of men who would lead. What about Eunice who raised Timothy, and Jocabed who got Moses back to raise? What if Mary had run off to other engagements and left Jesus to be raised by who knows? What about the Shunammite woman who was at home with her son, and available to host Elisha, a prophet of God? What about the Proverbs 31 woman? Could her husband and children really rise up and call her blessed if they really didn't know her because she was always away running her country?
Would Sarah Palin's time not be better spent raising her sons to be the ones to stand up and lead and she, herself, not have to be the "pitbull in lipstick"? And, raise her daughters to raise up their sons to be the next generation to lead? I have brown hair and glasses. I can be fiesty. Should I put my kids in school, hire a nanny and run for governor? NO! The responsibility of a woman to raise her children and make her home is just so misunderstood. Especially if you have children, that is the single most important thing you should do. I do firmly believe that the moral decline, the crime, the decay in education, and a host of other issues we are facing in America is a direct result of the feminism movement and the idea that women can and should have the right to do whatever in the world they please. John McCain said in his convention speech that he learned as a POW that there was a cause bigger than himself. Well, guess what? Raising your children is a bigger cause than yourself! If God gives you children to raise, He is not going to contradict that by caling you to something that would take you away from them.
On a second note, what about the issue of being subject to your husband? Scripture mentions over and over about women being subject to their husbands. (1 Peter 3, Ephesians 5:33, Colossians 3:18) This is not meant to be degrading to women or make them less equal than men. It is simply God's way of organizing the home for the greater good. Remember in Genesis how Eve was a "helper" for Adam? I think women in the workplace run into this time after time. The boss wants longer hours, more work, etc. and all the while pulling more time away from husband and children. Now, she's not under authority and headship of her husband, she's under authority and headship of her boss. The government is a much larger entity than a just a corporation. Perhaps Sarah Palin is subject to her husband, but how can she be available to her husband when the country, government and the people will have to come first? This seems to me like a major conflict of interest. I don't think the question should be "Is she qualified to be the Vice Presidential candidate?" but, "Should she be the Vice Presidential candidate?"
I'm not trying to criticize her at all, or imply that she is a neglectful mother. She seems very in love with, and proud of, her family. But, this is far beyond just my opinion. God has already laid out clear plans for women in his Word. God's plan works, but we do all we can to go against it. We do all we can to scoff at God's desires for us, just to pursue our own. I will still vote McCain/Palin because I don't want the alternative, but I am not really comforable with being partly responsible for electing her to this position and pulling her away from her family. I think Sarah Palin would much better serve her country as vice president of her house, than vice president of the White House.