All Beliefs Welcome, Unless They are Forced on Others

Sarah Palin is a women! At the point where you attempt in your fourth paragraph to put a line down whos a "real women" and who is not, shows a clear and deep flaw in your ideological approach to women. All women are women regardless of wether they decied to be a working women, working mom, or stay at home mom-regardless of their stance on abortion rights. When you try and claim who is a real women and who is not you are disempowering women everywhere. Now not only do you expect me to be a mother, wife, sister, daughter,and a worker now to be a women I must be pro-choice and anti-gun. You are a victim to that which you atempt to critise in this articel: you are attempting to force your opinon on what makes a women off on those who read this artical. Am I to not a women because I am pro-life?? That is exactly what this article says. That those WOMEN who are pro-life or against anything modern feminist decied to label as important to women are not women. Also just because Palin herself is pro-life does not mean she will actually make abortion illegal- if you know anything about the government you would know that if she is elected she herself could not do that.

Now next being pro-life is not forcing your beliefs on anyone. There is an agreement among americans that murder is wrong-thus murder is illegal. to those who think life begins upon conseption, abortion is murder-so those who do it are murderers. by being pro-life you are not forcing your beliefs on other-but trying to save lives of others. Just as those who are pro-choice are saying because we think life begins after birth abortion is not murder.

And finally this article presumes that Palin made her daughters pregancy public to help her politically-but it is not so. She released the information to avoid lies being linked to the american people.We need to know where candadites stand morally so we can make decisions and vote in leaders whom we believe will make the rights choice for us individually.

Wendy, you are a professor at a very fine institution. This is unfortunate. Can you not see that you are pushing your view that no one should push their views on other people? Your claim is a contradiction in and of itself. In fact, your article, despite what you claim, really says that Palin should not push her views on people. But it is ok for others as long as you like what they have to say. Don't hide behind poor language as a sound argument for your claims. I think she is an extremist to be sure, but so are you in the opposite direction, and neither is practical nor efficient in contributing positively to society. The government, if we are to let it stand, Democrat or Republican, needs to insist on some views. Your talking about abortion and saying it is up to women to choose is a very good point if the story ended there, but as some people see it who is there to protect the unborn? Don't we have some obligation to decide when life is worth protecting? Can a mother of an unwanted one day old just kill the baby, or what about during birth, before the head comes out? What is the difference? Obviously this question really can't be answered. But the fact remains you have opposing views to Palin but you should not claim to have no views yourself, or one's that you feel other people should follow. You are ignorant and it is sad.

Skeptic-
I just asked a question.

You said, you support her because he constituents like her-
I pointed out there was a 500 million dollar surplus not of her making, what is not to like?

And the current situation would not afford such ready acceptance-

The rest of your reply- God help you.

Peace

My guess as to why Palin causes the Donigers of the world to go berzerk has nothing to do with her politics. They hate her because she reminds these would-be "shapers of public opinion"--journalists, mainstream newscasters, big city yuppies, "public intellectuals", university professors, NOW, Hollywood celebrities, etc.--that they no longer shape anybody's opinion but their own.

In the past, when they disliked someone (e.g., Goldwater, Nixon) it *mattered*. When they liked something (e.g., affirmative action) it was automatically adopted. By no means all such policies were bad (the civil rights movement, in particular, was a good thing) but the point is, *they* determined what was acceptable and what was not.

This is no longer true. To their despair, they discover not only that a major party's presidental candidate not only totally ignores them in choosing his VP, caring not one whit that his choice is someone they strongly disagree with--something that would have been unthinkable 30 years ago--but his party is, mirablis dictu, *not* punished by a decline in the polls! How can this be?

This--after eight years of "Bush lied" and "get out of Iraq NOW!" resulted in no tangible changes in American voting or policy--is the final insult, as it were; the final proof they no longer determine anything. It is this, not anything about Palin's character or policies as such, that drives them to a frenzy.

Victoria:

You're changing the subject. I answered once or twice to be civil, but, seriously, let us get back to the subject, which is Wendy Doniger's claims about Palin. We *are* replying to her essay, are we not?

I must say t seems to me that your criticism of Palin is, in effect, listing the problems the country is facing and just expecting me to believe (sneer) that SHE (sneer, sneer) *OF COURSE* (sneer) could not handle (sneer) something that important (sneer, sneer sneer) -- I'm sorry, I'm running out of sneers.

Why do liberals tend to write in such an off-putting, I-know-so-much-more-than-you, shut-up-and-listen-to-the-truth manner?

But I digress. Again, my point is that whatever one thinks of Palin is not the point here. Rather, our subject here is the vile, indeed unhinged, attack by Doniger on Palin, culminating in the bizzare claim that she is "not a woman".

More generally our subject is the general derangement among certain sections of the left, in particular in academia, of which Doniger is a sad example.

So please let's talk about *that*, our original subject. Let's see. Here are a few questions on the issue of Doniger & her pals which I would like answered.

Why is it that such criticism of the opponents as subhuman, retarded, debased, evil, etc. is almost entirely done by the left? Why is it the the more someone is supposed to "multicultural" and "open-minded to other ideas" in theory, the more likely it is that they are in fact totalitarian bullies in practice (like Doniger)?

Why is it that political paranoia in America is now, apart from the fringes, almost completely on the side of the left? For example, why is it that "Bush is responsible for 9/11" conspiracy theorist Michael Moore, or "CIA killed Kennedy" conspiracy theorist Oliver Stone, are not only not ignored by the mainstream left, but actually lionized by them? Why are these cynical multi-millionaire liars seen by the left as some sort of "freedom fighters" who are "speaking truth to power"?

Why is the same true for political antisemitism? Why are the "the Jews control the world" and "kill the Jews" folks on the left (in their thinly-disguised "the zionists control the world" and "let's help the PLO destroy Israel" guise) not denounced as the Jew-haters they are by their fellow leftists, but called "human rights" activist and "peace activists"? We can well imagine what human rights Jews will have if their "peace" plan comes to pass.

Similary, why is hatered of America--I don't mean criticism of it, I mean visceral, actual *HATERED* of anything and everything American--respectable on the left? Why do leftist not renounced those of their number who openly support the killing of their fellow Americans in acts of "resistance" (read: terrorism)? Why are they called "activists" instead of what they really are: traitors?

Actually, the issue has been dealt with for over 900 posts.
And that is your personal issue with the panelist.
The post is about Palin, so it is odd that none of her supporters can find logical and compelling arguments.

Haven't we had enough of persoanl attacks?

So, your answer is, that such a simple request is beyond the scope of a post about Palin?

How is a question about Palin, on a post about Palin, not relevant?

Wouldn't you be somewhat suspicious of democrats who couldn't elucidate why they are for Obama?

I think you would.

I'm trying to raise the conversation out of the gutter of vitriol- to the realm of reason.

Are you saying that no one here is interested in reasonble dialogue?

Frankly, attacks on the panelist- after 900 of them- are pretty repetitve, require no constructive intelligence, and are boring.
But if you are satisfied with that- fine.
I give people the benefit of the doubt that some may want to elevate the conversation at some point- but maybe I'm wrong about that.

More attacks (now on my time?) still are not a substitute for an answer worthy of consideration.

Once again Victoria, way to divert the core issue here.

Considering you seem to have so much free time, you'll probably be on your computer many more hours than I can. So you'll obviously get in the last word. Just not the best one.

The real issue here is Doniger's obvious smear against Palin. Once again, you don't have to have a positive view on Palin's politics in order to have some common decency.

Criticism is one thing. The character assassination and vitriol towards Palin is the problem with Doniger and this article - and that is something your repetitive, "Why do YOU support Palin, huh?" attempts at drawing attention from the core issue here will never work.

Good day. And get a life!

Oh dear, I forgot about the 200 and 85 billion bailout for Fannie-Mae and AIG_ last week-

So that is 1,57,000,000,000 PLUS 285,000,000,000

$1,342,000,000,000.00

it is hard to keep up-

Palin solutions, anyone?

From a logical standpoint: you should realize that Palin doesn't even have to "appeal" to someone in order for them not to smear her in the fashion Doniger has. Whether or not you support Palin and/or her political stance is irrelevant to the aforementioned point.

You're obviously trying to divert attention away from the core issue here. Nice try (not really).

Sorry- I have to revise those figures-
357 billion dollar deficit plus 700 billion dollar bailout just announced by Bush =

$1 Thousand 57 billion dollar deficit now-

$157,000,000,000.00

So, what IS Palin's answer?

Well, I'm not a smug arrogant liberal elitist Mike and Skeptic- and logic and objectivity is exactly what I am asking for!

You'll notice my posts have no personal aspersion cast- and contain facts, figures and stances with neutral links to attest totheir truth.

Not blogs- or opinions- but impartial, objective sites.
So, what can you tell us about the stances on issues that Palin holds that appeals to you?

From a purely logical, non-emotional perpsective?

"All Beliefs Welcome, Unless They are Forced on Others"?

Well, it's my firm belief you are a smug, arrogant liberal elitist that will never be able to truly think logically and objectively about any subject.

I don't think I have to force anyone else in to believing that.

Skeptic-
I understand you do not care for Doniger- but I asked the question, in earnest.

As you railed against the value of polls quite recently- do you really think a poll is your best argument?

Again, you revert to emotional reasons- which are fine if they are yours.
You, and the people of Alaska are certainly entitled to like or dislike anyone.

For instance, the people of Alaska have a substantial reason to like Palin. When she took office oil was down to $9. a barrel.
In her tenure as gov- it has risen to over $130. a barrel- resulting in an ecnomic boom and a state budget that has gone to 500 million- and is projected to go to 700 million next year- WITH or WITHOUT Palin at the helm.

Now, I cannot imagine that you are going to credit Palin with the world market adjustments that have led to $130 a barrel prices.

http://www.gov.state.ak.us/omb/09_omb/budget/index.htm

So, that is a pretty substantial reason to like someone.

But it isn't about liking or not liking someone.
it's not about a 'gut reaction'.

If Palin is so privileged as to be voted in- she will be inheriting a $9.7 TRILLION dollar debt-
numbers beyond imagining.

$9,700,000,000,000.00

And a $357. Million dollar deficit-

$357,000,000,000.00

And an economy that hs collapsed because of the removing of the rules to protect us by Gramm-
deredulation has been McCain's call for decades.
(Can you say Keating 5 S&L bailout?- the first in our history?)
You are aware that McCain was one of the 5 charged, right?

So, what, in particular, about Palin's stance on ISSUES appeals to you?
What issues, proposals, repsonses to the current climate- numbers, facts, specifics-

You are welcome to support her from a purely emotional POV- as long as we are clear that is your criteria.

But from a reasoned and logical POV- as an academician- what issues do you point to?
Thanks.

>>>>>>>Why do you think she would be an effective leader?

Gee, I dunno. Having a 86% or so approval rating in the largest, and surely the toughest, state in the Union? Managing to do that despite raising five kids? Being faithful to her children and family for decades, showing her ability to stick to her word (you know, words such as "I do")?

Certainly she beats Obama, whose "leadership skills" consist of writing books about his favorite subject (himself), blabbering about "hope and change" (how original), and being a "community organizer" in that cess-pool of Democratic Party politics, Chicago--a city whose very name is synonymous with political corruption?

But hey, he has an Ivy-league degree, and comes from a big city, so he just *HAS* to be a better leader, right?

Wrong.

I can't believe a bunch of "Intellectuals" gave this woman a degree. I could show a picture of Sarah Palin to a bunch of first graders and they could identify which bathroom she should use. For heaven's sake Forrest Gump is smarter than this. Why do you intellectuals allow people like this to disparage your good reputation regardless of your political views? No wonder the "Bubba's" vote for Republicans like Bush. Way to go Doniger I sure as hell know who I'm voting for. The debate is over for me if the Ivy League intellectuals "Like Obama" believe this trash. I will take personal satisfaction of knowing my 1 vote will cancel this imbeciles vote out. See you in November

Hey Jennifer

I couldn't agree with you more. I am voting MCcain/Palin for exactly that reason. See you November 4th.

Thank you for your thoughtful analysis.

By Ms. Doniger:

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

This statement proves how far haters will go to demonize people when they don't agree with them. Attempting to redefine someone as a "non-woman" because you disagree with her demonstrates nothing more clearly than blind hatred.

It also demonstrates that Ms. Doniger doesn't seek equality for women, but only for those women with whom she agrees. It reveals Ms. Doniger's sexism, a willingness to subordinate femininity to ideology, and is reminiscent of Stalin's redefining political enemies as "non-persons."

Doniger then engages in flat-out lies:

"I am on record in this blog (and have not budged an inch) as not objecting to any candidate's religious views."

Really, Ms. Doniger? Then what is the point of this entire article, but to condemn Mrs. Palin for the way she lives her personal and family life?

"But I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people."

What evidence do you have that Mrs. Palin intends to do so? Do you present any facts? Mrs. Palin has expressly stated that she would not do so, and as you well know, the Constitution prohibits it. So what is your evidence, other than the way Mrs. Palin lives her personal life, which you so obsess upon?

The heart of Ms. Doniger's case against Ms. Palin is a series of fevered imaginings that have nothing to do with reality or anything Sarah Palin has ever said:

"I'd love to know precisely how the Good Lord conveyed to her so clearly his intention to destroy the environment (global warming, she thinks, is not the work of human hands, so it must be the work of You Know Who), the lives of untold thousands of soldiers and innocent bystanders (He is apparently rooting for this, too, she says), and, incidentally, a lot of polar bears and wolves, not to mention all the people who will be shot with the guns that she thinks other people ought to have."

That Newsweek and the Washington Post consider Ms. Doniger's lunatic ravings to be responsible spiritual opinion worthy of publication (this is the "On Faith" column), reveals how benighted these news outlets have become.

And for the parents of University of Chicago divinity students, remember that this is the "education" you are providing your children. The faculty need not demonstrate critical thinking skills or even basic factual research; instead, your children's professors may regale them with ideological screeds utterly unhinged from any objective reality -- on your nickel.

>>>>>>>Besides sardonic attempts to discredit the panelist- do you actually have anything of value to add to the conversation about the subject of the topic?

Doniger doesn't deserve a serious discussion. What she deserves is charitable silence which ignores her obvious mental incapacitation, in the same way one should politely ignore somebody's clubbed foot. As Virgil said to Dante, "Speak not of them, but look, and pass them by."

But while Prof. Doniger deserves pity and silence for her obvious mental illness, if I *am* going to comment about her nevertheless, surely the only appropriate comment is to point and laugh, or, as you call it, a "sardonic attempt to discredit the panelist".

I know, I know--making fun of the insane is not nice. But most insane people don't get to write columns for the "Washington Post" or "Newsweek" in an attempt to sway a national election. If she gets to *be* a lunatic in such a high-visibility forum, why can't I *say* she's one in the same forum?

So, while I admit that, if I were more charitable, I would have simply said nothing about poor Prof. Doniger, at least I know I'm doing no harm. However much I "attempt to discredit" Doniger by pointing and laughing, I surely cannot do her crediblity any more damage than she's already done herself, with her own words.

Skeptic-
Besides sardonic attempts to discredit the panelist- do you actually have anything of value to add to the conversation about the subject of the topic?

The really interesting question is, exactly why- besides a rudimentary emotional connection- you are a fan of Palin's.

Why do you think she would be an effective leader?

Other than having a distaste for the author- do you actually have a compelling reason for your support?
You seem to avoid the actual subject-

Could it be that there is no real reason?

In general about the Obama-McCain race, I think it will be close, contrary to pundits on both sides who claim their favorite will blow the other guy out of the water. I do not think all the claims about either the Democrats or the Republicans being in "panic mode" or "losing it" because the other guy gained 2% in recent polls mean much.

The intersting question is: how could the Democrats blow it so badly--have the race this close after 8 years of a president who, for a long while, had worse performance ratings than Nixon during Watergate, leading an unpolular war, and so on? (I do not *agree* with this assessment of Bush or Iraq, but nevertheless it's the case.)

The reason, I think, is that Obama is such an incredibly weak candidate for the presidency. He has no real experience, no significant laws to his credit, no clear views about anything (and being for "hope and change" doesn't count.) McCain is not perfect by any means--nobody is--but nobody can say he is unqualified for the job.

Obama has--in effect--only three things going for him: (1) He's black; (2) he's from an immigrant single-parent family; (3) he's not G. W. Bush. Well, that's nice, but what else has he done? What were the democrats thinking choosing him, when so many others were better qualified, I can't imagine.

It's not in the Bible, or the Qu'ran, or the Bhagavad Gita - it't in Your sick brain ! ! !

IF "It's not in the Bible, or the Qu'ran, or the Bhagavad Gita" - it'

Folks --

Mike is quite correct in his description of how 95% of academics are like. The problem is perception, not reality.

On any given day in my alma mater, you'd have hundred of instructors and professors honestly teaching thousands of students everything from engineering to Greek classics to the best of their ability. Just like Mike said.

Unfortunately, you'd also have two professors out on the lawn joining 50 pathetic "activists" "protesting" the evil USA's Zionist-Capitalistic-Imperialist-Racist-Whatever latest nefarious plot, or else shouting "RACIST!" at everybody who passes by who doesn't agree with them 100% about everything.

Those professors, incidentally, were *never* from, say, Engineering or Philosophy or Law or History or any other real department. They were always ALWAYS *ALWAYS* from some fake, B.S. department like "gay studies"--or else they were professors of literature, which were just as bad.

(Yes, unlike "black studies" and similar fake "scholarly" fields, literature *is* of course a real discipline. But for complicated reasons, the post-modernist "activism" plague managed to take over many literature departments, naturally enough completely destroying any scholarship, replacing it with vague left-wing resentment politics.)

Guess which ones get all the attention in the press?

I--and it seems that Mike as well--are begging you folks: PLEASE do not judge all academics by the like of Doniger.

Mike --

I *am* an academic, and I agree with you that academics are not useless. But we are hardly innocent in making it look that we are.

When--unfortunately--entire departments (fortunately, only pathetic, faux-academic departments such as "spiritual theology", "gay studies", etc.) are staffed with the likes of Doniger, and it is just those folks who keep ranting in the media (real scholars have better things to do), it is not surpirising this perception of academics is common.

It's a bit like the way young black men are seen. It is not that most of them are criminals or gang members--only a small percentage is. But when that percentage gets all the attention, the stereotype against them persists. This is unfair, but still the Black community is not free of blame: if it took better care to stop young people from joining gangs, the stereotype wouldn't exist.

In response to those who think academics are useless: Do you know any? Have you been to college? I've been an academic for years and we do such stupid, useless, and dangerous things as help young adults learn critical thinking, communication, and research skills; sometimes we even attempt to do REALLY destructive things like take students on mission trips and encourage other forms of public service. Our students also get the specific education and training they need for those "real" jobs that we all benefit from--teachers, physicians, nurses, librarians, police officers, and yes even garbage collectors. And gosh, just the other day at my state university we discussed MATTERS of FAITH!! and not once did the elites from around campus come and berate me or my students. Believe it or not (and I'm guessing many of you will choose the "not" option here) most academics, in addition to having the luxury to explore and debate the big questions that civilizations have faced for centuries, expend considerable energy and time trying to find the most effective ways to engage and teach students and to help them develop the tools they need to succeed professionally and personally outside of college, to be active members in our civic life, and, in the words of the mission statement from another college I was on the faculty of, "To live lives of meaning and purpose." Of course, maybe those of you among the non-intellectual elite find this offensive, stupid, lazy, dangerous, and whatever other criticisms you like to throw at academics.

Wow, abortion is a right in the constitution? No hardly. No where do you find it mentioned in the constitution. This is an issue of the 20th /21st century not the 18th.

Its ok to lean on Roe vs Wade, but when you lean on the constitution for this one, all you'll do is fall down.

Interesting how the numbers are suddenly meaningless when they disprove the GOP (false) contention that Palin effectively influenced women voters.

She influenced them all right- but NOT as has been asserted ad nauseum, postively.

So, I guess while you ignore the numbers- (which wer eposted simply to disprove lies as opposed to prove anything)

I suppose you feel comfortable ignoring McCain's demntia moments where he basically insults (by saying he doesnt know if he would invite him to the Whitehouse)the president of a country who is our NATO ally,
has sent troops to Afghanistan-
and heads an improtant and pwoerful European democracy- because he

1) Doesn't even recognize his name.
2) Seems to believe heis Zapata, references Mexico- and I suppose also thinks its 1919 because tat is when Zapata died.
3) Doesn't realize that the subject is Spain even thought it was the lead in question
4) Thinks the interviewer is asking about Latin America??

Yes, you can ignore that too-

Also you can ignore the fact that McCain would fire Cox- although that is NOT one of the presidential privleges- as he heads an INDEPENDENT Regulatory Commission and the President cannot fire him!

Hence the word INDEPENDENT!!!!!

In other words, he doesn't even know what the Presidents job is either!

I wouldn't hire him.
You keep ignoring the facts and talking about distractions while the rest of us pay attention to the real issues and make our informed decisions from those.
4)

>>>>>..Statistics are interesting, and numbers just don't lie.

Actually, there are numerous ways to lie with numbers and statistics. There is even an excellent book, "How to Lie with Statistics", about this.

Polling numbers, in particular, can be ignored. They are so easily manipulated--intentionally or unintentionally--they are practically useless. Remember, for instance, how virtually every poll predicted Kerry will win?

Besides, there is a moral issue: you should vote for the candidate you consider best, not for the candidate the polls say is most likely to win, just so you could feel you "picked a winner".

Is McCain operating on all cylinders?
Is this the man you want to entrust foreign policy to?

Is McCain aware that Spain is our trusted ally and meber of NATO- and a strong democracy?
Does he know that Spain is in Europe?

Does he know that Spain has allied troops in Afghanistan?
Does he know that Zapatero is the President of Spain, or does he think the interviewer is talking about Zapata?
You know, Zapata- one of the leaders of the Mexican Revolution in 1910?

Does he know what continent, or even hemisphere that Spain is located?
Does he even knwo the NAME of the President of Spain?
iS HE SERIOUSLY snubbing THE PRESDIENT OF OUR ALLY? FOR NO DISCERNIBLE REASON???

Here are the words from his interview today on Florida radio station WASA 1260-

Q: Senator, finally, let's talk about SPAIN. If you are elected president, would you be willing to invite President Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero to the White House to meet with you?

McCain: I would be willing to meet with those leaders who are friends and want to work with us in a cooperative fashion. And by the way, President Calderon of MEXICO is fighting a very, very tough fight against the drug cartels. I am glad we are now working in cooperation with the MEXICAN government on the Merida plan. And I intend to move forward with relations and invite as many of them as I can, of THOSE leaders to the White House.

Q: Would that invitation be extended to the Zapatero government, to the president himself?

McCain: I don't, I, you know, honestly, I have to look at relations, and the situations, and the priorities but I can assure you I will establish closer relations with our friends, and I will stand up to those who want to do harm to the United States of America. I know how to do both.

Q: So you have to wait and see if he is willing to meet with you, will you be able to do it in the White House?

McCain: Well, again, I don't. All I can tell you is that I have a clear record of working with leaders in the HEMISPHERE that are friends with us and standing up to those who are not. And that's judged on the basis of the importance of our relationship with LATIN AMERICA and the ENTIRE REGION.

Q: Okay, what about you? I'M talking about the PRESDIENT of SPAIN.

McCain: WHAT ABOUT ME WHAT?

Q: Okay, are you willing to meet with him if you are elected president?

McCain: I am willing to meet with any leader who is dedicated to the same principles and philosophy that we are for human rights, democracy, and freedom. And I will stand up to those that do not.
_______________________________

Does he even know who they are talking about?

YOU CANNOT MAKE THIS STUFF UP BECAUSE THE TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION-

Statistics are interesting, and numbers just don't lie.

Yes, people can interpret them and try to twist them- but the simpler they are- the harder it is to lie about them.

Amazingly- there has been a myth going around since Palin was introduced at the RNC, propogated by Fox news and picked up by others.
That Palin would siphon off women voters (especially white women like me, and my guess is just about every single woman here) and that Obama was losing support from that femographic.

This just in- as of September 18-

Obama- McCain numbers among only white women-

I choose to focus on white- because that is the supposed demographic that was claimed Obama has been losing in droves.

Keep in mind that the conventions get a bounce right after they occur.
Enough time has passed for the numbers to stabilize.

These are PRE-CONVENTION figures-

MCCAIN 45%
OBAMA 44%

POST CONVENTION (TODAY)

MCCAIN 37%
OBAMA 47%

McCain has LOST a whopping 12 points since Palin has been added to his ticket! LOST!!!

While Obama has gained and held!

In all women- Obama has gotten a superbounce of 21 points.

21 POINTS!

While you are all in here ranting and frothing at the WORDS of a woman you don't know- the rest of us are paying attention.

Dr. Donniger

The plucking of Sarah Palin, tounge-twisters about peasants and plucking aside, reminds me of the Monty Python Skit when Michael Palin joins the Philosophy Department of Wallamagoo University (I think it was Wallamagoo) and it is suggested that he should be called Bruce to avoid confusion. As Gertrude Stein would have pointed out there is a difference between a womban and woman and as we have once again discovered with Ms. Palin that for Republicans that the only rights womben or women should have are those preselected by the disinterested and inquisitionous family centric Dobsons of this world.

Yours

James Lewes (Dr of Journalism and other media related diseases.)

You stupid idiot. You wouldn't know a "real woman" if she bumped into you.

Ivory tower academics, chairbound and myopic,
are the most useless people in society. The
man who picks up my garbage performs a much
more valuable and essential service and
contributes more to the common effort than
any rockstar, actor, journalist, politician
or "Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions".

I have all the respect in the world for the garbage man and nothing
but contempt for the parasite and the twisted psyche that spews
this pseudo-intellectual nonsense!!

>>>>>>>For all the rabid rightwingers, I was a member of the International Socialist Organization for three years, and I remain supportive of the work they do and their attempts to educate fellow activists.

Hmmmm. The International Socialist Organization? The ISO?

The Troskyist-Communist group?

The one whose official goal is to make the US into a Marxist country?

The one so far out on the fringe and insignificant, that when my alma mater (to its shame) allowed them to use one its halls for their "17th world congress of socialist revolution activism" -- not the exact title, but you get the idea -- the "mass meeting" of all the world's ISO members turned out to be about 100 sad sacks in a half-empty hall?

*THAT* ISO?

Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.

Well, this certainly explains why you are the only one here, more or less, who is defending Prof. Doniger, or finds her to be anything else than a complete idiot. Birds of feather...

But, as they say, with friends like yourself, Prof. Doniger doesn't need any "reactionary" enemies to prove she's far out on the lunatic fringe, in case the "Palin is not a woman" nonsense didn't settle that point.

you are a typical journalist: good with words terrible with ideas. Can not think your way out of a wet paper bag.

Mmmm.... Pretty much all unDemocrat party policy uses coercion to enforce. Taxes, morality ... oh and who can forget that idea-gem Man Made Global Warming where we will be forced to pray at the alter in the Church of Latter Day Global Warming. I think we know who is the absolute worst offender in the area of "forcing ideas" on people. And worse yet unDemocrat ideas...ouch! .. these guys were definitely in special ed.

>>>>>>>For all the rabid rightwingers, I was a member of the International Socialist Organization for three years, and I remain supportive of the work they do and their attempts to educate fellow activists.

Hmmmm. The International Socialist Organization? The ISO?

The Troskyist-Communist group?

The one whose official goal is to make the US into a Marxist country?

The one so far out on the fringe and insignificant, that when my alma mater (to its shame) allowed them to use one its halls for their "17th world congress of socialist revolution activism" -- not the exact title, but you get the idea -- the "mass meeting" of all the world's ISO members turned out to be about 100 sad sacks in a half-empty hall?

*THAT* ISO?

Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.

Well, this certainly explains why you are the only one here, more or less, who is defending Prof. Doniger, or finds her to be anything else than a complete idiot. Birds of feather...

But, as they say, with friends like yourself, Prof. Doniger doesn't need any "reactionary" enemies to prove she's far out on the lunatic fringe, in case the "Palin is not a woman" nonsense didn't settle that point.

Ms. Doniger,

One thing is clear - it is NOT in the Constitution.

I'm the 2:49am anonymous poster. and i really have to go to sleep.

A commenter by the name of victoria had this to add to the discussion: 'It is funny- how tv affects peoples repsonses.
Roland Martin had a special on 7 Weeks To Go tonight on CNN and there was a woman who complained that Doniger said Palin wasn't a woman- at WAPO OnFaith (she gave all the info, I guess to direct blogger here-which I see happened)

And suddenly people are in here pretending that their wives suddenly came to the independent realition that Doniger denigrated the womanhood of Palin!'

Hmm, why am I not at all surprised? The previous 900 rantings and ravings suddenly have an identifiable point of origin, and I can now take a second to cease pulling out my hair over this cataclysm of sheer irrationality.

But since you, "Skeptic," directly addressed me, I'll just say this: it's apparent that you nor I will be swayed in this debate. Your gotcha comment regarding the symbolism of Obama betrays your cynicism. Because now - guess what? Thanks to your awesome guy McCain, there are now two candidates in this race that are vunerable to attacks of not being quite experienced enough (and naturally, it depends on who you have defining experience). So, if you had any sense, you might ask yourself why we Americans find ourselves in such a predicament. And again, that's why I mentioned the troubling personality contest feel of our current elections. I, personally, place the blame on our corporate media-saturated culture. As well as rampant anti-intellectualism. Apparently, it's not necessary for Americans to be informed citizens - that would be too close to, I don't know, democracy.

Anyway, I had a good laugh when you described my great anticipation of Obama "ascending to heaven." I'm not even a Democrat. I simply look forward to more sincerity and more demonstrated intelligence in our president, and less war-mongering and explicit greed. For me, this is not about the symbolism of Obama; it's about people becoming energized & inspired...to demand necessary change whether or not Obama delivers. It's only when masses of people develop the consciousness to mobilize to demand accountability from their elected leaders will any progress be made.

For all the rabid rightwingers, I was a member of the International Socialist Organization for three years, and I remain supportive of the work they do and their attempts to educate fellow activists. All of the reactionaries go ahead and have a field day. I've had my fill of the internet for today.

p.s. Skeptic, please read something on postmodernism other than what your fellow rightwing culture-warriors have to say about it. it's a little less simple than you believe, and only a bad word when you know how to use it correctly. there's a gazillion books on the subject, and even a handy-dandy wikipedia article to help you get started. just so you know. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism

The tortured logic that allows you to say that Sarah Palin is not a women is one more confirmation of my long held opinion of the character and mental abilities of the left wing.
But, rave on! Please! I love to watch you people rush onto the national stage, gnashing your teeth, soiling yourselves (figuratively, of course), and nearly imploding with desperate vitriol.
I find it most amusing. Most amusing indeed! (sound of smug laughter)

>>>>>>.I notice no one has anything to say about the candidate, Sarah Palin.

That's because Doniger's unhinged rant doesn't *deserve* a reply that deals with Palin.

If Doniger criticized Palin on, say, her economic policy, you could expect some replied to defend Palin's economic views and others to attack it.

But when Doniger's "criticism" is (in effect) "Palin is not a woman! I hate her! I *HATE* her!!!", the only reasonable response is to point and laugh at Doniger.

Another brain dead "college professor"

>>>>>>Because, folks, we're not looking for symbolism - we're looking for substance.

We ARE???

So why on earth did the Democrats choose Obama?

There are so many potential deocratic presidential candidates who are more experienced, more qualified, and who hold clear views about important issues (whether one agrees with those views or not). Of all the potential Democratic presidential candidates, Obama is clearly the least experienced and most vague about important issues.

Obama was chosen precisely *BECAUSE* he is a symbol, and for no other reason. You know: Black, immigrant family, single mother, rags-to-riches story, "community activist", Harvard-educated, etc. It is on his qualification of being a "symbol of hope and change" that he hopes to be elected.

So now all of a sudden the democrats care about "substance, not symbols"? Get real!

I notice no one has anything to say about the candidate, Sarah Palin.
No one seems to offer any actual reasons as to WHY they 'like' her, and defend her.

And she seems to be doing greater damage to herself with every breath.

Half a year ago- 5 months before any of us ever heard her name- a bipartisan committee of 14 republicans and democrats both- vote unamimously- that is 14-0- to investigate Palin on abuse of power charges in her firing of Alaskan Public Safety Commissioner over refusing to bow to her vengeful and unethical demand that he fire her former brother-in-law, Wooten.

Palin assured us when this story leaked that she had promised and will do everything to prove her innocence in any wrongdoing.

NOW, however, she is REFUSING to testify on her own behalf!
Claiming that the lead investigator is an Obama supporter (he is a democrat)!!!

And will only testify to the Personnel Board that is hand-picked by her!!

Who, has ever heard of an individual being able to pick their own judges!!!

NOW- to make the ridiculous even more sublimely comical, she has completely changed her reasopn for firing the commissioner!

She says now, (I could not make this stuff up)
That, the Commission Monegan- was fired by her- not because he dared to go against her imperial will- but because he- IN A STATE THAT IS THE HIGHEST STATISTICS FOR RAPE IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY- dared to ask for more funding for fighting rape!!!!

What an intelligent and judicious executive decision!

Of course, it is a just made up now fake reason- never heard of before today-

but - the cure is worse than the disease!

Best not to publish a rant with few facts and little relevence.

I like it when they post their pictures. Not only for the entertainment value, but for the easy lib recognition factor. It's just too easy.

Sorry, I meant "to", not "the". I guess I lose some liberal elitist points there or something. :(

Does it hurt when you press the shift button the capitalize "Good" and "Lord" together?

As if the media wouldn't have 'outed' Palin's daughter. Wendy Doniger presents the outing as if Palin had a choice, of course, not true. And saying that she being a woman is a 'pretense'. I guess you have to be a Democrat to be a woman. I wish I could email this window into the Democrat mind to every woman in America, for it really shows what contempt the Democrat 'elites' have for a. real women, b. those who don't agree with them, and c. those who can read (abortion in the constitution ?!?!?)
University of Chicago should check this nut out - she is out there!

Unbelievable! Never checked a fact, did you? Pity the Washington Post's "terms of use" don't apply to the sort of drivel they publish as "legitimate" comment in the first place....

Amen sister! Let us not forget the very reasons why the writers of the Constitution made the separation of church and state one of our civil rights. And, if you want to get right down to it, the argument can be made that a woman's decision to have or not to have an abortion is a matter of her spiritual beliefs making it fall under the Constitutional Bill of Rights that protects the freedom of religion.

How dare you use a woman who is filled with this much partisan hate and bile to write a column called, "On Religion." Her religion is apparently Far Left politics. This article has not a thing to do with religion as most would define it.

Volumes could be written about this poorly reasoned article but lets examine her last comment about Joe Biden's abortion stance.

If Joe Biden believes life begins at conception then by definition he agrees that abortion is the taking of an innocent life, what used to be called, in law books in a bygone era, murder. However, as Doniger comments, "he has gone out of his way to insist that he would not impose his personal views on others, and has indeed voted against curtailing abortion rights and against criminalizing abortion."
Then she gives her sacred blessing, "That is the right answer."

What exactly does that say about Joe Biden? That he thinks murder is negotiable and this might be a stretch, but I don't think even
Doniger would accept that premise.

Secondly, it is completely fallacious to speak about one person imposing their religious views on others as if Sara Palin has the power to something like that.

Finally, it's completely acceptable to Doniger for one ideology to trump another and force it on a society vis-a-vi abortion but it's certainly wrong to recognize that all human beings, whether in the womb or not, deserve full protection under the law. That view we cannot "force" on everyone. That view should be kept private.

In reality, Doniger has no problem with anyone imposing their personal views on society as long as what's being imposed are the correct views, the ones she agrees with. It's right for me but not for you. We have a word for that, "hypocrisy."

The reason we've found ourselves plunged into the ugliness of personal attacks stems primarily from the fact that, here, in the presidential election personality and politics have become disturbingly intertwined. You know what? I bet that I would enjoy the company of any number of republican folk - palin, mccain, bush, ect., ect. If I knew them in personal life, I might even go the distance and say that that they're some decent folk. This is the case for anyone you or I might meet who has a healthy sense of humor, and a comfortable 'every-man' feel. However that is not the basis by which I decide someone is then prepared to run a country. The most jovial, kind-hearted man or woman you know might inspire you with their strong spirit and strong sense of self, but taking that alone - how are we possibly to extrapalote that this person has the judgement, the experience, the vision to make executive decisions about the lives and fates of hundreds of millions of people? That requires a LOT more than a nice smile, an adorable family, or a plucky underdog persona. A funny, friendly personality does not a wise leader make.

But I digress. I was asked if I agree with Doniger that Palin is not a woman. I highly doubt that she's suggesting we should go and take a peek under Palin's skirt. That's absurd. What Doniger is surely referring to is that when it comes to ensuring that women are granted more choice, more equality, and more respect, Palin's presence on the Republican ticket only goes so far. Yes, it is absolutely necessary that women be seen in positions of responsiblity and power. And yes, working mothers deserve far more valorisation than they have yet received. Palin functions as a symbol of that and many women are happy to see it; however, the question is what has Palin *done* for women, and what will she *do* in the future? There she is, the token woman - we can all see that. However, instead of participating with those who have traditionally fought for women's rights (liberals), she's on the side of a party that has traditionally fought to keep women in their place. Check out this article to see what I mean: http://www.newsweek.com/id/157543/output/print

Why else would Doniger (or I for that matter) suddenly become upset about a woman and a mother assuming power? Because, folks, we're not looking for symbolism - we're looking for substance. I'm biracial just like Obama and would be happy to see a black face in the white house at long, long last, but if the man was trying his hardest to take away's women's choice and taking approaches to the issues in the same conservative stance that McCain & Palin do (the war, taxes, global warming, ect.), I wouldn't think twice about voting against him.

Why? Because I don't want a woman's face, or a black man's face. I want to see progress in everyday people's lives. If that means being a bit critical of one particular lady, then so be it.

But why is it that you never see an attractive feminist? I just find it chuckle-worthy...

Ms. Doniger's position examplifies the thinking by some on the left that truth and reality are not universal or absolute but are, instead relative. This how Bill Clinton can be labelled the first black president when he was not of black skin. "Woman" and "black" are not physical attributes, they are states of mind. For example I'd wager there are men in Ms. Doniger's life who are women to her simply because these men THINK a certain way. This is also how a woman who had a sex change but kept her female organs could be labelled a pregnant man.

Sadly truth and reality are not relative. The spoon does exist. One persons' right is not merely another person's wrong. This mentality is also why some feminists will not help women in foriegn countries. Those women are not liberals so therefore they are not real women and so undeserving of help.

Its sad that the group who talks about inclusion and tolerance is the most intolerant and exclusive by defining "woman" as the person who follows an ideology vs a being with female body parts.

Ms. Doniger, life is not a buffet and men are not the caterers. No one owes you a spread of choices. Independant, strong willed people make their choices happen. Someone like Sarah Palin for example.

I like Palin, from what I've been able to see.
McCain's economic policies I'm not so sure about.

To add to my previous comments, my view about the nasty comments of the "Doniger needs to get laid" sort:

First, I do not approve of personal attacks of Prof. Doniger's looks or sexual morals, but I think claiming she is an idiot is quite justified: we have ample evidence to prove *that*, evidence she herself provided to us.

Second, while I don't approve of such attacks, I can understand where they're coming from. After all, you can't very well post absurd, ridiculous lies about someone and then act shocked--SHOCKED!--that people, in return, are less than 100% civil to you.

Doniger shows, in miniature, the problem the liberals have. They, too, have been telling the American public for years how evil, stupid, and inferior they are--usually on evidence no better than Doniger's "proof" that Palin is "not a woman". They are then shocked--SHOCKED!--to learn that a large number of Americans don't like or trust them. What possible reason could there be for these incomprehensible bad feelings against them? The liberals ask themselves. Must be "the Republican propaganda machine", or something.

Oh I'll respond, all right.
What a load of garbage!!! I can't believe these so called "feminists" can't see beyond their closed-mind ideologies to see that a woman who is clearly "fed-up" with current-day politics is able to step in and show a little muscle, while at the same time care for her family.
Get off your democratic high horse and smell the coffee!!!
And by the way, I am not buying Joe Biden's new "Angry" facade...He has served the sixth-longest period among current senators and hasn't done anything other than superficially sign his name on any paper that comes across his desk that might make him look good.He wants change? What has he been doing all those years????
It's funny, I was "on the fence" about which way to place my vote-after reading your article, I think I have officially crossed over to the McCain/Palin side.

Jennifer:

While (in over 900+ posts) there are some "extreme right-wing" replies (e.g., there's one actual neo-Nazi who posted), the great majority of the replies have nothing to do with left or right but with exploding Doniger's false and patently absurd claims about Palin.

Do you agree with Prof. Doniger that Palin is not a woman, and that Palin is a "liar" for claiming to be one? Do you think Palin should come clean and admit she was lying all these years and is actually a man? That might be a bit of a surprise to her husband and children, I presume, but I suppose Prof. Doniger would breezily claim that this just shows what *good liars* Republicans are.

If you don't agree with these claims--and I am sure you don't--what exactly is so "spot on" about Doniger's screed? Why does it "need to be said" Palin isn't really a woman? More generally, why do Doniger's other allegations--the vast majority of them having already been proven to be simply lies--"need to be said"? Seems to me that absurd and false slanders are, by their very nature, the kind of things that do NOT need to be said.

Or is the mere fact that these absurd allegations are against a Republican that makes them worthy of being said? Truth-schmuth; anything to help St. Obama ascend to heaven in November, I guess.

P.S.

And don't tell me Doniger was using the word "woman" metaphorically. Alas, being a postmodernist scholar, she means this claim quite literally. For the last 30 years or so, postmodernists claimed that "gender"--that is, being a man or a woman--has NOTHING TO DO with biology, and is totally "socially constructed", as you may have heard.

I've read and/or skimmed a number of the comments here, and I am rather overwhelmed by the extremely vehement responses directed towards Wendy Doniger. I would expect this level of vitriol out of an extreme rightwing online publication. Um, not the washington post and newsweek. I will admit that much of what Doniger writes is provocative and polemical, but it is *absolutely* on point. Furthermore, in our current climate (not to mention this comment page), it *needs* to be said.

Whether or not Palin will be able to successfully enforce any of her own private & now publicly-touted beliefs once in office is perhaps debateable. But what's at stake here is the force of religious discourse in American politics. Conservative fundamentalist Christianity is cited as the only religious perspective that matters, and wouldn't you know it - how convenient for the republicans to leap upon 'faith' and 'family values' as if they, alone, monopolize these things. There is, in fact, a set of beliefs, practices, and values that are based within the constitution, but also in the many struggles for justice & democracy since. Many people of faith, believe it or not, subscribe to these kinds of progressive principles, yet are silenced because someone with the backing of Republicans such as Palin tells us of her Christian (ahem, Pentecostal) faith, and because of that she now knows what's best for all the rest of us. No matter that so much of what she has supported in Alaska has worked to the detriment of her fellow believers, her fellow women, even it seems her fellow parents of disabled children.

The commenters here are apparently quite ignorant of the ways in which the rightwing elite has manipulated the Christian faithful into accepting (a) that the republicans are committed to anything other than retaining their money and power, and (b)that the American voters needn't bother themselves with learning the facts. *Everything* that Doniger speaks of has a basis; I've been reading about nearly every single one of the charges she makes against Palin since day one. Until you all start personally digging around for information other than that the major networks, you're not going to have any clue why liberals are so furious and concerned. I applaud Wendy in saying what needs to be said; it's unfortunate that it is so divisive and partisan, but let's face reality: Palin is no angel, by an means.

You've GOT TO BE KIDDING! I am an independent and educated voter and people like you are why I regect the Democratic Party. You are absolutely ridiculous. Get a reality check and an education-Professor!

You've GOT TO BE KIDDING! I am an independent and educated voter and people like you are why I regect the Democratic Party. You are absolutely ridiculous. Get a reality check and an education-Professor!

Ms. Doniger states that Biden gave the right answer and backs this up by stating "It's in the Constitution." Perhaps Ms. Doniger has a different version of the Constitution than I possess for I have scoured it repeatedly and have never seen the word "abortion" anywhere in the US Constitution. The Supreme Court has decided to use the Constitution as a way for women to have reproductive rights but that is a long way from saying it is actually in the Constitution. If it were actually in the US Constitution, then people wouldn't be so worried about McCain/Palin overturning Roe v Wade.

This is really disappointing. I remember reading about Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty from Emory University days as a bright new religion scholar. This post reads like she just cut and pasted various Democratic party talking points. If you're a flack, fine, that's your job. But the Mircea Eliade prof at the UC Divinity School? I expected better.

are you incapable of shame for your repugnant remarks?

Why is it that the far-Left always thinks of its own positions on policy as wholly open and non-coercive? Professor, if you cannot see that much of what you recommend forces your beliefs on others through government action, you are blind and totally unthoughtful. Some of us think of gun control as an important freedom and resent liberals suggesting otherwise. I also do not want the tax money that I am forced to give up to pay for social institutions that encourage the moral waywardness of teen girls. No position on policy from any perspective--not Left, not Right, not even anarchism--is a neutral, open, non-coercive position. They all have consequences for others; all involve coercion on some level. So please spare us this nonsense, professor. Your article is intellectually dishonest.

You are an idiot. Newsweek, and your parents, should be ashamed.

I read your post the other day and liked what you had to say! I made a mental note to come back and see what you had to say another day.

I liked your wit, and got some good chuckles from your insights (including the newly famous line about her "pretense". Maybe as a former teen mom, now mom of 3, I appreciate your voicing opinions that speak to me and what I see -- the frighteningness that is Sarah Palin.

Thank you for your posts. Enjoy your Freedom of Speech like I do, and ignore Fox News' rhetoric! :-)

Take care,

Kay

you know it's ironic isn't it...how we've heard since 1939 how horrible Hitler was for killing six million jews and since the fifties the AMA (85% jewish) has killed over 43 million childern...FOE MONEY!!! chew on that for a minute...how hypocritical, isn't it?

SARAH'S OWN CONSITUENT OFFERS HER EXPERIENCE WITH PALIN

I do not believe Sara Palin knows very much about children or adults with disabilities. Her promise to help adults with disabilites did not lead her to provide sign language interpreters or CART (captions of her speech for the deaf or hard of hearing) at the Governors Picnic in Fairbanks this summer. This is suppose to be an affair open to ALL people including those with disabilities. She had no idea what I was talking about with her AND she was NOT interested in what I had to say.
Thus her pledge to help people with disabilities is just a compaign pledge and is NOT sincere in my opinion. People with disabilities are often very intelligent but may be blind, deaf, etc and need access to communication
so they know what their Governor is saying.

FROM HER HOMETOWN NEWS STATION

by Leyla Santiago
Sunday, Sept. 14, 2008

ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Gov. Sarah Palin's child, Trig, was born with Down Syndrome this year. She cites his birth and rearing as evidence of a new understanding toward children with special needs.

It's a topic she's been vocal about throughout the campaign. But critics say her record doesn't exhibit a dedication to special needs programs.

One program that supports special needs children is the Special Olympics.

"It's very good for other people with disabilities and others in our community," said one Alaska Special Olympics participant.

During her speech at the Republican National Convention, Palin pledged support to families with special needs children.

"To the families of special needs children all across this country, I have a message for you: For years you've sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters, and I pledge to you that if we are elected, you will have a friend and an advocate in the White House," the governor said.

Since Palin's pledge support for children with disabilities has increased.

"Any time a political leader or someone in the limelight speaks on behalf of people with disabilities, that awareness piece is very huge and it goes a long way," Alaska Special Olympics President James Balamaci said.

But some legislators in Alaska say the state's approach to the special needs community is nothing to be proud of.

"I don't think there are many people in the Alaska disability community that would say she's been a champion for them," said Sen. Bill Wielechowski, an Anchorage Democrat. "And maybe she's changing her position on that, and I think that's a good thing."

Despite Palin's support for children with disabilities, Sondra Thompkins, who's son has autism, participated in a rally against the governor Saturday.

"We feel very strongly that Sarah Palin is not the right choice," Thompkins said.

Some say Palin has supported special needs programs financially but has cut out others.

"It's been a mixed bag," Wielechowski said. "There are certainly funds provided for some things for Special Olympics and there were other things that were cut."

While the Special Olympics did not want to make any comments about budget cuts, Channel 2 News looked into the governor's funding of the program.

Records show Palin actually increased their funding by $25,000. However, that amount is only half of what the program asked for.

Contact Leyla Santiago at lsantiago@ktuu.com

This professor is a total idiot.
this utter drivel from the Left.
utter claptrap,
start learning how to actually think.
disgusting,
vile,
frankly immoral
unethical,
fundamentally dishonest
damaging our civil society

best wishes.?????????????????????????

Ugly insult after vile degradation- But the funniest most outrageous hypocrisy of all-

YOU WISH HER YOUR BEST?

My! If this is your best, civil society needs to be protected from YOU!

Do you pray to God with that dirty mouth?

I am so sick and tired of left-leaning Rubes calling Palin a Dork.

My IQ is 164 (that's about 1 in 30,000), I went to the 2 top universities for degrees, and I am an inventor.

This professor is a total idiot. The only explanation for her having gotten tenure and a job at the university is her leftist bias and 'promoting their own' policies, which have damaged the talent at our universities to no end.

I actually like Barack Obama and will probably vote for him for President, but I totally understand why everyone is leaning Right after having to endlessly read this utter drivel from the Left.

Get a life, lady - quit the university, spare another generation from your utter claptrap, and start learning how to actually think.

Palin is obviously very bright. Her husband is demonstrably a highly supportive male spouse, the perfect role model for any couple where the woman's is the main career. They obviously have high principles to have had a 5th child with a major syndrome, due to their commitment to that child's soul.

You can choose to disagree with Palin's specific positions. You can argue she isn't qualifed to be VP due to lack of proper experience.

But these disgusting, vile, frankly immoral and unethical, as well as fundamentally dishonest assaults on DECENCY have to stop. You're just damaging our civil society and harming the next generation.

best wishes.

Are repulsed by the venom and hatred spewed forth like poison from these filthy mouths.

Jesus never said hate and abuse those with whom you disagree.

Shameful hypocrites.

This is a far more vicious and virulent underside of the true face of aggressive , hate-filled fearstruck representatives of Christian Republican neo-conservatives who have no conscience about killing hundreds of thousands (600,000 children- Lancet Report) of brown people all over the world- yet shed copious crocodile tears for unborn babies to hang onto their power.

If Jesus were here, he would not be able to stop throwing up.

I've never voted for a Republican, and I certainly can't claim to be a great fan of Sarah Palin, but this rant by Wendy Doniger is rife with nonsense.

Sarah Palin spoke out about her daughter's pregnancy after many people came to suspect that Sarah's daughter was the mother of Sarah's son. That involved no "hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people". Discussion of the matter was already widespread.

Sarah Palin never tried to ban any books, and I know of no evidence that she tried to "fire the librarian who stood against her." Pure fabrication.

"I'd love to know precisely how the Good Lord conveyed to her so clearly his intention to destroy the environment (global warming, she thinks, is not the work of human hands, so it must be the work of You Know Who)" Umm. Perhaps Doniger believes that God (gods, goddesses) never make such a decision. Seems there was an earthquake and tsunami on Dec. 26, 2004... There have been many natural events that have taken many lives.

With professors like this, it's no wonder that the percentage of men in the academy is in a state of collapse.

Why is this hate speech by this bigot/misogynist published in a national newspaper?

It is Clear that Barack Obama has a more detailed plan for the economy than John McCain. Unfortunately, He wants to drive the bus right over the cliff, hoping for 80 Billion in new tax revenues from the top 2 percent to pay for 300 Billion in more spending every year...That's scary.
He has also repealed the law of supply and demand. Nice Trick. Under this new law, domestic drilling and nuclear power will not decrease the cost of power. raising taxes on corporations will not force them to lay-off employees or move their manufacturing overseas.

Thanks to hate-mongers like Prof. Doniger, it looks like McCain is going to win the election. Most of America will not tolerate vicious lies and slanders in the interest of a political agenda. Add the elitist hate-speech from genius celebrities like Lohan, Damon and Griffin mean he will win going away. Imagine, Lohan, Damon and Doniger leading a right wing conspiracy to get McCain elected. That's real genius.

"Comments that include personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site." So your rules say. If this is your policy, then please remove your blog because it is an inappropriate attack upon Sarah Palin. Or do you not believe rules apply to you and other screaming liberals?

If the Washington Post Website removes "comments that include ... personal attacks," shouldn't they remove Wendy Doniger's article entirely?

Wendy...You are eloquent, well thought out, and TERRIFIC!!!!!!! Thanks for speaking out on this issue..Palin is an incredibly offensive choice for any number of reasons...thanks for blogging on this!

"All Beliefs Welcome, Unless They are Forced on Others"???

Then you must be opposed to Roe v. Wade, which forces the choice of liberal judges on those of us you would like to be able to have our votes count for something on this issue. Instead, judges make the rules, and we have to live with them--all when the Constitution says absolutely nothing about abortion. How "open" it all is!

Ma'm, I'd like to respectfully point out that the easy availability of abortions to young girls, makes it quick and easy to hide the evidence of sexual exploitation.

Let's not fool ourselves: Sexual gratification without responsibility has been a goal of a significant segment of all male populations since time began.

Abortion laws in the USA, as currently formulated, make it all the easier for those types of men to avail themselves of the pleasures of male/female intimacy - at zero cost of serious commitment.

A young women, after being used sexually one or several times, under the current system, ends up with nothing - just a dead baby.

Under the old system, the father of the child was prompted to whip himself into shape and commit himself to a positive relationship.

Studies clearly show that couples who are together and treat each other well, live better, more fulfilling lives.

It's not abortion you should be clamoring for. Rather, what you should be praying for and working towards is an America where young men treat young ladies with compassion, respect and dignity.

In their heart, young ladies are not interested in the current porno/stripper-chic, sleep-around culture that seeks to reinforce itself by ready access to abortion.

If abortions in the USA were to drop by 90%, the aggregate enjoyment, positive self-image and positive self-respect among America's young women would rise dramatically.

Young ladies, like everyone else, yearn to be appreciated, loved and respected.

Making it easy for sexual users to reduce them (via easy-access abortion) to nothing more than gratification dispensers is, in the long run, both cruel and shortsighted.

The idiocy of this essay is outstanding:

"Belief in god, like getting pregnant, is a private matter between consenting adults (or one consenting adult and one or more deities) and is no one else's business." Suppose my faith dictates human sacrifice or torture--still private? Suppose my mother and I wish to conceive a child together--still private? If not, where, and how, do you draw the line b/t private and public? Care to retract or modify your statement?

"But I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public..." Will you then condemn Obama's very public professions of Christian faith and praise McCain for being far more restrained in this regard? If not, why not?

"Sarah Palin's views make me fear that the Republican party has finally lost its mind." You may want to re-read your essay and consider whether you have lost yours.

"the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people" The left-wing crazies forced this revelation b/c of some really awful rumors about her daughter. So her choice was to "out" her daughter or let the terrible things beings said continue. I think Palin made the right choice, and you are complete bit** for suggesting otherwise.

"using a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska" You know, it may be surprising to a fruitcake like you, but lots of people would not want their tax money used for this. Teenagers should live with their parents and behave themselves, and government has no business making it easier for young women to behave badly and escape the consequences.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman." Palin looks a lot more female than you do, lady(?).

"She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women." I could recite for 30 minutes the names of women I know you will be voting for Palin in November. Almost all working class. The problems of women transcend the narrow concerns of fringe left-wing types like you. The working class women I live with would not agree with a thing you said here. One of them is standing over my shoulder now, reading your essay and laughing at you.

"(global warming, she thinks, is not the work of human hands" Neither do plenty of experts--e.g., Richard Lindzen of MIT. Here's a list of many, many more: http://martynemko.blogspot.com/2008/06/elite-scientists-dissent-from-climate.html
Just because Al Gore makes a movie doesn't make the story true--even when that story gets repeated again and again by the media.

"An even wider and more sinister will to impose her religious views on other people surfaced in her determination to legislate against abortion even in cases of rape." Let me ask you this: If I told you I was the product of my mother's being raped, would that justify the view that my mom should be legally able to kill me? Also, you obviously DO NOT need religion to justify a position against abortion--even in the case of rape.

"voted against curtailing abortion rights and against criminalizing abortion. That is the right answer. It's in the Constitution. It's not in the Bible, or the Qu'ran, or the Bhagavad Gita. It's in the mother-lovin' Constitution." Once again, there are quite obviously secular grounds for opposing abortion rights. Moreover, the Constitution is silent on the matter. It's not the Constitution, professor--it's judges as crazy as you on our courts imposing THEIR views on the MAJORITY under the guise of specious Constitutional interpretation. I do not see how that comports with the freedom our founders intended us to have.

Wendy Doniger, you are an idiot. DO the world a favor a keep your stupid comments to yourself.

As a UChicago alum, I am shocked that a prof from my alma mater would write anything this stupid.

i think you're jealous she's a hottie and gets everyone's attention.
this blog article proves feminism as represented by NOW and such ilk is truly dead, having moved entirely to the fringes of gay politics.

YOu have mixed her personal life with her political decisions they are two different things. For example her decision to line item veto a transitional school for pregnant girls has nothing to with her decision to support her OWN daughter.

It's sad that a hate monger gets to pass herself off as a "religion" professor. Femininity clearly is something you know little about. Sadly your just another mouthpiece for the monotonous HYPOCRITICAL political left. Blah, blah, blah.....

You, lady, do not speak for me.

Hey Doniger,

If you actually read the Constitution, abortion and gay marriage are not in there. Those were added by activist judges forcing thier beliefs on the rest of the nation. Also get your facts straight, Palin never banned any books and never fired the librarian. Although if the librarian was like you, I would applaud Palin if she fired her!

You mistakenly think that all women are like you - a militant man hating feminst who treats abortion as a right of passage into womanhood. Palin represents the real women in this country who respect God, this country, and the life of the unborn.

You are a joke. Go crawl back under the rock you came from with the rest of your man hating lesbian friends.

You have totally lost whatever tenuous grip you’ve had on reality and your credibility. How does a person like you get a forum for your ideological rants?

Right on! This Palin creature needs to be put in its place! Woman? Palin is hardly even human. Real women "work" at universities, write horribly bigoted critiques of the Hindu religion, and are leftist tools! You Go Girl!

"...not to mention all the people who will be shot with the guns that she thinks other people ought to have."

Is this implying that you believe people ought not to have them, and would enforce gun restriction legislation? Pretty sure that violating people's 2nd amendment rights would be 'inflicting private views' on other people...

Jealousy is a bad cologn. Referring to your quotes about Sarah Palin. You wont be happy until some ugly, no-shaving lesbian is in the white house.

...and in her attempts to ban books, including books on evolution, and to fire the librarian who stood against her.

Look it up, she didn't ask for any books to be banned, and didn't fire anyone over it.

Bork

So in your opinion you think that Sara Palin is the candidate/running mate that is least like a woman?

I think you are confused.

Didn't Wendy Doniger, just break your rules?

degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability, or other classification
is predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass
---------------------------------------
Wendy Said:
Belief in god, like getting pregnant, is a private matter between consenting adults (or one consenting adult and one or more deities) and is no one else's business.
Susan said: WELL YES!
-------------------------------
Considering the mainstream media dug all the dirt out on Sarah Palin and made it public..Do you think she had a right to defend herself from people like yourself or not?
Give me a break. You are so in the tank for obama your hypocrisy is rampaging.
Barrack Obama DID vote to not allow survivors of infanticide care if they survived a botched abortion and no matter what your views are, THAT is evil!

you spelled Qur'an wrong ...

Wow! this woman is totally in the lunatic bin.

"All Beliefs Welcome, Unless They are Forced on Others"

This statement, along with the screed accompanying it, is self refuting. "All Beliefs Welcome, Unless They Don't Agree With Mine" is what Doniger means.

And this is what we get from the academy?

It was the news media who sent their satraps to Alaska to discover if Sarah had a religion they could denigrate. It was the accusation that her daughter gave birth to Trip that encouraged her announcement of her daughter's growing pregnancy, probably to protect her as it was becoming obvious. Leftist journalists have depended on the bigoted liberal view of us conservatives to be spot on. They hoped we would crucify Sarah for having a pregnant daughter. Instead, we are being so non judgemental that one leftist journalist complained it was making the liberals appears 'stuffy and slow witted' for attacking young Bristol and her mother.
You all are being 'hoisted on your own petard'. Your own bigoted view of the Christian, middle class, hardworking American is causing you to make absured statements, while we seem to be disproving your bigoted hatred of us by not cooperating. Chris

First off, I'm neither pro or anti-abortion but I have to say I have never seen the right to abort a pregnancy in the US constitution. Maybe there's an addendum that I missed but I doubt it.

What an incredibly uninformed and slanderous piece. I cannot believe you are a professor, your know nothing about religion, the constitution or common human decency.

You use the word hypocrisy overmuch in this diatribe. Are you so brazen to suggest that a mother's love for her daughter is fabricated for voter consumption? Are you omniscient or are you merely without shame? Or perhaps both?

Mr. Obama is correct in saying families should not be used for political gain, yet the horse left the barn on that one decades ago. What president since--and including--JFK has not used their families at least for photo-ops? Mr. Obama is certainly the first democrat I know to at least appear to do so begrudgingly.

You are right to state that religion and sexuality are private matters, best kept between family, friends, or perhaps even to oneself altogether. I would also agree that no politician should "inflict" their religious views on the publicl, and never use the law itself to do so. Yet, indeed, both have happened repeatedly and are likely to do so for years to come. The latter should be fought vigorously, the former merely tolerated. Since the platforms of the major parties have fundamental tenets that are faith-based (such as the notion that minimum wage helps the working class) we do indeed have much work to do.

The greatest conceit in your whole rant is the breathtaking statement that Ms. Palin is hypocritical in her "pretense that she is a woman." Such a statement speaks volumes about your own religious tolerance. The doctrinaire lore of post-modern identity politics is a pernicious thing. Demagogues are only appealing to True Believers.

And what about this gem: "she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women." It is patent that you are not using 'sympathies' in the normal use of the word so what in fact do you mean? Does 'have sympathies' mean advocate for more government programs, even ones proven to be ineffective and destructive? Does this mean support religious institutions in low income neighborhoods as they do impact poverty? Advocate for more strict divorce laws to insure women are not "single mothers?" Push for school vouchers to help the less fortunate escape the blight of public schools? Distribute free yoga CD's to help women relax after a difficult day? What exactly do you mean, and how to you presume to have such divine knowledge?

And, perhaps you believe it to be obvious, but do you have such sympathies? Does your public proclamation prove so? If so, why do you believe Ms. Palin does not? Is public benificence the only reliable proof of moral integrity? Does the promise of state largesse (regardless of its actual impact) validate the altruistic nature of a candidate or incumbent? Some people do believe--and with good evidence--that government services make many situations demonstrably worse. Some would even say that government intervention amounts to an act of violence against families.

Finally, a point of order. It is legitimate to speak of criminalizing abortion and you are right to be very concerned that such laws may be made manifest. Yet no product or service can ever be a right. To speak of 'Abortion Rights' is evidence of either malice or confusion. To fight efforts to make abortion illegal is a defense of basic liberty.

I just wanted to say that Ms Wendy Doniger needs to get laid.
I know she wants it but just can't get any. The title of all of her rants should read,I just need to get laid and all would be right with the world.
Of course see hates Palin she gets laid lots.
If you have ever worked in an office with a lot of females you know how they all hate the attractive ones. Ms Wendy is just one of the plain ones that can only get the weak left over men. Maybe Ms Wendy can't even get that.
One last piece of advice for Wendy, go to the out skirts of town like Barack's mother did and get the first drunken bum that comes along. These men will screw anyone even an unattrative woman like you.

Wow! There is so much wrong with this article that I don't know where to begin:
1.) I'm so glad that Wendy is so open minded that she doesn't "object" to the candidates' religious views.
2.) How is it, though, that she doesn't object to their religious views, if they don't "take them out in public?" It is a complete falsehood that your religious views do not inform your political views. It is important to know their views on life because if you don't value the most basic right, which is life, then you can't value any others. Since Barack won't help a baby born alive and will allow it to die, then you know he is a person who does not value life and that flows from his pastor.
3.) It was not Sarah Palin who "outed" her daughter, it was the liberal news media. It was people like Wendy who "outed" her. Also, the fact that Wendy uses the word "outed" shows what she thinks of unborn babies. They are "things" that should be kept in secret and if it becomes public knowledge that someone is pregnant then they are "outed". This speaks volumes about Wendy.
4.) I hate to tell you Wendy, but Sarah is a woman. It's no pretense. You don't know what a woman is and you teach at a Divinity School? That speaks volumes too!
5.) Wendy, you're either misinformed about Sarah's views on God or you're deliberately falsifying them to further your views.
6.) As far as Joe Biden goes, if he is not man enough to stand up for what he believes then he definitely shouldn't be Vice President. It seems to me that if he believes that abortion is murder and yet won't stand up for the unborn, then he is collaborating in murder. This is why the Bishops have said he should not be taking communion.

This is only 6 points but I could go on for pages about how out of touch the liberals are in this country but I know that I don't have to. Any American reading drivel like this knows it for what it is: useless garbage. This is why Obama will lose the election.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman"

What an idiot.

Oh really? I defy you to find one single instance where Gov. Palin has "pushed" her theology on others. Gov. Palin has an outstanding record of doing as the PEOPLE wish, even when it goes against her own personal feelings. Which, some may argue, is why she supports contraceptive sex education in schools.

As for your quote on her first-hand conversations with God, you might be interested in the footage that landed on ABC's cutting room floor. When you add in the part about "praying that" ...we are doing God's work, her statements make a lot more sense.

The Catholics who feel the need to espouse their views on abortion haven't been listening in church, either. There is no wiggle-room in Catholicism for abortion. None. Nada. Zip. Not for rape, not for incest, not because the mother might go crazy from stress. So, their views are immediately visible for what they are - hypocricy.

Anyway, Palin sure speaks for me, much more than you do. It's pretty obvious that your only religion is liberalism. And the funny thing is - this Christian, Sarah Palin, is speaking for me as a Buddhist, who could care less about homosexual marriage or abortion or anything. But Palin is real and honest and has integrity. That matters a whole lot more than her views on specific issues.

By the way, you know, your God is watching you smear this woman. Do you ever wonder what His reaction might be to your nastiness? If I were you, I would really take a deep look inside myself and decide if God would consider me a good person or not. If the truth is not too painful.

It's interesting that you are actually employed by Newsweek. I find your column to be extremely sexist, prejudicial, biased, and equivalent to the firebrand leftist journalism that you typically find in student newspapers.

you are so biased, you are a minister of satan, not Jesus

It's no wonder the Church is in the shape it's in when you have professors like this idiot teaching in a "Divinity School". I am sure there have been some fine theologians that have come out of this university in the past, but the sheer foolishness of someone like this teach people who will enter the ministry is blindingly blatant. If she truly knows anything about the history of religions, she knows that Jesus called on His followers to be "salt" and "light", to let their lives influence others to likewise become followers. Belief in God is not a "private matter". Christians have been commissioned to go into all the world and boldly PROCLAIM the Gospel.

So, let's see. If Sarah Palin has 5 kids, a career, a loving husband who helps her with their offspring and believes that God has a plan for us and we must determine what that plan is, she is not a woman? If she believes that abortion is wrong and global warming is not all man made, she is not a woman?

All it sounds like is that she is a woman who disagrees with you. And as all of us out here who don't adhere to the left wing ideology on everything know, that makes us subhuman. And you are the reporter On Faith? Wow. There must not have been any other applicants for the job that day.

Liar or bad researcher; which is it? This whole "she cut funds for [fill in the blank]is straight out of the Daily Kos of the world. That is one of the many liberal attacks on Gov. Palin that have been proven to be untrue.

So do you know that it's a lie and you used it to shore up a bad argument or do you simply cut-n-paste from what other terrified liberals are saying? There is no other third choice.

God Bless you, but my goodness, the real America is getting so tired of listening to all of this. Very tired indeed.

Thank God for Palin. You people on the left (MSM, Politicians, Hollywood, & College Professors) are showing everyone your truly ugly colors!Since you think your side are the true intellects (B.S.), let me show you how easy it is to be hateful and how moronic you sound:

"Hey Doniger, Palin's not a woman? Look in the mirror lately?"

Good one eh? Maybve I'll write a column for newsweek now!

How enlightening....Can you tell me, where and in what manner, abortion in mentioned in the Constitution?.........Thanks much.

You're just jealous because Palin is so much hotter than you.

I hope this person doesn't really think "she" speaks for women. As for the right to kill babies being in the Constitution-I don't think so!

This thing that wrote the article needs to be fired

a crackpot.

You didn't "...object strongly" when the Obama's "...tries to take their theology out in public." Making you a hypocrite and not a serious thinker.

In other words, Wendy Doniger is a partisan hack disguised as a religious analyst not worthy of the credibility lent to her by the public.

I can't remember a time when the press, that includes you, Wendy Doniger, has been so discredited and laughed at because of their almost demonic reaction to a single public figure.

It's almost like Linda Blair in the Exorcist flailing and convulsing at the mere mention of God. Except in this case they are flailing and convulsing at the mere mention of Sarah Palin.

Well, I guess I thought final authority was from the bible. Well I guess instead of getting my answers from it, I should learn what YOU believe. How silly we have all been!

Skeptic - for all of your bloviating in defense of Palin, you're ultimately just another Bush apologist. You and your captive audience here simply want another dose of it with McCain/Palin.

We can only hope for the sake of the nation that you fail in that ambition.

>>>>>TURN OFF FOX NEWS... READ A PAPER OR MAGAZINE

Why?

It is becoming increasingly clear that the mainstream papers and magazines are left-wing biased. Why do you think the "New York Times" lost 70% or so of its stock value over the last few years? Because most people no longer believe it to be remotely objective.

Liberals hate Fox and talk radio, as well as the internet, since it broke the stranglehold they had on "acceptable" opinion (i.e., whatever the "New York Times" reports).

Yes, of course Fox and talk radio is biased the other way. But Fox doesn't attempt to silence everybody else with the opposite opinion, and talk radio doesn't claim those who disagree with it must be shut down, like liberals are trying to do to both.

The left is facing the "boy who cried wolf" problem here, I think.

After all, you cannot claim every single conservative candidate in the last 40 years is a "scary" "book-burning" "theocrat" who will turn the USA into a dictatorship if elected, and then expect people to keep taking the accusations as seriously as they did the first time you made it.

Experience shows such accusations usually boil down to "some liberal guy in the candidate's hometown doesn't like the candidate".

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1831073,00.html?iid=sphere-inline-sidebar

PALIN IS AN UNINFORMED IDIOT YOKEL

READ A PAPER OR MAGAZINE-

TIME MAGAZINE REPORTS ON AUGUST 9TH-
GEORGIA ATTACKS OSSETIA.

AS PALIN TOLD CHARLES GIBSON (CONFIDENTLY)
"RUSSIA ATTACKED GEORGIA UNPROVOKED."

GIBSON,"UNPROVOKED? ARE YOU SURE?"

(HESITATION) "YES."

Because I just KNEW some idiot said to themself, "That's RIGHT! Russia DID attack Georgia first!" when they read another of many gaffes by Palin.

No wonder McCain will not allow her to talk to reporters.

GEORGIA ATTACKED OSSETIA FIRST- WHICH IS UNDER THE PROTECTORATE OF RUSSIA.

By Chuck McLean

The selection of another incurious, ill-schooled politician with no foreign policy judgment and a simplistic "the military can solve everything" view of foreign policy will continue the dramatic slide of the U.S.'s global influence. It will also dig us much deeper into a foreign policy hole that has already brought us to an international situation more dangerous than the darkest days of the Cold War.

PostGlobal's Global Power Barometer (I'm one of the editors) measures how well the key powers of the world, and by extension their leaders, are exercising their power to achieve their own desired ends. It tells you clearly who's winning and losing on the world power stage. The GPB's "4-week View" makes it obvious how far the U.S. has fallen far behind Russia, China, Iran and even Israel and the Islamists in achieving its global goals.

As we've watched world reaction to the Bush administration over the years, the people and leaders of the world are not as much interested in "experience" per se as they are two critical human traits: 1) curiosity about the world, and, 2) a knowledge of the history and cultures of their nations. Governor Palin has neither and that's downright dangerous.

The Governor, who obtained her first passport less than two years ago, has traveled outside the U.S. only once, to visit Alaska National Guardsmen stationed in Germany and Kuwait. She claimed a visit to Ireland, but the Irish quickly pointed out that a refueling stop in which you don't leave the airport is not a "visit." In fact, she has never even visited Alaska's important next-door neighbor, Canada.

Consistent with a complete lack of curiosity about the world around her, Governor Palin has never had any formal education in history (of the U.S. or the world,) let alone any experience with global culture or politics that might serve as a substitute for formal education.

Beyond what this says to the people of the world (which is that a VP Palin simply wouldn't care), we've just experienced eight years of the costly errors of a President without any curiosity or understanding of how foreign lands will react to U.S. actions. Iraq is a prime example. Even a cursory knowledge of culture and the region would have suggested the outcome of an Iraq invasion (Bush 41's great knowledge and understanding of history and culture kept him out of Baghdad.)

In the current crisis with Russia, an understanding of Russian culture, history and 20th-century experience (and, of course, the right judgment to apply the lessons of that history) would have avoided creating the situation in which Russia had little choice but to draw the line at South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

The U.S. has a history as long as a blink of an eye in comparison to much of the rest of the world, so it may be understandable that we have little interest in world history. U.S. citizens are some of the least traveled among developed countries, so that may explain our lack of knowledge of other cultures. But in order just to protect ourselves and avoid mistakes that strengthen our enemies and weaken the U.S., we need leaders who are curious about the world, its history and its cultures. The nomination of Sarah Palin sends exactly the wrong message to the world and guarantees four more years of foreign policy and military mistakes in a world far more dangerous than it was eight years ago.

Soon after the book controversy, Bess found himself again at odds with Palin and her fellow evangelicals. In 1996, evangelical churches mounted a vigorous campaign to take over the local hospital's community board and ban abortion from the valley. When they succeeded, Bess and Dr. Susan Lemagie, a Palmer OB-GYN, fought back, filing suit on behalf of a local woman who had been forced to travel to Seattle for an abortion. The case was finally decided by the Alaska Supreme Court, which ruled that the hospital must provide valley women with the abortion option.

At one point during the hospital battle, passions ran so hot that local antiabortion activists organized a boisterous picket line outside Dr. Lemagie's office, in an unassuming professional building across from Palmer's Little League field. According to Bess and another community activist, among the protesters trying to disrupt the physician's practice that day was Sarah Palin.

Another valley activist, Philip Munger, says that Palin also helped push the evangelical drive to take over the Mat-Su Borough school board. "She wanted to get people who believed in creationism on the board," said Munger, a music composer and teacher. "I bumped into her once after my band played at a graduation ceremony at the Assembly of God. I said, 'Sarah, how can you believe in creationism -- your father's a science teacher.' And she said, 'We don't have to agree on everything.'

"I pushed her on the earth's creation, whether it was really less than 7,000 years old and whether dinosaurs and humans walked the earth at the same time. And she said yes, she'd seen images somewhere of dinosaur fossils with human footprints in them."

Munger also asked Palin if she truly believed in the End of Days, the doomsday scenario when the Messiah will return. "She looked in my eyes and said, 'Yes, I think I will see Jesus come back to earth in my lifetime.'"

Bess is unnerved by the prospect of Palin -- a woman whose mind is given to dogmatic certitude -- standing one step away from the Oval Office. "It's truly frightening that someone like Sarah has risen to the national level," Bess said. "Like all religious fundamentalists -- Christian, Jewish, Muslim -- she is a dualist. They view life as an ongoing struggle to the finish between good and evil. Their mind-set is that you do not do business with evil -- you destroy it. Talking with the enemy is not part of their plan. That puts someone like Obama on the side of evil.

"Forget all this chatter about whether or not she knows what the Bush doctrine is. That's trivial. The real disturbing thing about Sarah is her mind-set. It's her underlying belief system that will influence how she responds in an international crisis, if she's ever in that position, and has the full might of the U.S. military in her hands. She gave some indication of that thinking in her ABC interview, when she suggested how willing she would be to go to war with Russia.

"Alaskans liked that certitude when she was dealing with corrupt politicians and the oil industry -- and there is something admirable about it. But when you're dealing with a complex and dangerous world as commander in chief, that's a different story."

Bess said that he and fellow valley residents have long been charmed by the Sarah Palin who is now dazzling the American public. Despite their strong political differences, "she always has a warm greeting for me when we bump into each other. She's the most charming person you'll ever know."

"But," Bess adds, "this person's election would be a disaster for the country and the world."

The pastor who clashed with Palin
Baptist minister Howard Bess, who wrote a book Palin wanted banned and who fought her on abortion and gay rights, says the country should fear her election.

By David Talbot

Pages 1 2 S S S RSS Print Email
Read more: David Talbot, Alaska, Politics, News, Sarah Palin

Inset: Howard Bess

Sept. 15, 2008 | WASILLA, Alaska -- The Wasilla Assembly of God, the evangelical church where Sarah Palin came of age, was still charged with excitement on Sunday over Palin's sudden ascendance. Pastor Ed Kalnins warned his congregation not to talk with any journalists who might have been lurking in the pews -- and directly warned this reporter not to interview any of his flock. But Kalnins and other speakers at the service reveled in Palin's rise to global stardom.

It confirmed, they said, that God was making use of Wasilla. "She will take our message to the world!" rejoiced an Assembly of God youth ministry leader, as the church band rocked the high-vaulted wooden building with its electric gospel.

That is what scares the Rev. Howard Bess. A retired American Baptist minister who pastors a small congregation in nearby Palmer, Wasilla's twin town in Alaska's Matanuska Valley, Bess has been tangling with Palin and her fellow evangelical activists ever since she was a Wasilla City Council member in the 1990s. Recently, Bess again found himself in the spotlight with Palin, when it was reported that his 1995 book, "Pastor, I Am Gay," was among those Palin tried to have removed from the Wasilla Public Library when she was mayor.

Rate this story with Reddit:

Thanks for your support.
"She scares me," said Bess. "She's Jerry Falwell with a pretty face.

"At this point, people in this country don't grasp what this person is all about. The key to understanding Sarah Palin is understanding her radical theology."

Bess -- a fit-looking, 80-year-old man in a gray University of Illinois sweatshirt and blue jeans – spoke with me over coffee at the Vagabond Blues, a cafe in Palmer with a stunning view of the nearby snow-capped Chugach Mountains. The retired minister moved to the Mat-Su Valley with his wife, Darlene, in 1987, after his outspoken defense of gay rights at Baptist churches in the Santa Barbara, Calif., area and Anchorage landed him in trouble with church officials. In the Mat-Su Valley, Bess plunged into community activism, helping launch an assortment of projects, from an arts council to a shelter for the mentally disabled.

Inevitably, his work brought him into conflict with Palin and other highly politicized Christian fundamentalists in the valley. "Things got very intense around here in the '90s -- the culture war was very hot here," Bess said. "The evangelicals were trying to take over the valley. They took over the school board, the community hospital board, even the local electric utility. And Sarah Palin was in the direct center of all these culture battles, along with the churches she belonged to."

Bess' first run-in with Palin's religious forces came when he decided to write his book, "Pastor, I Am Gay." The book was the result of a theological journey that began in the 1970s when Bess was asked for guidance by a closeted homosexual in his Santa Barbara congregation. After deep reflection on the subject, Bess came to the conclusion that "gay people were not sick, nor they were special sinners."

In his book, Bess suggests that gays have a divine mission. "Look back at the life of our Lord Jesus. He was misunderstood, deserted, unjustly accused, and cruelly killed. Yet we all confess that it was the will of God, for by his wounds we are healed ... Could it be that the homosexual, obedient to the will of God, might be the church's modern day healer-messiah?"

When it was published in 1995, Bess' book caused an immediate storm in the Mat-Su Valley, an evangelical stronghold dotted with storefront churches. Conservative ministers targeted the book, and the only bookstore in the valley that dared to stock it -- Shalom Christian Books and Gifts – soon dropped it after the owner was barraged with angry phone calls. The Frontiersman, the local newspaper that ran a column by Bess for seven years, fired him and ran a vicious cartoon that suggested even drooling child molesters would be welcomed by Bess' church.

And after she became mayor of Wasilla, according to Bess, Sarah Palin tried to get rid of his book from the local library. Palin now denies that she wanted to censor library books, but Bess insists that his book was on a "hit list" targeted by Palin. "I'm as certain of that as I am that I'm sitting here. This is a small town, we all know each other. People in city government have confirmed to me what Sarah was trying to do."

For the benefit of those who are totally puzzled by Doniger's nonsense, a quick FAQ about the strange creature known as the "postmodern professor":

Q: Does Doniger REALLY MEAN Palin is not a woman because she disagrees with her politically?

A: Alas, yes. For the last 30 years, feminist dogma had been that "woman" is NOT a biological term, but a "gender" term--who is a "woman" is defined by society and culture, not biology. There is a small (repeat: small) amount of truth in this, since of course when we speak about "woman" we tend to think about the average woman in our society.

But feminist then claimed, absurdly, that who is a woman is TOTALLY determined by society, and whether or not the person has a womb is irrelevant. People like Doniger really think being a woman is determined 100% by one's political and social views or position, and has NOTHING to do with biology.

So, no, Doniger isn't using the word "woman" metaphorically (like we might say someone "isn't a man" when we mean he's a coward). She REALLY MEANS Palin isn't a woman.

Q: If Doniger is for free speech, how come she wants to stop Palin from saying what she believes in?

A: "Free Speech", for many academics, means "free speech for any liberal view". It is consider "diversity" to have 57 varieties of radical feminism on campus. Conservatism, however, is described as "reactionary" and "fascist" and "against women's rights" and banned.

The problem here is deeper than merely not wanting opposition. The real problem is that for the liberal professors, the conservative worldview is not a worldview at all--it's similar to the flat-earth theory, something only deranged, primitive (oops--"primitive" is a *good* thing in their view; I mean *reactionary*), superstitious people could possibly take seriously.

So Doniger doesn't think she's a censor. She really DOES think she's in favor of free expression of all views. It's just that she cannot even conceive, or imagine, anything to the right of the mainstream democratic party as even BEING a coherent worldview.

Q: Are all humanities professors this loony?

A: Not by a long shot! The vast majority of them are not. Unfortunately, in *specific departments*--mostly those departments that require the least intellectual effort (e.g., "women studies" and other fake departments)--these people are the majority. In real humanities departments--philosophy, history, etc.--usually things are much better, and the scholars are real scholars.

The reason for this state of affairs is that there is de facto segregation in many universities: many women, gay, and black students who aren't good enough to become professors in real humanities departments claimed "racism" and "sexism". Universities, to get rid of them, created faux departments ("black studies", "spiritual" theology, "women studies", "centers for the study of gender").

Everybody's happy: these fools get to play university professor, and they're out of the way of real scholars. The philosophy or history department people, for example, usually simply totally ignore the women's studies "professors".

(To clarify, this is not an insult against women, gays, or blacks; MOST students are not good enough to become professors in real departments, whatever their sex or skin color. Competition is tough and one must be very bright. But white males who don't make the cut simply find jobs outside academia; for blacks and women, there's always the option of trying to become a "women studies" or "black studies" professor.)

Q: If most humanities professors aren't like that, why do we keep hearing from them in the media? Why don't we hear from real scholars?

A: Inferiority complex! (Okay, not really a complex--people like Doniger *really are* inferior to real professors).

Deep down, Doniger & the other faux professors in "opressed group X-studies" departments *KNOW* they're not taken seriously by real scholars because, well, they're just not good scholars. To protect their fragile ego, they do two things:

First, they go to the media and try to dazzle the "ignorant" (in their view) public with how "smart" and "educated" they are. Usually, as in Doniger's case, they just make fools of themselves, since--like most stupid people--they fail to realize the "stupid" public is actually much smarter than they are and laughs at their nonsense.

Yes, real scholars from serious departments *should* take more interest in the media and explain to the public the latest idiot "gay studies" nut on CNN isn't representative of the university, but most real scholars, understandably, find the prospect about as inviting as cleaning up after the elephants in the circus. So the skewed perception remains...

Second, they whine about "evil white eurocentric phallocentric anti-gay" things called "research", "standards", "objectivity", "truth", "logical thinking", and so on. Since they KNOW a logical analysis of their "scholarship" according to objective standards of evidence shows it to be totally worthless, they pretend the very idea of judging their work objectively is some sort of "opression" because it actually will show it to be inferior.

Hope this helps explain why Prof. Doniger, in the immortal words of King Arthur in Monty Python's movie, is "such a curious person".

It's sad enough that filth-spewing websites like Daily Kos and Democratic Blunderground spit out this poison. But a professor from a Divinity school? Who did Wendy study under? Fred Phelps? What a disgrace.

Newsflash for Ms. Doniger: Abortion is not "in the Constitution."

Perhaps a re-reading of our Constitution is in order.

So all beliefs welcome, except Palin's. She didn't cut funding or ban books, please look this stuff up.

I don't think they want to know the truth because it doesn't fit their agenda.

But not a woman? That is the words of a hateful person.

If the Democrats lose this election they should be disbanded, but they let MSNBC pick the candidate and Hillary should be apologized to. They are trying to focus on Palin as if she is going to do anything as VP and enough Matt Damon and your actuary tables (no one cares if millionaire actors are scared, scared is losing your job to a working class person). When your supporters are no longer going after the actual candidate and going after the pick of what is a ceremonial job, they have already lost

So how is it hipocrasy to love your daughter inspite of what she has done? Did not Christ say to love your enemies? How much more is her daughter than an enemy? And how can someone who claims to be a professor at a divinity school be so ignorant of the most basic of Christ's teachings?

seriously? This woman gets paid to write?

seriously?

I think you contradicted yourself.

In your bashing of the Great Governor Palin you said and I quote that

"I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people..."

Okay. So basically you don't want other people spreading their moral beliefs about sex out on anyone, but you rebuke Palin for doing just that (not spreading her sexual views).

When she line-item vetoed the half-way house for pregnant teens she abided by your tenants of non interference. When she did that she took the government, voter's money, and taxpayer's out of that woman's sexual consequences/ life.

Palin took the people out of those women's sexual business.

Now I don't understand your point. You are saying that she is a hypocrite. Where? Because her daughter became pregnant? Well she is going to get married to Levi - and let me tell you something I'd rather Sarah Palin tell me what's going on then have Obama's team try to destroy her -which they can't. Besides we would of figured out she was pregnant sooner or later.

Is she a hypocrite because she stands behind chastity? Virginity is not hard to keep - I am still one. I think it is noble. And very achievable.

Do not disrespect Governor Palin because you think her strong principled stances are too hard for you to conquer. Or even worse - you think so lowly of American girls that you think that they/ we can't obtain them.

As a black person I am used to hearing what we can and can not do - This woman has faith in us; and gives us faith in ourselves to become more.
Obama wants us to make him OUR faith. I am not buying that.

McCain/ PALIN 08'

Pharisian!

Wendy Doniger,

The question of when life begins is not just a religious one, but also a moral one. That you would take such an incredibly hardline, fundamentalist view and put on blinders a mile thick on the subject is just typical of radical feminists. As the stormtroopers fight to protect the female body, they care not for the female's body who is ripped in half and discarded into a waste bag.

I'd further like you to explain to me where the Constitution provides the right to abortion--(I know you're citing the First Amendment regarding abortion, but I'm calling that argument completely specious). I can, however, clearly cite the US Declaration of Independence that speaks of a God-given right to Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness. Or is this just discarded because it's "imposing a religious belief" on others. *massive roll of eyes*

Not only is it eggregiously offensive to claim that the origins of life should not be questioned, it is an absolute failure of the defense of human rights and human dignity. If believe something is murder, I will, without question, lash out at those who would destroy it.

Or would you take the view that genocide is perfectly okay that one considers another race sub-human or inferior? The question of what is human life should not only be vigorously debated, it is a moral imperative if one at all believes in the dignity of human life.

I have little patience for santimonious windbags who on one hand argue that the origins of life should not be legislated but dare to presume who is indeed a woman. It amuses me to no end how the feminists try to cross that divide.

This woman teaches theology? Wow!

booo--why are you so hateful, Wendy? Did you really mean to write about Palin: "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman"? I believe that is a hurtful and small minded statement.

Well, not everyone can be a beautiful and successful Governor. Some people have to settle for being Wendy Doniger.

Wendy Doniger's greatest hypocrisy is her pretense that she is serious about academic freedom. In her sad universe, if a man is pro-life he might still be invited to call himself a man. But, a pro-life woman is engaging in the pretense that she is a woman. How shallow. What in heaven does that really mean anyway? p.s. doniger's second greatest hypocrisy is that she is serious about the accuracy of her argument. She states John McCain would not "reverse Roe v. Wade." John McCain has stated publicly that Roe v. Wade was "wrongly decided" and should be overturned.

Now we know why our Seminaries and Divinity Schools are such a joke. They are liberal cesspools.

Nothing more

Have a Blessed Day.

This youtube video actually contains more information than this blog post... enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWP5ljQV79s

Wendy Doniger writes like someone who has never been married, and has only cats in her life. What a tard.

WaPo MUST be closet McCain supporters. That's the only possible explanation for this. No rational person could possibly believe it would help Obama.

Sarah Palin is indeed a woman, despite the fact that she is not a liberal. Furthermore, the constitution does not place a woman's life above the life that she carries in utero. It does clearly state, however, that all of us are created equal.

This piece forms the definition of mean spirited.

TO: All
RE: After Reading this Item....

....and the 'credentials' of 'Doctor Doniger' listed in the preface....

....it's my considered opinion that she's a follower of Molech.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out.]

TO: Al McCausland, et al.
RE: Jealousy

Imagine that, women hating women because she is successful! -- Al McCausland

Actually....

....I suspect it goes much further than that. Even as much as 'skin deep'. After all, the governor IS a 'beauty contestant'.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Hell hath no fury.....]

You liberals have nothing positive to say about Sarah Palin and hate her because she will blow Barack Hussein Obama away. Imagine that, women hating women because she is successful!
Hypocrites!

P.S. Even worse, you're obviously opposed to the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, when you suggest that no one can express their religious beliefs in the public forum.

That, by definition, makes you an enemy of the Constitution of the United States.

I would suggest avoiding all soldiers, sailors, airmen and ESPECIALLY Marines....they might decide immediate action is required.....

TO: Wendy Doniger
RE: Look Whose Talking

But I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public... -- Wendy Doniger

As in publishing their 'religious beliefs' in something like Newsweek?

Hypocrite!

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Let us cut out the nonsense...all religions are allowed in Dr. Doniger's civil discourse provide they don't espouse any beliefs! As to the hedge-Catholic Joe Biden, it is quite easy to "personally" not believe in abortion provided it doesn't cost you votes. As to the Constitution, Dr. Doniger & Senator Biden should return to its roots in English Common Law and the right of believers enshrined in the acts of Henry II, the Magna Carta and the laws of Edward III, instead of the arrogance and tyranny of the "law" of Henry VIII. As Thomas More said to Cardinal Wolsey "I believe, when statesmen forsake their own private
conscience for the sake of their public duties . . . they lead their country by a short route to chaos. It was true in the 16th century and is still true today.

I am not going to vote for McCain-Palin, but this column is completely devoid of anything approaching common sense. Palin didn't "out" her daughter- her pregnant belly did!
Palin's "greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman"? Goodness gracious. She IS a woman, by any definition!
There are several other instances in just this one column of this sort of addled thinking.
Ms. Doniger has taken leave of her senses.

I've been on the fence in this election so far. I see good and bad on both sides. Who to vote against is probably how my reasoning will be at pull the lever time.

If a person is know by who their enemies are, I would certainly move towards the Republicans after reading this screed. Hard to believe that a person with a PhD could write such drivel.

I encourage Dr. Doinger to reread her own article" Thinking More Critically about Thinking too Critically" {cf divinity.uchicago.edu/faculty/doniger.shtml) where she states:

"Our moral discomfort becomes more complex if we extend our second naiveté to
cultures other than our own, and try to appreciate things in them from which we might
otherwise recoil. We bump headlong into moral relativism, the belief that each culture’s
ideas must be judged moral in their own context."

Palin's "culture" is definitely not Doniger's "culture". Doniger is saying her liberal values trump Palin's and that Doniger's are the "right" values. Cultural ethnocentrism?

Wendy, after reading this: "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman", I'm wondering whether you haven't lost your own mind. "HER PRETENSE SHE IS A WOMAN"?

Are you hearing yourself?

So what is that will make her a "real" woman, Wendy?

Having multiple sex partners and aborting dozen of babies, then going on welfare?

What Professor Doniger, somewhat surprisingly, seems to forget, is that almost all the laws we have, including the Constitution, are based on someone "forcing" their views and beliefs on at least some unwilling parties, and often a rather large minority. It may be true that some of our laws, like those against, say, murder, are almost wholly universal, although even these have certain opponents, on the very far fringes of society. However, many of our other laws, like the Death Penalty, or Affirmative Action, to give examples from both sides of the political spectrum, are enforced on all, regardless of the fact that large portions of American society disagree with both.

The point, of couse, is that despite Doniger's claim that she "object[s] strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people," that is just what our nation does, anytime it passes, and enforces laws based on some conception of morality, and often with moral theology, be it laws against child molestation, or those supporting same sex marriage. The American system fundamentally disagrees with Doniger, because, while it respects the rights of others to disagree with the law, it is unafraid of laws with which others might disagree. How can any of us make any decisions without reference to creed, or, more generally, belief? If one truly believes that life begins at conception, than being against abortion is not only the obvious choice, but a Constitutional necessity - we do, after all, have that pesky clause about protecting life. If one does not have such a belief about life, than obviously the pro-choice forces are right in supporting a woman's sovereignty over her own body.

I can't help but wonder if Professor Doniger's criticism of Sarah Palin is, perhaps, a perfect example of the primary problem with liberalism today. Having won many of their battles over the past thirty years, many liberals, especially academic ones, seem to prefer to consider the matter closed, the debate settled. Those on the other side of the aisle disagree. Unfortunately, if Doniger and company truly wish never to enforce any beliefs on anyone, this must, of necessity, include their own beliefs. If someone is, truly, pro-life, she can easily argue, as Sarah Palin would, that killing a fetus is killing a human, thereby forcing one person's belief, the belief of a mother that her unborn child is not fully human, on another person. True freedom, of the type Doniger professes to value, requires that no decisions be permanent, all policies up for review, and that no politician ever make a decision based on anything but the public whim; if politicians cannot use what they believe to make their decisions, they can only use what other people believe, i.e. the voting public. I might refer Professor Doniger to Edmund Burke on that topic.

Wendy,

Help me, you are a professor of the History of Religions?

Did you miss the classes on Christianity?

Did you know that Christianity teaches love, compassion, humility and submission to a loving Heavenly Father?

I have rarely read such bigotry and hatred dressed up in "pretty speech".

You should be ashamed of yourself for your hard-heartedness and total lack of simple kindness.

You have some facts wrong and many attack points that are disingenuous as well as angry and hateful.

Please consider that disagreeing with someone politically does not give license to bigotry.

Love to all.

Wendy,
After reading a good number of the comments, they pretty much believe you to be an idiot. Enough said. I certainly do not need to weigh in on it.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. The Republican party's cynical calculation that because she has a womb and makes lots and lots of babies (and drives them to school! wow!) she speaks for the women of America, and will capture their hearts and their votes, has driven thousands of real women to take to their computers in outrage. She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women."

Dear Wendy Doniger:

Please keep writing this stuff for at least another two months. When Candidate Obama loses the election to Senator McCain, you can pat yourself on the back for having had some influence on the election.

Dear University of Chicago:

As an alumnus of the school, please rest assured that I will continue to donate to the Annual Fund even though you use my hard-earned dollars to pay for this sort of person (poor critical thinking skills, condescending attitude toward women) as a professor. Although I'm sure that if a man condescended toward a woman this way, you'd reprimand him for sexism.

Dear Wendy:

Two more things. What gives you the right to think that you speak for all women? For that matter, what makes you think that all women are - or should be - the same? I'm reminded as I read this piece ("her pretense that she is a woman") of the articles last year questioning whether Obama was "black enough". It's a sad state of affairs when someone who purports to be an intellectual descends to characterizing people by pre-conceived stereotypes and assumes that everyone of a certain characteristic (e.g., every woman) must behave in accordance with those prejudices. Why do you want to force her to believe the same things you do? Why do you get to define what women are and what they are permitted to believe?

You should respect (even rejoice in!) the fact that not every woman thinks alike and not every woman wants the same things from life - or from the government - that you want. Sarah Palin being a Governor and a mother and whatever else she wants to be is a triumph. This sort of success was denied to women just a few decades ago, and it is a real tribute to the progress we've made as a society. Why do you insist on tearing her down? Liberation means freedom - the freedom to choose any path you want. You should be proud of her success and more careful in your criticism of her.

Way to elevate the discussion Wendy! I find it refreshing, and life-affirming, to see a mom who 'walks the talk' in valuing life.
I don't know what the heck your viewpoint represents, but it is certainly not Christian.

Wendy:

I find your post self-righteous and a bit offensive. You're making large presumptions about what Ms. Palin will or will not do in office. The fact of the matter is, we don't know what any of them will do. Interesting that you get so riled up over a fundamentalist woman.

I felt queasy after reading this putrified rant. Such detritis! Such sanctimonious bile! What a shame that the University of Chicago has actually empowered her to think she's got anything worthwhile to post. The professor's twisted ideological belief that she is a legitimate voice of clear reason reflects her total disconnection from mainstream thought. Stick to Sanskrit Wendy!

I thought the point of the On Faith series was to provide a forum for differing views on religion, including those of nonbelievers. I have enjoyed reading many of the opinion pieces and lively debates. It is very hard, however, to see how Doninger's screed fits in with the On Faith series. Her piece is simply another version of the venom spewing forth from radical leftwing feminists who, after the election in November, will be wondering how Obama could have lost because they don't know anyone who voted for McCain/Palin paraphrasing the late Pauline Kael of The New Yorker who said that of Nixon in 1972).

I say all this as a likely Obama voter with very strong doubts about Palin's experience and preparation to be Vice President. But I have no doubt Palin is a woman. It is a good thing the Donigers of this world are not permitted to judge which women are and which women are not...well, women. I am a nonbeliever who continues to be puzzled why anyone in the 21st century pays heed to the political and philosophical silliness advanced by too many faculty members in "Divinity Schools", especially those at our "elite" universities.

Caveat: I am a pro-choice man.

Sara Palin is a true feminist:
Self-made
Successful
Has a family
Has a supportive husband

Political views are not a pre-requisite for being a successful career woman & mom.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women."

This kind of unhinged vitriol has little place in an intelligent discussion - let alone in a divinity school prof's blog. With all due respect Ms. Doniger, you are an embarrasment to the University.

It is hard to know where to begin. This article is reflective of O'Flaherty's personal leftist bias, misinterprets facts, and even repeats falsehoods about Palin and her positions that have been debunked by multiple media sources.

Palin did not "out her teenage daughter", the press were running with the story so she dealt with it. She did not conceal her own pregnancy at all- pretty hard to do anyway. And O'Flaherty apparently has a new definition of hypocrisy if she thinks that a woman's loving and supporting her pregnant daughter within a family means she can't object to using tax money to support pregnant teens outside of the family. And keep in mind, the daughter and her boyfriend are getting married and setting up their own family.

Saying that Palin is not a woman says more about O'Flaherty herself than about Palin. Palin is a true woman, and guess what- she not only cares about the problems of woman, she IS a working class woman. O'Flaherty is in no way a working class woman- she is employed in the academic setting, surrounded by others who think alike, where elitism and self justification are endemic.

People like O'Falherty are not happy that a woman can do things with the support of a husband, and be successful without government programs, because it conflicts with their goals.

It is outrageous, and again very telling about O'Flaherty herself, that she belittles having a womb, making babies and caring for children, the very thing that O'Flaherty's mother did, but then, of course, O'Falherty's mother was no doubt forced into it by society, and expectations, and a lack of other acceptable "career paths".

O'Flaherty invokes Obama approvingly, no doubt agreeing with him that "if my daughter makes a mistake, I don't want her punished with a baby". Think of the difference- lovingly dealing with a new life vs. being "punished with a baby".

Woman like Palin are very threatening to O'Flaherty and her ilk, as Palin and those like her point out the hypocrisy of O'Flaherty's brand of feminism, which denies women the right to choose those traditional paths, without needing government help, and without paying homage to the strident females who, in the end, have denied their own womanhood.

wow, hard to guess who you support. barack was behind the teen pregnancy coverage, despite his media-friendly pleas to avoid the issue - he worked for and is a member of the blog that broke the story.

Oh, and Palin IS a woman, if you hadn't noticed; just because she doesn't hold your beliefs doesn't mean she's a man.

Nice fluff piece, with a mind like that, I can see how you could be taken in by all the hopey-changefulness. When Barack takes a real stance on an issue, instead of ummm-ing and giving nice, lawyerly issue avoidance answers, I'll be interested to hear what the most recent polls told him to think.

Ms. Doniger...if there's anyone who's lost their mind it is the radical feminist like you! Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman? How dare you!

I am a mother of 2 and a step mother to 2. I was a single parent for 7 years and never once asked the government to help me. Why? Because I could do it on my own with the help of my family.

Just because you continue to blame all of your bad decisions on the government and men doesn't mean that real women have to. Suck the government's tit all you want but leave us real women alone.

Sarah Palin speaks more for me that you could ever hope to. I find your words offensive, stupid and a total insult to women.
Shame on you!

In most modern divinity schools, if you are a transsexual defrocked priest who claims Jesus was really a woman (or homosexual, or black, or preferably all three), they'll make you the dean of the school for your "taboo-breaking" and "transgressive" ideas. But if you are a priest in good standing who actually thinks Jesus was the son of God, they'll consider you a reactionary influence that has no place in their department. (Unless you have some redeeming quality, such as admitting being sexually attracted to children, in which case they might keep you around as a part-time lecturer and unofficial department mascot, to remind the others of how awful Catholics are.)

The same "transgressive" and "taboo breaking" love of perversion and hatered of decency, incidentally, also poisons most art schools. I cannot photograph worth beans; if it wasn't for point-and-click automatic cameras, I wouldn't be able to get anything in focus. But if I photograph a "last supper" scene with Jesus as a nude Black woman, surrounded by the 12 apostles in SS Uniform (or whatever--it really isn't difficult to come up with a zillion such "transgressive" scenarios while shaving), then it won't matter that the picture isn't in focus and I cut off the head of the two guys on the right. My "transgressive", "shocking", "patriarchy-questioning" (etc., etc.) picture is sure to make me an up-and-coming, with-it, avant-guard, cutting-edge "performance artist".

("Performance artist", by the way, is the name usually given to those "artists" who cannot actually do any type of real art like music or painting. You know: the cover-yourself-with-chocolate, claim-to-have-an-abortion-as-an-art-project type of "artist".)

It's really not hard to be the next "cool" avant-guard artist or "progressive" religious department professor. No artistic talent or belief in God is necessary; if anything, they're a hindrance. The only question is, why on earth would anyone *want* to be the next Prof. Doniger or Robert Mapplentrop?

I have tried, reading twice, to see the merit in this view, but I must not be intelligent enough, or in academia. Can someone seriously deride Palin for simply admitting that her daughter is pregnant (Doniger calls it "outing")? What would the outcry have been if she hadn't? When they say the phrase "loony left", now I know what they mean. Disagreement is fine, but this sort of mischaracterization is simply, ridiculous.

WOW! Pathological! It sure is refreshing to see that the good professor's advanced education was money well spent... seems to have really opened her mind. NOT! Dear professor Wendy... regarding your gender... what would you delare yourself to be then, hmmm? It certainly is nice when a bloviated liberal intellectual elitist clearly declares herself as such! Makes 'em easier to avoid.

Evidently the divinity in this school's name refers to the candy and not to Christianity. Religion encompasses many belief systems, but Christianity is unique. That uniqueness seems to get lost in all the left wing mushy thinking that gets touted by elites as reason.

At first, I thought this article was satire. Could this sad excuse for a "woman" actually be doubting the womanhood of Sarah Palin? Ms Doniger has shown herself to have all the intellectual honesty of a 5 year old. Lets pretend that there was no God (which is an idea that probably already has Ms Doniger tingling). Lets just look at "nature". Ms Doniger fancies herself a real woman and talks about how real women have taken to their computers to protest Sarah Palins audacity in having 5 children. (Interestingly, there must be far fewer "real" women than Doniger thinks because women themselves are responsible for Palins magic in the polls). By nature, there is nothing more natural than for an unborn baby to find solace and protection in its mothers womb. There is also nothing more natural than a mother protecting her babies life with her own. We see this throughout the animal kingdom. With this in consideration, it is safe to say that there is no more unnatural act than for a mother-to-be to let someone infiltrate her womb and kill her developing baby. Since Ms Doniger apparently has never met an abortion that she doesn't like, and thinks that having abortion is a sign of true womanhood, then it is Ms Doniger who is the unnatural woman and Mrs Palin who is behaving how nature would dictate that a woman should behave. It is Ms Doniger who needs chromosome testing. What a pathetic legacy. She spends a lifetime tearing down anyone who believes in God, family and the nurturing of babies, while she advocates abortion at every turn, apparently going as far as the argue that its a right of passage into true womanhood. "She" is someone who believes in abortion for abortions sake. She has no interest in truly helping women. She is a man-hating, God-hating, self-hating, morally bankrupt individual who thinks herself capable of policing her own actions without the need of a God. And she has done such a great job of doing so that her hands are covered in the blood of countless unborn children, whom she was gleefully complicit in killing through the policies that she advocates and the political figures whom she supports. How very, very sad for America that someone like this is given a position of teacher and scholar. How very, very sad.

You should get your facts straight before you blow hard about much of what you have said. Banning books, forcing her view point on others? Where in God's kingdom do you think that came from? Someone's imagination gone wild! Obviously, you disagree with her conservative stance on every issue--that is your right! But to demean and belittle and dismiss Governor Palin as "not a woman." Well, someone might suggest that your invective is inhuman.

No wonder the Washington Post is losing money. They let any dried up old harridan file ignorant drivel and expect the readership to accept it as "truth". She might as well have written "Sarah Palin, I hate you to infinity". That would have been equally as intelligent and mature. One can only hope that, after a McCain/Palin win in November, people like Mrs. O'Flaherty will dry up and blow away.

To be entirely honest- afer 1 and 1/2 weeks of watching Palin parrot the exact same speech verbatim- I am dreadfully bored with her now.

Tigerlady-
While you expressed some dismay at what I have written- you didn't specify what exactly it was- so there is no way to address your discomfiture.

As for your outright statment that I was lying- tsk tsk-
her interview with Charles Gibson did not cover the things I spoke of, so of course you did not see any relation.

Here you go my firend-
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

Please check the facts for yourself with the very substantial and extensive resources there- and then apologize for an unkind undeserved slander.

Now, as to the OpEd piece- opinions are another issue, and we all have them.

The facts I posted are very solid.

Now, you are dead wrong about the Bush Doctrine.
Out of curiosity and for the sake of knowledge- I read the Bush Doctrine of 2002.
Palin didn't know what it was, nor did I before I read it.

It is funny- how tv affects peoples repsonses.
Roland Martin had a special on 7 Weeks To Go tonight on CNN and there was a woman who complained that Doniger said Palin wasn't a woman- at WAPO OnFaith (she gave all the info, I guess to direct blogger here-which I see happened)

And suddenly people are in here pretending that their wives suddenly came to the independent realition that Doniger denigrated the owmanhood of Palin!

At least be honest about your source- if I see something on tv- and it inspires a connection- at least I have the honesty and throughness to credit the source.

So now it is with some clairty we witness the sudden influx of pseudo-outrage at the womanhood of Palin.

Shame on you Tigerlady- can you not make the intellectual distinction between a difference of opinion without dragging personal insults to strangers on a blog?

These comments are fairly disgusting. I have no reason to believe Sarah Palin put her daughter in the public light to further her political career.

I'm tired of the anti-christian remarks that people like the author of this column continue to inflict on us--the American public.

>>>>>>My wife and I read your post and are extremely disturbed. My wife realises that she has not received her official certificate of womanhood from you. We are concerned that she is in fact not an "offical" female. If you could forward the required forms and documents we would be happy to return them as soon as possible.

Did your wife give birth to children? That might disqualify her, apparently.

Realpolitics--

Sorry I'm a bit ratty, but... put yourself in my position.

Suppose you were a plumber, and, like most plumbers, try to do a good jobs fixing leaks and opening clogged drains. Yet, every time you turn on the TV, there is some "activist plumber" talking, going on and on about the *REAL* purpose of plumbing is to "fight the white male eurocentric hegamony" by refusing to fixing leaks correctly in Republican voters' owned homes.

What's more, he's also (as is usually the case with these "activists") a "postmodernist" plumber, who claims the very idea that there is such things as leaks, or that we can determine objectively whether a pipe is leaking or not, is an evil eurocentric plot for the racist-colonialist goal of making colonialists feel superior to natives, just because native tribes didn't develop indoor plumbing.

Surely you see why I won't consider someone like that a plumber at all, and why it annoys actual plumbers, even mediocre ones, that this postmodern-activist fool is the face the plumbing profession shows to the world.

Yuck!! Pardon me while I try to sidestep this odious pile claiming to be journalism. Yuck!!

My wife and I read your post and are extremely disturbed. My wife realises that she has not received her official certificate of womanhood from you. We are concerned that she is in fact not an "offical" female. If you could forward the required forms and documents we would be happy to return them as soon as possible.

What a hateful article. I certainly would not be taking classes from this woman.

Harry Fromne - contain yourself. Do you form heart-felt political opinions based on one person's post that you've happened to stumble across On Faith? I sincerely hope not.

The general reaction to this author's post is beyond the pale. You'd think this was the only fault-finding Palin post on the internet! It does speak to the truth, however.

This author is one person, with one opinion. If you hate the contents of this thread, and other such 'liberalized' On Faith points of view, then why not blog elsewhere?

You can make up your mind as to whether you're a liberal or a conservative, based on what other people are thinking elsewhere, or you can learn to think for yourself. It's your decision to make.

The postings here are among the most unbalanced reactionary diatribes I've yet to see on the net. I'm sorry that you've included yourself in that number.

Mz Doniger states this about Gov Palin:

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

when she looks like Roger Ebert with lipstick. Can I say such a thing and the Post will allow my Comments to be posted? She gets 'ugly' against Gov. Palin. What hypocrisy and hate! The Radical Left is soooo glowing with the buzzwords of "love" & "tolerance" but is intolerant & hateful towards those who disagree with liberalism. I was never & am not a Democrat or Republican, and leaned & at a more liberal place in my politics, but the hate & venom that comes from liberals like her, and so many liberals, & checking out the positions led me away from the fold. I still am not conservative on all things, but I am trusting it more than before in more areas.
Some of the things the Post says not to include in readers' Commnets are that which:

"# degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability, or other classification
"# is predatory, hateful..."

Doninger degrades Gov Palin on the basis of her gender, politics & religion so badly that she goes so low as to assert Gov. palin is only pretending to be a woman, because she doesn't salute & march in lockstep to her agenda of liberalism.
I hope Doniger wouldn't be able to post that filthy slur against Palin on the Comments section, though she can do so in the Washington post itself.
All beliefs welcome, unless they come from a woman who isn't liberal.
BTW, there are atheists who are pro-life on completely secular reasons, based on evidence they find convincing. Liberals "inflict" their religious, social, moral views on others. I could give a long list to prove this.

Mz Doniger states this about Gov Palin:

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

when she looks like Robert Ebert with lipstick. Can I say such a thing and aloow my Comments to be posted? She gets 'ugly' gainst Gov. Palin. What hypocrisy and hate! The Radical Left is soooo glowing with the buzzwords of "love" & "tolerance" but is intolerant & hateful towards those who disagree with liberalism. I was never & am not a Democrat or Republican, and leaned & was at a more liberal place in my politics, but the hate & venom that comes from liberals like her, and so many liberals, & checking out the positions led me away from the fold. I still am not conservative on all things, but I am trusting it more than before in more areas.
Some of the things the Post says not to include in posts are that which:

"# degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability, or other classification
"# is predatory, hateful..."

Doninger degrades Gov Palin on the basis of her politics & religion so badly that she is only pretending to be a woman, because she doesn't salute & march in lockstep to her agenda of liberalism.
I hope Doniger wouldn't be able to post that filthy slur against Palin on the Comments section, though she can do so in the Washington post itself.
All beliefs welcome, unless they come from a woman who isn't liberal.
BTEW, there are atheists who are pro-life on completely secular reasons, based on evidence they find convincing. Liberals "inflict" their religious, social, moral views on others. I could give a long list to prove this.

Skeptic - your reasoned reply is appreciated. And I was compelled to re-read the Doniger piece yet again. There is a disconnect, to be sure.

Her academic title has virtually nothing to do with her personal opinion, nor did she ever say as much. This is not about the studied opinion of a PhD in religious studies and related ancient languages.

While I believe she spoke the truth, the piece was somewehat unfairly posed as the studied opinion of a religions expert. Politics in the street is not the stuff of academia, much less the realm of comparative religions....this despite the religious element that been infused in this election cycle!

She didn't pull out her doctoral degree her, just told it like she saw it. I could have recommended a re-write here and there, because although I believe I know what she meant, those with opposing views were probably quick to mis-interpret certain phrases.

For example, the statement, "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman" would have made more sense if she had ended with.......'that she is every woman'.

Now this is absolutely true. The GOP is pandering to an entire population of female voters based on Sarah Palin's gender - and it worked in the short term. Not to mention the seemingly disenfranchised Hillary Clinton supporters in particular.

So the lesson here is simple - mean what you say, and make damn sure that you say what you mean. On the other hand, radical politics has never been very far from the classroom door - I don't know about your generation, but I went through undergraduate/graduate studies in the latter part of the 1960's.

Now that was great fun - I'd just finished a tour in Vietnam and got radicalized not too long after. I studied religion under a number of transplanted University of Chicago profs that gravitated to other religion departments in the Midwest.

I do sometimes wonder what the politics of my mentors from those long-ago days might be just lately - probably still democrats, even after all these years!

regards -

Someone asked whether I'm jealous of Prof. Doniger's achievements (such as they are) and therefore asked what I do for a living. Well, as it happens, I'm--of all things--a lecturer in the humanities, and, yes, recently had a book published about my research. It is of no interest to 99.999999% of the planet, but--unlike Prof. Doniger's work--at least it isn't a dirty book, and I'm not defending in it a totally trivial thesis.

As I see it, the problem with Prof. Doniger isn't that she's a bad scholar--for all I know, so am I; peraps my work is wrong for all I know, for some totally trivial reason that I just missed. The problem with her is that she isn't a scholar at all. She obviously sees the goal of her research, not to find out the truth--or at least to try to do so--but to propagandize for pornography and/or for whatever "gender studies" decided is the dogma du jour.

This is why the likes of Prof. Doniger annoy me and motivate me to post. The world needs to know not *all* academics in the humanities are such fools--self-important political propagandists mascarading as "scholars". There are many humanities professors, indeed most, who really do care about their research subject, often for no other reason than trying to find out the truth. They have political opinions, just like anybody else, but those are secondary to their life.

The fear I often hear on campus--that so-and-so is a liberal professor and will therefore fail anybody who dares to criticize socialism in his class--is, nine times out of ten, *NOT* true. But I can see where that fear comes from: it seems that every time I open the newspaper, or go online, I find one of the "activist" jackass-of-a-professor like Doniger making a fool of themselves. And now *I've* got to try and explain to students these guys aren't really the majority in academia, although it seems that way.

I'm sorry if I sound a bit nasty, but, put yourself in my place. Suppose you were a plumber, and every time you turn on the TV some idiot "activist plumber" is explaining that the *real* reason he became a plumber was to "raise the consciousness of the gender-capitalist-opressed people of color" by refusing to fix any leaks in evil Republicans' homes. This means you have to quiet down your conservative clients' fears before you could do any work. Wouldn't you be annoyed?

What we have here is not stalwart members of the Pat Robertson 700 club - no, I think we have a small team of bloggers that are swamping this thread with a multitude of Palin drone hate rants - the contest is on.

Which bloggerhead can post the greatest numober of psycho rants in one hour!? By and large, originality is greatly lacking though - you're making the GOP look alot like the groupthink zombies that they actually are.......another misfire, guys and gals of the GOP Darkness.

Good God! Anyone that would use right-wing political hack Charles Krauthammer as a veridical reference of any kind is really a reaching for the basement! The man has rarely told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in his entire career!

That idiot is the most perennial neocon apologist with pseudo-journalistic pretentions to be found in the entire MSM.

Charles Gibson threw Palin softballs as we knew he would - she gave an interview under very strict GOP controlled guidelines, and she couldn't even handle a canned interview. Palin is the greenest thing about Alaska - a real political greenhorn with very unappetizing political views that is already beginning to backfire on the GOP cynicmeisters, big time.

She's a GOP sham and quite a con artist in her own right - her past and ever so brief life as the Alaska governor is coming undone as we speak.

They need to keep her locked away for sure - she would be the end of McIdiot in a heartbeat, if her unsuitability for office ever becomes common knowledge. It could be too late.

The GOP has engineered their own destruction with this deceitful little ploy, and not a minute too soon to save the nation from more inevitable years of abuse at the hands of the neocons and Karl Rove.

Skeptic - you should be applying all that deductive power to comprehending the duplicitous behavior of your own beloved party of the Big Lie - assorted rightwingers, neocons, and bible thumpers that think a trip back to the Dark Ages would be alot of fun.

We're halfway there, so you have reason to rejoice. I think your criticism of Ms. Doniger smacks just a wee bit of the bloated green monster whose name begins with a capital 'J'.

When was the date of your last publication, the title, and the university at which you're currently employed?

PS. The University of Google doesn't really count....

For those of you who held some hope Doniger is a serious scholar, apart from her pathological hatered of anyone more conservative than Mao, I've got bad news.

A quick google search found her most recent "scholarly" works are "Acts of Love" (a collection of ancient erotic poetry) and "The Essential Kamasutra".

Typical.

Of her more "serious" work, we have "Splitting the Difference", a book that argues that "sometimes culture is just a shadow of gender". Why, exactly, does she think ancient Hindu texts support this postmodernist feminist nonsense? Because sometimes "stories about women in different cultures are more similar to each other than to stories about men in the same culture."

Gee, no kidding? Nobody realized *THAT* before! Except for every five-year-old whose copy of "Fairy Tales from Different Land" has stories about little boys from different places that are more similar to each other than to stories about little girls in the same book.

Naturally, prof. Doniger cannot imagine any possible explanation for her "amazing discovery" except for the world being exactly just the way the postmodernist feminists think it is.

I suppose I could have made a more detailed search (e.g., checking academic databases) for a more complete picture of her work, but why bother? She's obviously just another sex- and "gender"-obsessed fool of a professor, whose "scholarship" ranges from the obscene to the obvious.

They're a dime a dozen.

Victoria, one more thing. You might also read the Op-Ed in the Washington Post today titled, "Charlie Gibson Wrong on the Bush Doctrine" by Charles Krauthammer. Just another view of the Gibson interview.

Sorry Victoria but all of recents posts are not truthful. I too watched the Gibson interview and saw it much differently. I also read the NYT Op-Ed by Bob Herbert and wrote back to the Public Editor some of the problems with the Gibson interview. You might want to answer some of these questions yourself!
Dear Mr. Hoyt,
Your Opinion Page has often been riddled with things that I disagreed with enormously and many that I found fascinating. However, Mr. Bob Herbert’s column on September 12, 2008 was beyond unforgivable to the public at large. I accepted that Mr. Herbert feels like Governor Sarah Palin might not be “She’s Not Ready”, until I actually read the Op-Ed piece in its entirety. Mr. Herbert has called Governor Palin in his own words, “I’ve gotten the scary feeling, for the first time in my life, that dimwittedness is not just on the march in the U.S., but that it might actually prevail.” Reading the piece makes it clear that not only does Mr. Herbert think that Governor Palin and all Republicans are dimwitted, but most importantly he makes a point of insinuating that people who want to vote for her are dimwitted. I do not understand how a newspaper can continue to allow Opinion Columnists to show such condescension towards the people who read your paper. I am an American woman with four children and a Master’s Degree; married to a degreed Engineer and can tell you that I am totally offended by Mr. Herbert’s column and by several of your previous Op-Ed columns. Shouldn’t you suggest that people such as Mr. Herbert stop putting their personal swipes at the American people, especially American women, on your pages?

I would like you, Mr. Hoyt, who is supposed to speak for the readers of the NY Times to please answer questions about this column. Do you support the position in Mr. Herbert’s column? Can you answer for Mr. Herbert’s claims of Senator McCain “promoting himself as America’s ultimate patriot” which was casting aspersions on Senator McCain’s duty which included nearly giving his life for the United States? Can you answer to Mr. Herbert casting Senator McCain’s actions in picking a very well spoken, college educated, woman of 5 children with Executive experience (that Senator Obama doesn’t have) as “craziest, most irresponsible things imaginable?” Can you have him answer if he really does believe the people of America are “dimwitted” and just vote without thinking? Can you have him answer to me and millions of other intelligent, educated women (who are fairly informed about politics) about how he thinks that because she did not immediately know what Charles Gibson described as the Bush Doctrine (which was media created, ever evolving by the media political types specifically Gibson himself and Palin answered very effectively) that somehow disqualifies her as intelligent or worthy of the position of Vice President? Can you ask Mr. Herbert to not pretend that the majority of her answers were not cut and left on the editing room floor (in which I have now read the entire transcript)? Can you ask him what the importance of the so-called media created “Bush Doctrine” is except for it being synonymous or a collection of what the media talking heads believe that President Bush stands for? Can he then answer why he then fails to recognize that Governor Palin answered that question sincerely and powerfully (oh and by the way correctly)?

Dear Mr. Hoyt please be honest and open enough to answer and have Mr. Herbert answer these questions, because contrary to what is written in this ridiculous Op-Ed column, I am not dimwitted and not a sheep and not stupidly going to vote without conscience for anyone who I believe cannot lead the American people in the right direction. I would also like to know if Mr. Herbert and yourself have watched the comparative interview that Mr. Gibson did with Senator Obama when he first announced his run for President. I certainly did. I ask that you have Mr. Herbert look that transcript up and maybe the NY Times Public Editor can do a compare and contrast of that with the one with Governor Palin in the interest of honesty and fairness.

Thank you and I hope to read or hear your answers soon.
Sincerely,

I find when people have no logical point to make- or know that they have no reasonable respnse nor defense of an assertion, that they start slinging the ad hominems and attack the messenger.

Rick Davis said of this election, "Issues won't matter, personality will".

I see here, emotions- but not much intelligent attention paid to issues.

I think some people here are not aware that there are many records of Palin speaking about the issues here- google any of the key words in the question and there are youtube videos- and writings to access.

For just plain issues though, some of Palin's claims have been proven to be- misrepresentations.

"That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay."

Yes, technically she put it on ebay- and failed to sell it. She sold it off line to a privaye buyer and took a monetary loss- the state paid 2.7 mil and she sold it for 2.1 mil-actually costing the taxpayers money. And add to that the $45,000.00 dollars JUST THIS YEAR she spent on plane fare for her and her family-

"I told Congress, thanks but no thanks to that bridge to nowhere. If we want a bridge, we'll build one ourself."

In truth- Plain supported that bridge publicly and vocally until she got the governors seat (she platformed on it)
It wasn't until Congress and John McCain used it repeatedly as an example of wasted tax dollars,AND threatened to pull funding and her own constituents were solidly AGAINST it- that she decided not to build it.

O- And she kept the 300 million dollars allocated for it too.

Palin is against pork, and earmarks.

Well, only just now. She has earmarked 200 million dollars.

So, to me, the fact (and it is a fact- out of her own recorded mouth) that Palin thinks that god is on her side- is not necessarily a deal breaker.
I look to honesty and consistency in words and actions.

Actually, it seems that her evangelical background is the only thing she has going for her, politically.

I recommend her supporters and detractors alike look for her interview with Charles Gibson.

>>>>Dr. Doniger, I can only trust that you are far more learned in your chosen fields - Sanskrit and Indian Studies -in which your were awarded your doctorates.

Don't bet on it, Dr. Evans!

Nowadays, people in Indian studuies are more likely to get tenure for work "proving" Hindu scripture supports gay marriage, or for "defending the wisdom of traditional, natural societies" by praising the Hindu practice of burning widows alive, than for any real work.

It is unquestionable dogma in the humanities that there is no such thing as true or false interpretation, or right or wrong behavior--unless, that is, one claims "Bush lied!" or "Republicans are evil!". Critical thinking and a sense of morals are merely tools of white capitalist male Eurocentrist opression, you see.

For this reason, I'll bet good money Prof. Doniger's works are of the same quality as her rant here. This is also why her grammar is shaky and her vocabulary juvenile: the idea there is better or worse ways of using the English language is also one of those "white-male centered tools of opressions of colored people and women", naturaly.

Jesus H. Christ Wendy, I'm surprised that you've managed to pull so many haters our from under their rock, it's just amazing. And even more so, is how many write in identical Faux sound bites, the same crap regurgitated ad-infinitum.
If only bible thumping was a crime, so many of these pin heads would be in prison that the streets and freeways would be far easier to drive on.
Jerry w,
www.boskolives.wordpress.com

Dr. Doniger,

I can only trust that you are far more learned in your chosen fields - Sanskrit and Indian Studies -in which your were awarded your doctorates. I sincerely hope that the pathetic drivel that is found throughout your entire article is not indicative of your typical academic work. If it is indeed indicative, then you really ought to resign from your teaching position immediately, because you are obviously a charlatan. As an aside, if I were you, I would try to get my money back from Harvard and Oxford -it's painfully obvious that you've been cheated out of your tuition monies.

On the other hand, I would like to see you write 3 or 4 more articles just like the one above; given the reception of the first article, a few more of the same ilk should ensure a McCain-Palin landslide victory in November. Thanks again for your help in assuring another Republican victory this year and perhaps another 8 years of Sarah Palin as President beginning in 2012. Kudos and well done!

Best regards.
Dr. Stephen S. Evans

Dr. Doniger,

I can only trust that you are far more learned in your chosen fields - Sanskrit and Indian Studies -in which your were awarded your doctorates. I sincerely hope that the pathetic drivel that is found throughout your entire article is not indicative of your typical academic work. If it is indeed indicative, then you really ought to resign from your teaching position immediately, because you are obviously a charlatan. As an aside, if I were you, I would try to get my money back from Harvard and Oxford -it's painfully obvious that you've been cheated out of your tuition monies.

On the other hand, I would like to see you write 3 or 4 more articles just like the one above; given the reception of the first article, a few more of the same ilk should ensure a McCain-Palin landslide victory in November. Thanks again for your help in assuring another Republican victory this year and perhaps another 8 years of Sarah Palin as President beginning in 2012. Kudos and well done!

Best regards.
Dr. Stephen S. Evans

"[Gov Palin] does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women."

Whereas a Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor does. Riiiiiiiight.

Next time mention the FACT that as governor she never once forced her views on her constituents. Also, if you believe in god then you believe he put that life in a woman's body to be born and not murdered. AT LEAST BE SOMEWHAT HONEST FOR ONCE. I know the core liberal doctrine is to lie, but try telling the truth and maybe you wont be so angry.

Two things to say ... (1) Shame on you. (2) Your mother should have taught you better.

Others have already pointed out how Prof. Doniger's accusations against Palin are simply lies (e.g., the "book burning" part, the "cutting funding for unwed mothers" part, being a "fundie", etc.) so I won't repeat it. As for Palin not being a woman, that "criticism" is beyond comprehension.

What is amusing--in a sad sort of way--is that Prof. Doniger clearly considers the *only possible reason* for anyone to disagree with her liberal dogma about global warming, the enviornment, welfare, Iraq, guns, or anything else, is that "the good Lord" told them so--in other words, it just *has* to be a religious-based delusion due to being a "fundie".

Therefore, concludes Prof. Doniger, disagreeing with Prof. Doniger is *really* due to one's "fundamentalist religion", and, therefore, counts as "parading one's religion in public" and "forcing it on others". Which is a no-no, you know: seperation of Church and State and all that.

It is, I suppose, still legal to disagree with Prof. Doniger's views in the privacy of one's own home. In the dark. When nobody is around, of course. But how come America, which is supposed to be a secular country, actually allows people who *disagree with Prof. Donniger* (a sure sign of religous delusion) to run for office? I'm shocked--aren't you?--at how theocratic the USA is becoming.

I see Prof. Doniger is a professor at the University of Chicago, formerly one of America's great universities. That such an obvious clown is a professor there shows us the sad state of American humanities.

A year's tuition at the university of Chicago costs over $50,000. Yes, folks--for 50 grand, Prof. Doniger can teach your children to think (if that's the word) just like her.

What a deal!

WOW! For you to have so many degrees, and to be a professor of religious studies, yet have no actual relevant facts and only hearsay and innuendo is sad.
I have yet to hear Sarah Palin once speak about her faith, except from bloggers like you who continue to tell me how evil she is. does her actual faith in God make you nervous? To follow your whole idea that she also threw her daughter to the wolves, is pure stupidity, especially since bloggers like you were the one's who broke the story.
Do you hate and dislike her cause of an actual stand she has taken, or cause she is a woman that cannot possibly have a brain cause she does not believe what you believe cause we all know that all women in america want to be able to have abortions.
At least she has taken a stand. I may not feel the same way about an issue as Sarah, but I also cannot stand someone who answers "thats above my paygrade." Duck and run, take a stand in a place where taking a stand may not be popular.
oh and by the way, mam, you know better. As a theology professor, psalms 139 states, for you fomed me in the womb..........

I watched Charles Gibson interview Palin.
He asked her, why she insists that her daughter's DECISION (her words) regarding her pregancy is only her family's own business- and that should be respected-
Why doesn't that extend to the individual choices americans want to make for their own selves.

She didn't have an answer so he asked again, "Isn't it hypocritical to decide for others while retaining her own autonomy in decisions"

No answer for that either.
And isn't it a remarkable coincidence that her son conveniently signed up for service on 911- and was deployed one year later on 911?
I'm sure she wan't thinking of using that emotion laden date to advance her ambitions in any way.

She doesn't know what the Bush Doctrine is- but she DID say that she believes that Al-Qaeda was the reason we went into Iraq.
Even the Bush Administration doesn't purport this any more!

SO with Palin, we don't get 4 more years of the last 8- we get 4 more years retrograde policy fropm the beginning of Bush's term- minus the lessons even old dull George learned!

You are proof that education does not impart knowledge, nor wisdom.

This is one of the worst examples of commentary I've ever seen. It is also one of the most blatant examples of extreme stupidity it's ever been my misfortune to encounter. If Ms. Doniger had even a shred of integrity she'd immediately resign her job, tear up her diploma, and get the only job she's intellectually qualified for: "Would you like fries with that?"

I couldn't have gotten away with turning in a writing assignment that bad in junior high English class. To think that she pretends to teach college students is astounding.

Dear Ms. Doniger:

I do not agree with you at all.

1. The media has been "pushing" for answers from Sarah Palin. She is answering them with her opinions and expressing her stand on specific issues. They may or may not sit well with you, but at least she's answering. Obama skirts the issues.
2. Re: her daughter. Palin was in a no win situation. If the daughter's pregnancy was kept secret then Palin would have been accused of hiding something. Since the pregnancy has been made public she is being criticized by people like you for "outing" her daughter. Shame on you.
3. Re: guns. I grew up in rural North Dakota. We didn't run around killing things or people, just for fun. There's no difference in killing a deer or other animal for food than for you to walk into the supermarket and buy meat. Same difference. Yes, there is some "sport" hunting. There is a season for hunting. If there is an overpopulation of animals many of them die during the winter months because there's not enough food for them.
4. Global warming. Check your facts. Yesterday there was new information announced that we may in fact be entering a "global cooling" rather than a "global warming."
5. Re: abortion. Ever since I've had ears I have heard politicians express their viewpoints on the issue of abortion.
6. Re: abstinence. Just because parents teach their children certain values, there is never any guarantee that the children will follow by example or lesson. This in not Sarah's fault. Plus, no one has examined whether or not the boy was forceful or intimidating.
7. Re: religion. I agree that this is personl. However, why can't a politician express their personal religious beliefs?? Sarah is not forcing them on you, she's telling you how she views events based on her personal faith.
8. Re: books in the library. You are jumping to conclusions without knowing all of the facts. There is more to the book story.
9. Re: evolution vs. creationism. Why do we teach anything? How do you know that we weren't created by God? All theories should be taught, not just those embraced by atheists.

Monk, I did not make an assertion in my previous comments on Ms. Doniger's article. I merely indicated the overall grade I would have assigned to Ms. Doniger's work. You assumed, incorrectly, that in my posting I needed to give my reasons for Ms. Donigers grade.
As a teacher, we were cautioned about writing our reasons for a grade on the students work. Comments could be embarassing to a student if they were seen by others. Students were given free access, yes even encouraged to meet with us privately to discuss the basis for the grade they received.
Giving you my reasons for Ms. Doniger's low grade would violate a very important educational principle that states, "specific evidence that determines a students final grade on their work shall be kept private and shall further more only become public by written permission of the student".

You are going to miss those guns when they come to drag you to their church or kill you. How did American politics come to be so much about religion ? Religion is used to control people. Real Christians don't hate or want to take control like these people do...

.......and the self-righteous piety of the republican right is truly nauseating. To be honest, I can't believe I'm living in the same country with the bulk of the born-again idiots on this thread.

So this is what has been living next door to me all these years? Had I known, I'd never have left the house....

Monk, I did not make an assertion in my previous comments on Ms. Doniger's article. I merely indicated the overall grade I would have assigned to Ms. Doniger's work. You assumed, incorrectly, that in my posting I needed to give my reasons for Ms. Donigers grade.
As a teacher, we were cautioned about writing our reasons for a grade on the students work. Comments could be embarassing to a student if they were seen by others. Students were given free access, yes even encouraged to meet with us privately to discuss the basis for the grade they received.
Giving you my reasons for Ms. Doniger's low grade would violate a very important educational principle that states, "specific evidence that determines a students final grade on their work shall be kept private and shall further more only become public by written permission of the student".

So what we're seeing in these 700 and some posts is the face of the republican party?

Today is a very, very good to be a Democrat.

Givem both barrels Wendy. You really shouldn't have pulled your punches - take a lesson from McCain and tell the Big Lie, and then keep on lying! That way your fans never suspect the truth.

Imagine Mcliar in the Whitehouse - it's like Bush never left. Did I say left? Now that's a very bad word.

I meant to say, Bush was never right, and neither are McDufus and his born-again VP.

Vote Obama/Biden in '08!!!!!!

Doniger -
You don't have to worry about abortion - no man would come within 100 yards of your ugly face.

Clearly you're not a Constitutional scholar ... Abortion-choice is NOT "in the mother-lovin' constitution" as you purport.

Too liberal to function?

Your vitriol takes my breath away. Liberals really are wired differently.

Gov. Palin is not the one who has interjected her religious beliefs into this campaign. Nor is there any indication whatsoever that she intends to impose her beliefs on all of America. That bit of propaganda is the work of the Obama campaign and its unpaif press agents, the witch-hunting liberal media.

Why does it not surprise me that you are a college professor? You have no idea what the average American woman is like. We are like Sarah Palin! No, most of us are not as articulate and ambitious, but she speaks for us. She seems incredibly honest and intelligent AND she wants smaller government. After seeing what has come out of Washington during the last 20 years, I'd vote for her for PRESIDENT!

You remind me of Madeline M. O'Hare. Barf.

Madam, I would like to point out that people who own guns legally, rarely ever harm amybody. I would direct your attention to the animalistic underclass in this country that committs almost all of the crime. If you remove their commission of crimes from statistical analysis, the United States would have a per capita crime rate less than Switzerland. I would further direct your attention to our corrupt congress and senate. They are the ones who enacted the legislation which created and nurished a large uneducated underclass.
As to your opinion of Ms Palin. I would like to point out that it is extremely illogical to base an opinion on a political speech from any politician since it was written by a committee of profession speach writers and handlers. You have no idea what Ms Palin's values are or Mr. Obama's for that matter and neither does anyone else. If you believe you do then you delude yourself.

You and your friends don't get to decide who's a woman, or a person, and who's not.

I don't know if you will read all of these responses, but I wanted to write and say that I appreciate your input on the situation at hand. As a female, I would appreciate the choice of Palin as McCain's running mate were I not so absolutely sure that her choice stems solely from McCain's desire to be elected and not from any preparedness to govern on her part. She frightens me viscerally, particularly because she allows her religious beliefs to cross so heavily into the political spectrum. Judging by many of the other responses to your writings, this might not be the place to write this... but it almost makes me understand why the Ancient Romans outlawed Christianity and Judaism. As monotheistic, exclusive religions, they seem to be in conflict with their purported underlying message--one of love for all humanity. I do not want to take away the church from anyone and even if I am not a believer, I think that religion can be extremely beautiful. I spent every Sunday of the past year singing for three different church services and had the wonderful opportunity to learn about a beautiful and wonderful tradition in a very personal manner. I was there during Holy Week, singing every day, moving from plainchant and tears and bare walls to the bright, jubilant strains of flower-filled Easter morning. And I loved that every Sunday, these people gathered together to hear messages about love and about caring and about reaching out to the community, about their soup kitchen and the sick members of the parish. Religion should remind us of the good we can do for other people, of the positive interactions we can have with those who believe in Christ and those who believe in luck and those who believe in nothing at all. Insofar as this relates to politics, I have trouble understanding how anyone can justify overturning legal abortion while upholding the death penalty. In fact, I think it is an insult to us as human beings to make the decision for us, as if we cannot be trusted to know what is right and what is wrong. We know that it is wrong to kill other people. Abortion is nothing like going on a shooting spree or even plotting the death of another sentient being. Or animal. It is the result of a long and torturous self-examination, of deep regrets and of much sadness. Anyone who does not feel this way probably should have their head examined. But it doesn't mean that abortion should be illegal. If you don't want to have an abortion, don't have one. And tell your friends not to have them. And feel free to disagree with the views of those that do have them, just as I disagree with those who picket at abortion clinics and support Sarah Palin. But don't legislate morality. Furthermore, for Palin to say that her daughter made a choice to keep the baby is assuming that her daughter had a choice--a choice that Sarah Palin would take away from every woman in America if she made abortions illegal. If that is not hypocrisy, I do not know what is.

But as far as hypocrisy goes... they're ALL politicians. What do we expect? I will vote for the democratic candidate, as I always have planned, but it does not mean that I believe in everything Obama says (or that Hillary Clinton said). They are politicians, and nothing more. Not regular moms. Not regular dads. Not anything. They are playing a game, a very high-stakes game, in which they hope to find themselves controlling a large number of people and a whole lot of money. We will probably disagree with things they do. We will probably not want to be those people. We probably don't even want to have their job, since it must be a rather difficult one. But even the hypocrisy of politics does not stop me from fearing the irrational, calculating minds of Sarah Palin and John McCain.

I do not purport to change the beliefs of all that have written before me, nor would I want to. I just hope that we can all learn to love each other for who we are, to not treat the different amongst us as abominations but as "members incorporate of the mystical body of" humanity. Wherever we get our sense of morality, be it our church or our temple or our parents or our books, we need to recognize that all of us are humans even if we can't understand them. Will making Christian-themed legislation or involving ourselves in wars of religion solve this problem?

You are as ignorant maam as the studies suggest radical liberals are.....there's nothing about abortion in the Constitution!!!!! and yes Palin has real breast and a vagina...hence she is a really woman and American. But to you one has to hate America and its white people and their culture to be a good American....right BRAIN DEAD ugly woman?

I know you can't wait for the constitution to be a living breathing document so you can kill it for good.....disdain for it is the proud Progressive way since Pres Wilson.

By the way you idiots have no clue how to hold a conversation....you don't know anything about your past or present (not the virtual kind). and you never stay on track. The more educated you are the more stupid and pulseless you are.

The only type of people you talk to are yourselves...and you love congratulating each other on your brilliance and pervesions....but I promise....bad things alway catch up to you...have fun when they do.

I KNOW YOU WON'T POST THIS...YOU RADICAL "PROGRESSIVES" NEVER DO SHOW THE OTHER SIDE OF ANYTHING THAT CONFLICTS WITH YOUR MANTRA. HOW "OPEN-MINDED" (ie. NO BRAIN IN THE HEAD)!

BUT HERE I GO......

YOU MUST BE OUT OF YOUR MIND!!! "A HYPOCRITE FOR PRETENDING SHE'S A WOMAN"???!!! GUESS WHAT...I THINK ANYONE WITH 2 NEURONS CAN FIGURE OUT THAT INDEED SHE IS A WORKING WOMAN, A MOTHER, AND AN AMERICAN ONE AT THAT.

WHEN DID YOU LAST REPRODUCE YOURSELF?..AS IF YOU KNOW WHAT ITS LIKE TO BE AN AVERAGE WOMAN!

ARE YOU JUST ANOTHER SCARED ELITIST...TRYING TO DICTATE YOUR WARPED SENSE OF ELITIST ETHIC ON OTHERS. DO YOU HATE THE FACT THAT SHE'S BEUTIFUL, INTELLIGENT, FAITHFUL TO HER GOD, FAMILY ORIENTED, AND MOST OF ALL GOT TO WHERE SHE IS WITHOUT TOTING YOUR PASSE FEMINIST FASCIST SLOGANS/DOCTRIN?

I'M NOTHING LIKE YOUR TYPE TOO BUT MADE IT QUITE NICELY IN PROFESSIONAL LIFE...I GUESS I'M A NONE ENTITY TO YOU....UNTERMENSCHEN EH?

AS IF YOUR TYPE GIVES A DAMN ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE THAN SHOWING OFF YOUR CAPACITY FOR MENTAL MASTURBATON TO YOUR OWN ENDOCTRINATED/NARROW MINDED KIND. YOUR DOCTRINE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH HELPING REGULAR PEOPLE SUCCEED AND BE HAPPY, AND SELF SUFFICIENT...IN FACT YOU NEED EVERYONE TO FAIL IN ORDER TO KEEP YOUR FLUFF JOBS. PATHETIC AND ALARMING THAT HITLERS LIKE YOURSELF ARE STILL OUT THERE AND PEOPLE LISTEN.

YOU ARE THE HYPOCRITE...YOUR TYPE KEEP PREACHING ABOUT TAKING OFF LABELS AND HAVING THE FREEDOM TO BE YOURSELVES ETC...THE FACT IS THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO BE AND THAT IS YOUR WAY. IF NOT, ONE CASES TO BE A RATIONAL HUMAN BEING...OR A WOMAN...OR A BLACK WOMAN AS IN MY CASE.

I ONCE WAS A WACKO LIKE YOU UNTIL I STARTED READING SERIOUS LITERATURE/PHILOSOPHY ETC AND REALIZED HOW RICH IN IDEAS OUR WESTERN CULTURE IS AND HOW VAPID AND DANGEROUS THE SO-CALLED "PROGRESSIVE" MOVEMENT IS....THE ONLY REAL RELIGION THAT HAS CAUSED DEATH BY THE BILLION IS "ATHESTIC COLLECTIVISM"...DON'T YOU DARE TELL ME HOW SCARED YOU ARE OF CHRISTIANS WHEN YOUR TYPE HAVE PERPETRATED UNTHINKABLE ABOMINATIONS AGAINST HUMANITY ON UNMENTIONABLE SCALES IN THE NAME OF THE LITTLE GUY...YOUR GOALS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LITTLE GUY OR IT WOULD BE DONE BY NOW.....IT ALL HAS TO DO WITH YOU HAVING POWER AND BECOMING THE NEW ELITE...JUST LIKE SANTANA DESCRIBED.

EITHER YOU ARE IN ON IT OR YOU ARE BEING USED BY IT. EITHER WAY YOU AND WE WILL LOSE WITH THIS DEADLY DYSFUNCTIONAL POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.

...AND I REALLY DON'T CARE ANYMORE EITHER WAY.

OUR CULTURE IS DEAD AND YOUR TYPE KILLED IT. WHY? BECAUSE OF HUBRIS AND RASCISM. DEEP DOWN YOU SECRETLY THINK THAT OUR CULTUR/RACE IS SO SUPERIOUR THAT IT CAN TAKE ANY ASSAULT ALL IN THE NAME OF FUN, GAMES, MONEY, AND YOUR EGO. WELL ITS NOT...AND AS YOU WILL FIND THE CULTURE THAT TAKES OVER WILL NEVER BE AS FREE AS THE ONE YOU ENJOY SHOOTING YOUR MOUTH OFF AT TODAY. THE PEOLE YOU MAKE FUN OF ON A DAILY BASIS AND EVEN HATE WILL NOT BE THERE TO SAVE YOU.

NOPE...I HOPE YOU REAP WHAT YOU HAVE SOWN..My guess is that when that day comes you'll be begging for the society based on christianity that yielded your "rights" to come back!!!

I KNOW YOU WON'T POST THIS...YOU RADICAL "PROGRESSIVES" NEVER DO SHOW THE OTHER SIDE OF ANYTHING THAT CONFLICTS WITH YOUR MANTRA. HOW "OPEN-MINDED" (ie. NO BRAIN IN THE HEAD)!

BUT HERE I GO......

YOU MUST BE OUT OF YOUR MIND!!! "A HYPOCRITE FOR PRETENDING SHE'S A WOMAN"???!!! GUESS WHAT...I THINK ANYONE WITH 2 NEURONS CAN FIGURE OUT THAT INDEED SHE IS A WORKING WOMAN, A MOTHER, AND AN AMERICAN ONE AT THAT.

WHEN DID YOU LAST REPRODUCE YOURSELF?..AS IF YOU KNOW WHAT ITS LIKE TO BE AN AVERAGE WOMAN!

ARE YOU JUST ANOTHER SCARED ELITIST...TRYING TO DICTATE YOUR WARPED SENSE OF ELITIST ETHIC ON OTHERS. DO YOU HATE THE FACT THAT SHE'S BEUTIFUL, INTELLIGENT, FAITHFUL TO HER GOD, FAMILY ORIENTED, AND MOST OF ALL GOT TO WHERE SHE IS WITHOUT TOTING YOUR PASSE FEMINIST FASCIST SLOGANS/DOCTRIN?

I'M NOTHING LIKE YOUR TYPE TOO BUT MADE IT QUITE NICELY IN PROFESSIONAL LIFE...I GUESS I'M A NONE ENTITY TO YOU....UNTERMENSCHEN EH?

AS IF YOUR TYPE GIVES A DAMN ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE THAN SHOWING OFF YOUR CAPACITY FOR MENTAL MASTURBATON TO YOUR OWN ENDOCTRINATED/NARROW MINDED KIND. YOUR DOCTRINE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH HELPING REGULAR PEOPLE SUCCEED AND BE HAPPY, AND SELF SUFFICIENT...IN FACT YOU NEED EVERYONE TO FAIL IN ORDER TO KEEP YOUR FLUFF JOBS. PATHETIC AND ALARMING THAT HITLERS LIKE YOURSELF ARE STILL OUT THERE AND PEOPLE LISTEN.

YOU ARE THE HYPOCRITE...YOUR TYPE KEEP PREACHING ABOUT TAKING OFF LABELS AND HAVING THE FREEDOM TO BE YOURSELVES ETC...THE FACT IS THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO BE AND THAT IS YOUR WAY. IF NOT, ONE CASES TO BE A RATIONAL HUMAN BEING...OR A WOMAN...OR A BLACK WOMAN AS IN MY CASE.

I ONCE WAS A WACKO LIKE YOU UNTIL I STARTED READING SERIOUS LITERATURE/PHILOSOPHY ETC AND REALIZED HOW RICH IN IDEAS OUR WESTERN CULTURE IS AND HOW VAPID AND DANGEROUS THE SO-CALLED "PROGRESSIVE" MOVEMENT IS....THE ONLY REAL RELIGION THAT HAS CAUSED DEATH BY THE BILLION IS "ATHESTIC COLLECTIVISM"...DON'T YOU DARE TELL ME HOW SCARED YOU ARE OF CHRISTIANS WHEN YOUR TYPE HAVE PERPETRATED UNTHINKABLE ABOMINATIONS AGAINST HUMANITY ON UNMENTIONABLE SCALES IN THE NAME OF THE LITTLE GUY...YOUR GOALS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LITTLE GUY OR IT WOULD BE DONE BY NOW.....IT ALL HAS TO DO WITH YOU HAVING POWER AND BECOMING THE NEW ELITE...JUST LIKE SANTANA DESCRIBED.

EITHER YOU ARE IN ON IT OR YOU ARE BEING USED BY IT. EITHER WAY YOU AND WE WILL LOSE WITH THIS DEADLY DYSFUNCTIONAL POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.

...AND I REALLY DON'T CARE ANYMORE EITHER WAY.

OUR CULTURE IS DEAD AND YOUR TYPE KILLED IT. WHY? BECAUSE OF HUBRIS AND RASCISM. DEEP DOWN YOU SECRETLY THINK THAT OUR CULTUR/RACE IS SO SUPERIOUR THAT IT CAN TAKE ANY ASSAULT ALL IN THE NAME OF FUN, GAMES, MONEY, AND YOUR EGO. WELL ITS NOT...AND AS YOU WILL FIND THE CULTURE THAT TAKES OVER WILL NEVER BE AS FREE AS THE ONE YOU ENJOY SHOOTING YOUR MOUTH OFF AT TODAY. THE PEOLE YOU MAKE FUN OF ON A DAILY BASIS AND EVEN HATE WILL NOT BE THERE TO SAVE YOU.

NOPE...I HOPE YOU REAP WHAT YOU HAVE SOWN..My guess is that when that day comes you'll be begging for the society based on christianity that yielded your "rights" to come back!!!

Hey Wendy, if you had half the brain of Sarah Palin, you would know that abortion can be found nowhere in the constitution. It takes an amendment to the constitution to put abortion into it. That is why there is such a debate about it. The people never had a chance to vote on it.

All beliefs welcome is one of the most dishonest, misleading and disgusting posts I have read. Is this person a regular contributor to KOS? Why can the left never debate the issues honestly without all the personal vitriolic comments?

“But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.” — Matthew 5:22

If I were you I would step back and review my CHRISTIAN beliefs.

Like Joe Biden is NOT a Catholic Christian because of his actions regarding abortion. Check with the actual Catholic Church before you teach falsehoods.

It’s continually amazing when someone from the so called free-thinking, tolerant and diverse side is confronted with someone from the traditional side whose beliefs are different from yours, how intolerant and averse to diversity you become and how put out you are because that side must represent an end to this great, evolved world of yours. You criticize the Republican party for believing Sarah Palin could capture the hearts and votes of women just because she has a womb and makes lots of babies? But don’t you think because YOU, or women like you and Hillary, have a womb and can make lots of babies (or kill them if you so choose) that the heart of the American woman is with you? Are you really so “enlightened” and “evolved” when you can’t fathom that women like Sarah Palin believe more in the life of an unborn child than the right to claim her body as her own when it comes to killing the life she’s carries? I bet if you took a minute to shake that jumbled mess of a head of yours to clear it from all the crap that’s in it, you would understand that the reason Sarah Palin has taken this country by storm is because she does represent and speak for so many women that you don’t speak for! Women who haven’t had a representative or voice in quite a while because people like you do your best to quash it at every turn – but that must be in the name of tolerance and diversity to protect YOUR enlightened and evolved world! And it’s hard to square Palin’s attitudes on family and abortion with McCain’s policy on abortion? Maybe they will have to agree to disagree on differing issues, such as abortion, as I’m sure President’s and VP’s have had to since elections began. But also, since we are already living in an America where women have the right to abort their unborn child, Sarah Palin, as well as all the women who believe as she does, have already had to learn to accept and live with many things we fundamentally disagree with and don’t believe in. But it freaks you out to imagine a world where you would have to accept and learn to live with something contrary to what you fundamentally believe in – you, the standard bearer for tolerance and diversity. How ironic that is!

Your comments are so ridiculous that further comment is useless. You claim to be open to people having religious views (as long as they keep them to themselves.) OBAMA strays from traditional Christianity by saying that "Jesus is one of many ways," and yet you don't complain of that airing. Yet SP has traditional views and you say she imposes them because she has them? She demonstrated her traditional views in loving her daughter in view of the daughter's straying from "the way." Isn't loving the sinner part of traditional Christianity? If she hadn't brought the fact to the public's attention, the vindictive press would have. She did it the right way, and yet you call her a hypocrite.

Sorry, your wisdom truly escapes me!

OH ... MY ... GOD !

Sorry ... Oh My Goodness! -- would probably be more acceptable to you.

It is mind-boggling how one person can get so few facts so wrong in so many ways. I am in awe.

I will pray for you.

Ah, yes. Christians, do only your beliefs matter and everyone else is "going to hell in a handbasket"?

If you were true Christians you would not be saying or doing what I have seen on this site. What is that saying of yours? "What Would Jesus Do"? Think about it...would he be doing and saying what you are or would he be for peace for all people and tolerance of others. RTFB - Read the F*&%ing Book!

I dunno if you read the polls... but apparently women are flocking to McCain/Palin and the horrendous attack, of which yours is mild in comparison I must admit, are not helping your case.

sorry... NObama.

Slaughtering the unborn is in our Constitution? Ms. Doniger will have to show me where...

Well, I was so dumbfounded at the overwhemingly negative response to this article that I had to re-read it, very carefully. And now I begin to see the problem. Over 700 posters on this thread are simply unable to read with acumen. They hate anything they perceive as 'liberal' or democratic, and read/react accordingly.

The born-again 'feminists' here are died-in-the wool republicans with republican values - the real feminist movement was conceived and carried forward by liberal democratic women, and really, the movement as a political statement is long dead. I think many of it's goals have been achieved. Working women and highly educated women in powerful positions is no novelty.

No indeed - women and mothers are everywhere in the workplace, and have been for decades. Trying to capture the 'feminist' title for yourselves just ain't gonna fly - anyone with a memory knows better.

You've got to hand it to the republicans though - some 30-40 years late, but they're finally getting the gist of what democratic women were talking about in the 1960's and 70's!

Furthermore, a good many of these posts are the very definition of 'knee-jerk' responses. I've seen any number of posters that claim to be former democrats now voting for McCain -and what a load of crap! You were never a democrat!

The best liars are invariably republicans in my experience (thinking of the Bush administration now) -they do it with such indignent self-righteousness!

In fact, there are over 700 republican voters on this thread, whether they admit it or not.

This piece simply points to the truth - Sarah Palin is eminently unqualified to be the Vice President of the USA, but is at the same time an effective strategy for getting John McCain elected.

This is the dark genius of Karl Rove at work - surely none of you think McCain is capable of such successful political maneuvers? Karl Rove must be laughing his ass off - he's got you right where he wants you, all of you Palin drones.

Now, I was an early Hillary supporter, and thought that she was indeed qualified for the White House - but it didn't work out. A real democrat will suck it up, and vote for their candidate.

As to Sarah Palin, compared to Hillary Clinton, the only thing they have in common is the lipstick.

OMG! When this poor farmer's daughter got an academic scholarship and went off to be indoctrinated at the Univ of Fl in 1969; this is what my daddy meant when he said he would never send another child off to college.

You liberals are not more highly evolved, not way more intelligent than the rest of us; you are all mentally ill.

I pray God will explode the scales from your eyes so you can see.

In reading several of the apparently Right WIng responses to the original article -- I would say your anger and characterizations indicate that you have difficulty reading anything without debilitating bias that binds you to the actual words that were written.

This makes it extremely difficult to hold an intelligent and informed conversation or dialog with you.

Many of those Right Wing comments make completely unfounded accusations about what WENDY DONIGER actually wrote -- The consequence is that you are presenting yourself as uneducated and/or possibly mentally incapable of correctly interpreting something was clearly written and which was NOT by any stretch as over the top as your responses.

Shame on you if indeed you think you people are Christians! Shame on you for you are the worst of the worst and if you are not aware of your misrepresentations you are ignorant as well as being fools.

OMG! When this poor farmer's daughter got an academic scholarship and went off to be indoctrinated at the Univ of Fl in 1969; this is what my daddy meant when he said he would never send another child off to college.

You liberals are not more highly evolved, not way more intelligent than the rest of us; you are all mentally ill.

I pray God will explode the scales from your eyes so you can see.

Wow. That's all I can say to this article. Clearly, her "god" that she does not want to inflict on "others" (except the lives of the unborn - it's okay to inflict on them?) is very confusing. I do wonder if her god may be political, instead of sciptural?

The words used in this article are very judgemental, contrary to what she dictates in her own words. Search your heart, Ms. Doniger.

This is too logical. A person AGAINST choice, against the environment, against so many things most women are FOR -- may be bad as a VP. But if that person is a woman, that'll sway some women. Especially if marketed appropriately. That's what Republicans are so very good at.

I just don't know why democratic national campaigns can't match the single-mindedness of the Republicans in spinning the facts and slogans to their advantage. Facts don't matter; policies don't matter. All that matters is winning the election. If facts and slogans can be harnessed to sway hearts and opinions, the Republicans will use those. If facts and slogans hurt them, they discard them on a dime and will spin abject lies as new truths.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. "

Wendy,

Who appointed you the arbiter and definer of womanhood? What this inane statement reveals is YOUR HYPOCRISY! Guess that you just couldn't help yourself from appearing like a fool given your outrage. Apparently after years of correctly complaining about the sexist and biased rejection of talented female candidates, the radical feminists have decided they would rather not have a woman president (which Sarah Palin would certainly have a good chance of becoming if the Republican ticket was elected) than have a woman president who challenges their moral definition of right and wrong and would prove that they do not speak for the majority of all women. They would no longer be able to claim to set the "feminist" agenda, and you all would be marginalized.

Yes, I did graduate from an elite liberal university, but used my wisdom to understand that the best place to live is in rural America if you want to live among hardworking typical Americans.

I like the analysis presented in this article. It is inline with my thinking as a non-religious yet deeply patriotic American.

The worst hypocrisy is that of the person using their religion as a shield from behind which they lie and repeatedly lie after the facts are already exposed.

I simply do not understand how the Republican party has fallen to such deplorable depths as to have nothing substantial to talk about and yet delights in outrageously absurd misrepresentations and lies.

They must covet the power of the Presidency very very much... Which should give pause to even the most rabid Republican.

Ms. Doniger - By what right or authority would you strip Ms. Palin of her erstwhile claim to female-ness and judge her a mere pretender to such? Is it for anything other than the fact that she does not agree with your understanding of what it is to be a woman? Are there no other women that favor Ms. Palin's understanding of their femininity? Are they all fraudulent pretenders as well? ...just because they don't agree with the likes of you???

You, Ms. Doniger are NO WAYS NEAR so tolerant as you'd apparently like to claim yourself to be.

Secondly, by what right or authority do you proscribe all people of faith from holding that their faith is of BOTH private and PUBLIC value? Who exactly are you to define all faith as being a strictly private matter unfit for the light of day or public practice and application?

Your clumsy summation crassly references the 'mother-lovin' constitution, ...but as I recall that document was the one that guarantees freedom OF religion in our public lives; which is the POLAR opposite of the freedom FROM religion you are demanding all our political leaders agree to as a condition of participation in public life.

If our religious lives are obliged to be kept closeted, exactly how it that we are religiously free???

Is Wendy Doniger on medication? What's with the desperate hysterics and tired leftist talking points? As for her being a religion "professor", who let this wolf in with the sheep?

I am surprised to hear that you did not know that Sarah Palin, who I am almost positive is a woman, believes in Pro Choice. She and her daughter have chosen life as their choice. Isn't that what being "Pro-Choice" all about?

The vitriolic attacks against this woman are unfortunately not surprising. In the arena of ideas, you have been found wanting.

I truly had no candidate before Sarah Palin came on the scene. May she not be the only one out there who stands up for the principles that people like yourself have worked so hard to erode over the years.

Another benefit of the leftist implosion is that it is exposing the rot festering in our universities, the last bastions of Marxism, Maoism, and fascism.

Keep it up, leftist professors. Soon the public will realize that the credential of a degree from the so-called elite universities isn't worth $200,000.

A degree from an elite college only shows that the graduate met high admissions standards. Employers will soon catch on that they can use SAT scores and high school records just as efficiently as college admission committees, cutting out the middle man.

--Mondonico

PS: No, I'm not an envious prole, I'm a traitor to the meritocracy! (BA Yale 1985; where did you do your undergraduate work, Prof. Daniger?)

"You need to study your law before posting stuff like this."

"No, overturning a law does NOT require an amendment of the constitution. It merely requires that the law be declared un-constitutional." >> Chris

No Chris, you need to read what I wrote and study up on *your* law before posting.

You quoted me, but yet didn't read or maybe understand what I wrote. How could you possibly miss what I wrote? Here, I'll explicitly point it out for you;

"Forth, to overturn Roe vs. Wade would require an Amendment to the US Constitution *** or for the SCotUS to over turn it ***..."

In order for a law to be declared unconstitutional *after* the SCotUS (that stands for Supreme Court of the United States) rules on it, ONLY the SCotUS can then overturn that decision. If you knew anything about US Constitutional law, you'd know that the SCotUS is the final arbiter and no other court can overturn that decision. There are ONLY two options for overturning a SCotUS decision, an Amendment to the US Constitution or for the SCotUS to overturn its previous decision. But, I'm just repeating myself. Perhaps you care to enlighten me now?

Reading these comments, I wonder where the Christians are: such a lot of name-calling, vicious comments. Perhaps Prof. Doniger has upset their worldview and suggested they should start thinking why people disagree with them.

Or, perhaps, the right-wing mafia just does a number on these comment areas: swift boating anyone who dares to disagree with them and attacking with dirty names anyone who deviates from their dogma.

The University of Chicago has long been a Conservative's Mecca. (I went there and know what they've promoted over the last 30 Conservative years.)

Maybe some of these people could use a little course on how to argue without character assassination.

Bravo, Prof. Doniger, for waving the flag in front of the conservatives' bull.

"And as for religion, I'd love to know precisely how the Good Lord conveyed to her so clearly his intention to destroy the environment (global warming, she thinks, is not the work of human hands, so it must be the work of You Know Who)... and, incidentally, a lot of polar bears and wolves, not to mention all the people who will be shot with the guns that she thinks other people ought to have."

There is yet to be any definitive proof that humans are the cause of climate change. You do know that 2007 saw the steepest temperature drop in recorded history?

Clearly you know nothing of the repurcussions of adding Polar bears to the endangered species list.

First, the whole basis for adding them to the list is that the ice caps are going to continue melting. This is pure speculation.

Second, the current system enables Inuit tribes to sell their hunting licenses to American hunters for $30,000. The selling of a license does not ensure a kill, and the proceeds provide sustenance for the local population.

The removal of this hunting process would undoubtedly increase the threat to Polar Bear populations, as the Inuits would no longer be selling their permits and would instead hunt them themselves, allowing the entire season to score a kill rather than a single hunting expedition.

And you've apparently ignored the fact that Polar Bear population has only been rising over the past decades.

"But he has gone out of his way to insist that he would not impose his personal views on others, and has indeed voted against curtailing abortion rights and against criminalizing abortion. That is the right answer. It's in the Constitution. It's not in the Bible, or the Qu'ran, or the Bhagavad Gita. It's in the mother-lovin' Constitution."

Whether you like it or not, abortion is a moral debate that should not be decided by politicians or Federal law. Roe v Wade IS imposing his personal views on bible thumper states that view abortion as murder.

I don't know what you are saying is in the constitution. It seems you rely on what are known as "Activist Judges" to pass unconstitutional social policy. If you want Abortion to be a federally mandated legality you should amend the constitution. As of now, it should remain up to the democratic process of local state populations.

Using the central government to enforce morality is not Constitutional by any means, and Biden is probably the biggest opponent to Constitutional law.

I am personally pro-choice, but the debate shouldn't be made in the Supreme Court, it should be localized to state voters so that it doesn't pollute our national elections, and confuse simple minded "professors" like yourself.

???!!! The right to abort children is spelled out in the "mother-lovin'" Constitution? What version - Version 1973.0??

Joe Biden's reasoning fails logic, as does Ms. Doniger's. It's an embryological (not religious) fact that life begins at conception. This is a fact of Natural Law, something that the advances in science and technology have shown more vividly that at any other time. Yet in the face of these facts, Ms. Doniger and Mr. Biden encourage us that our response should be to "not impose our beliefs on others?" Cover your eyes, they say, this is none of your business.

I find it interesting that they would blindly invoke the Precautionary Principle in the face of the great uncertainty surrounding the idea of anthropogenic global warming, yet toss this same principle aside when confronted with the facts of life.

To Ms. Doniger and our misguided Senator from Delaware - thanks for showing your true colors. Apparently this faulty reasoning is not above either of your pay grades.

Your piece is quite something. Leaving commenting, per se, aside I have a question.

If Sen. Biden believes, as you note, that life begins at conception, how is he not imposing "his personal views on others..." when one of those "others" is the human he believes to exist from conception. This "other" is killed without an opportunity to advance his/her point of view on the overall situation. He/She is just killed.

If Sen. Biden believes that this unborn child is a life, isn't he imposing a view on the child? Aren't those who would kill him/her?

I know exactly how you feel when someone claims to speak for you as a woman, but doesn't have even the slightest understanding of who you are. Apparently women are pretty complex, because I have been offended for years to hear NOW claim to speak for me when I am nothing like their definition of a woman. Perhaps you ought to be applauding a society where women - you, me, and Sarah Palin included - can be so successful. I would love to see women encouraging each other; not tearing each other down just because we don't agree politically. You have taken a lot out of context and your rude demeaning tirade does not seem to be bringing civility to politics.

Wendy,
To get to know the women who connect to Sarah Palin - please go to www.GetterDoneGals.Blogspot.com
Thank you.

Too bad there isn't a "report offensive posts" button for the original article.

Methinks that Dr. Doniger protesteth too much and brag too much about how liberal and tolerant she is.

The Lying Doctor typed:

"I am on record in this blog (and have not budged an inch) as not objecting to any candidate's religious views.

But I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual)..."

Actually, if Dr. D were honest, she would now admit she not only has "budged an inch" she is now on record as objecting to a candidate's religious views.

CASE CLOSED!!!

For all those preaching that "abstinence did not work" for Sarah Palin and her daughter. How do you know that they did not have a failure of birth control? Were you there at the moment of conception?

Funny how thin-skinned and bigoted some "tolerant" Liberals are...

Wendy Doniger (O'Mentally Ill).

Kinda says it all. Wendy, you are a sick individual. You incorrectly said Palin "outed" her daughter's pregnancy and "hid" her own.

Actually, were you intellectually honest you would at least have a clue that it was the media that did both of those things.

But then, Liberalism means never having to be intellectually honest (or any other kind of honest).

You are awfully mean-spirited, for a "tolerant" person.

You small-minded bigot!!

Ms. Doniger:

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. "

You are a disgrace to your profession, your educational institution, and your gender. I pity you for your transparent bitterness and your obvious envy of a truly accomplished and fearless woman. You, on the other hand, are a failure in your desire to diminish her.

Michele Monopoli

So, you do not object to anyone's religious views unless they try to live them? How inane.

Sarah Palin makes not pretense of being a woman, is is a woman. You seem to be mixing the term woman (a biological designation) with the term Militant Feminist (a political designation). How small minded of you.

RS BUNKER

I haven't read the other comments, and I am not going to try and point out all that was wrong in this essay, because I don't think there was one sentence, certainly not one paragraph, in this entire thing that did not contain a falsehood, a lie, or something profoundly wrong.

Professor of Religious History, huh? How long ago was it that you sold your soul to the gods of political correctness and relative morality?

Her "pretense that she is a woman"? Her outing her teenage daughter in front of millions of people? I didn't feel as though any religious, maternal or family views were being "inflicted" upon me; I was happy to see a proud mother showing the world her family, a family that Sarah Palin is obviously very proud of. Would you rather she "hide" them from the media, what eyebrows would that raise? Your assessment of the Republican nominee for vice president has missed the mark, and by a wide margin. You don't get it; this woman is true to her convictions, family and to her country. She is what this country needs!

Suppose (though very unlikely) Sarah Palin were to become President and engineer an overturning of Roe v Wade. The separate states would then be the source of any health and safety Code pertaining to the subject. Anyone who thinks that abortion would be totllay illegal everywhere in the US for years after that is wrong, perhaps there would be a need for some to drive to a nearby state, but it wouldn't be illegal everywhere. What would happen though if there were a sea-change in attitude toward abortion? A demand for and therefore development of better birth control along with a perhaps more appreciate of the human fetus, or the Post Traumatic Stress some who have aborted feel (even males who caused -- can feel he "has" to be wild and crazy for longer becasue he was rejected as a man ready to take on fatherhood -- even subconsiously that can weigh on sensitive people)
So why can't we look at a woman who is not pro-abortion? We are free to discover who we relate to as women.

I'm sure this will be deleted, but, Doniger, you are worse than an idiot. You are a fool who demonstrates that, while ignorance can be cured with information, stupidity is terminal.

JFC! What is wrong with you people? You think since you believe in a book that told you God made this world you should be the ones to rule it? Why should I, as a woman, have some idiot in the Supreme Court or Congress or even the Presidency tell me what to do with my body? Just as abstinence did not work for Palin's family (including her) it will not work for others. Let the others make their choice. Since I don't believe in your God, I don't believe in your faith. I have a more intelligent aspect on life and do not let others tell me what to do with my personal affairs. Since these people who believe abstinence is the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancy do not teach it (or any other form of prevention) to their children, the schools are going to have to step in. By the way - since Palin's daughter is pregnant, she must not have used a condom...is that how you teach your children about STDs?

GROW UP!

Looks like somebody sounded a dog whistle. Even atheist Susan Jacoby's column hasn't gotten this many replies.
I must say, I'm glad I finally came upon a place like this full of such mature adults.

Bunch of rhetoric. No valuable content. Made to sell, not to get a real point across. This writer is not loving by any stretch because if she were, she would not have written this. She does not love Sarah Palin as a person on this earth.

Well done, Wendy, you have made yourself lower than when you started writing the article. And if you don't think that you point at her and you don't have three fingers pointing back, you are a liar. Horrible, absolutely horrible thoughts - in essence Ms. Wendy would just assume to have Mrs. Palin dead.

Oh, no, not that, because that would be intolerant!

I think the cynicism behind selecting Palin is very frightening: the purpose for selecting her escapes me, but I would guess that one reason might be that she's the "anti-Cheney" pick. That is, the promise that she would not be the powerful VP that Cheney has been. If McCain died in office, the power mongers would squash Palin into a flat-disk Lady Bug and take over our country IMO.

Govenor Palin increased the funding for the home, not as much as requested, but still an increase. Your prejudice shines through.

Funny, I haven't heard Palin try to force anyone into believing her way. But I do believe she doesn't think it's ok for governments to force others to pay for abortions. "She Palin does not speak for women." That's really an intelligent statement, Ms. Doniger writes. Palin never claims to speak for every woman or any woman. She is voicing he opinion, just like Doniger, Sally Quinn, and the others like to do. It's so funny. I used to think it was about "women." But now the truth is coming out, the curtain has been drawn back to reveal that Doniger and her ilk are not about "women." They are about their own liberal beliefs. These beliefs have been forced upon us for years, but now we finally have someone who speaks for those who haven't had a voice in the past. And guess what? Doniger and her buddies are running scared!

Um, Sweetie, being really, really well educated on certain things doesn't make you an expert on others. Nor does being exceptionally bright and well-informed confirm your views on American civics. But, I'll leave those at that.

The real embarrassment is your view of religion in civic life. You should know better. Religious views throughout the world, throughout time, have worked to both liberate and give dignity to human (and animal) life as well as to denigrate and destroy the same. Separating a person's moral views from their religious (or irreligious) ones is, quite simply, impossible. But you should know that.

It is better to show that the particular expression of a politician's moral views do not comport with the moral views of the populace than to presume that moral views arising (presumably) from one's religion should disqualify her. But, again, you should know that, too.

Thanks, and try to keep that angry, arrogant liberal shoved a liiiittle bit deeper down. It makes the rest of us Democrats nervous and the Republicans happy.

P.S. - By the way, the right to an abortion (or even bodily integrity) is not in the Constitution - anywhere. It's in a series of Supreme Court opinions. I'm sure UC has some law professors who could explain this to you.

Let me put this in terms even you moronic conservatives can understand. In your world, women would be FORCED to carry a child to term regardless of the circumstances. When was the last time you heard someone pro-choice advocate the forced abortion of your child?

That is the difference in the interpretation of "tolerance" between liberals and conservatives!

If Palin's greatest pretense is that she is a woman, then Doniger's greatest pretense is that she has something intelligent to say.

I wonder if this atheist shouts out against the violant Islamic faith and its medieval tenets of stoning, women being less than men, unable to work, etc.? Or does she just abuse Christians? She is jealous of Sarah Palin's accomplishment amongst her strong family values. Let's see: she loves Obama, who believes babies that live in botched abortions don't deserve to live, and Biden, whose church leaders have denounced him for his abortion beliefs. I just can't take this so-called "professor" seriously.

Perhaps my lack of higher education is the root cause of my confusion, but I have two questions for the professor.

Question 1 - Where does the Constitution guarantee a woman's right to an abortion? I must have missed that article.

Question 2 - How is Gov Palin not a woman? Does the term "woman" imply that one must have left-of-center views? I guess all those womb-bearing conservative life forms who like guns, religion, hunting, and don't believe in killing unborn babies is right must not be real women. I guess I better tell my wife and have her pass it on to the majority of the military wives in this country.

What a jealous, shriffled up old fart the eiditor is! Sarah DOES represent us working women--at least those of us who worhship our God, believe in morals and values which come ONLY through religion, and who worked after birthing children. And as a professor of the history of religions, I'm sure then that you despise Islam, which is imposing its doctrine through violence, right? I doubt it. Now Barack--let's see--he believes babies born in botched abortions should be stowed away in a closet to die. And Joe Biden? What a joke! He doesn't believe in ANYTHING, much less his Catholic religious doctrine. He, along with the fool Pelosi, has been renounced by a passle of church leaders about their abortion beliefs.
It's religion you oppose, correct? So my real question is---just what if it you fear about religion? Jealousy prevails!!!!!!!!

Oh dear... another Victorian Feminist taken to having fainting spells. I hope Ms. Doniger has someone nearby with some smelling salts.

Yes, both McCain and Palin identify as religious and anti-abortion, but neither has led their political lives with that belief, ever, as their signature issue. Politicians act on their passions - the passion of McCain and Palin is reform of government, not society! In her time in office, Palin's focus has not been to kick the gays, put the ten commandments in every classroom and make abortion illegal; it has been to kick the corrupt and make wasteful spending illegal. This all negates Obama's simple contention that McCain=Bush=more-of-the-same. Instead it was Obama who chose that demosaur Biden as running-mate.

The Republicans are now making direct appeals to Clinton supporters because they know many voted for her simply because she was a woman, that it was just "About time..." (for a woman in high office). Palin is much more attractive to them than Obama, and the fact that McCain is old is an asset rather than a liability -- they like the fact that she's but a heartbeat away from the Big Chair. It appeals to their Cinderella Complexes, that they too might be the Pretty Woman who is Flashdanced to celebrity and stardom, and become the next American Idol interviewed by Oprah.

And it's all working splendidly for the R's. They've done this masterfully, once again calling into question the D's continual claim that R's are just a bunch of dumb yokels.

What the...?

At least half of the "facts" in this rant are false. And an amazing little tool called the Internet will show you all kinds of interesting sites that have actual quotes on record to dispute your lunatic theories about Sarah Palin.

Keep believing in fairy tales. Does wonders for the Dems credibility with the average voter.

And to think I almost decided to vote for Obama until all of his "helpers" have let loose with their typical fringe insanity. I don't want you people within 50 feet, let alone the ear, of the president.

First, let me say that I'm disgusted with the amount of name-calling both in this piece and in the comments section. Act like adults, don't throw around names because you lack a better argument. Intellectual discussion degenerates with the first claim of someone being a left-wing baby hater, or right wing nut job. Relax, take a deep breath, and talk about the real issues.

As to the article's suggestion that the right to privacy is found in the Constitution, it's not. The ruling on Griswold vs. Connecticut, which first established the precedent for reproductive privacy rights, found there was a penumbra of this right in the Constitution. In other words, there was the faintest of shadows in the Constitution that supported a couple's right to use birth control. This same argument was used in Roe vs Wade.

The Supreme Court thought there was a shadow suggesting the right to privacy. It is nowhere in the Constitution.

The line "As for sex, the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people, hard on the heels of her concealing her own pregnancy (her faith in abstinence applying, apparently, only to non-Palins)" is a nonsensical waste of language. First, the circumstances were different for her pregnancy and her daughter's. Rather than let the Obama campaign find the skeleton in the closet of her daughter's pregnancy, Palin decided to be honest about it. Good parenting? That's a matter of debate. Hypocrisy? Please. And the insinuation that Palin only believes in abstinence for non-Palins is ridiculous. If a child does something, does that automatically mean that their parent's support that? NO, it does not. It's called disobedience, and it happens all the time in any parent-child relationship.

@ Joe, Katy Texas:

"Wow I just read some of the replies, You Republicans are running scared. Did the author hit a soft spot? Lets face it Palin maybe attractive, but she's still a Dragon."

Running scared because we commented on some old hack calling Palin a man? Why don't you admit that this isn't Joe, but rather the Author? No one would be stupid enough to back this wacko up in her claims that Palin is not a woman.

DESPERATE DEMS. DESPERATE.

@ Joe, Katy Texas:

"Wendy,

The article is awesome, you hit the ball out of the park."

I am embarrassed that you live in the same State as me. Please, move to California where water heads like you belong.

Wow I just read some of the replies, You Republicans are running scared. Did the author hit a soft spot? Lets face it Palin maybe attractive, but she's still a Dragon.

@ alex y.:

"Wow, 677 comments and more pouring in. That's a real solid fan base for sure."

If by "Fan Base" you mean "Outraged Public at Callous Remarks" then...yes. Quite a large base.

This old lady is the typical Democrat. Believe you can cast magical spells on people, summon the earth to "speak and walk like a human"...but when it comes to a GOD loving his CREATION (See: Unborn Child) you claim it's NOT POSSIBLE.

Did you come up with this while riding on your UNICORN like you wrote about? GET OFF THE CRACK, PSYCHO!!!!

Wow, belief in God is a private matter? I totally disagree - it is completely public and is everyone's business. She's totally misleading about her facts, as well. I Google'd her insinuation that Palin cut funding to a teen pregnancy center - she more than doubled the funding from 1.5million to 3.8million, but didn't support the 10 million sought. Only a democrat defines that as a "cut in funding."

Wendy,

The article is awesome, you hit the ball out of the park.

Wow, You are one rabbid sounding lady. Your rant does not sound vary distingushed or divine. I hope your splean is OK, venting it with that much force could put your health in danger. If this is an example of your high minded examination of Mrs. Palin's political comments, well, let's just say you sound more like an angry party hack than a professor of divinity. Next time, stay away from the keybord untill you cool down a bit. LOL Ed...

@ Chris:

You wrote:

"When she mentions the constitution she's referring to Thomas Jefferson's discussion of the first amendment, and within that, the separation of Church and State. Abortion, being an issue combining of sexual & religious values, and having no bearing on the governance of the state, falls on the Church side of the separation"

Why is it that when a pregnant mother is murdered, it's considered 2 counts of murder (1 for mother, 1 for unborn child) but when it's abortion, you liberal pukes claim "CHOICE CHOICE CHOICE!"

I claim MURDER. MURDER. MURDER.

You should take a minute to read your own full rules governing commentaries and discussions:

-degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability, or other classification
-is predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass

Uh, Joe Biden would have the power to influence the change in the abortion laws which should be changed.

If he had the courage. I think the Serenity Prayer is most applicable.

Those who pray it know what sort of "change" is truly expected of the human race. And by Whom.

Wow, 677 comments and more pouring in. That's a real solid fan base for sure.

I agree that Palin fails to represent many women in America, myself certainly included, but I must ask the question, should she? Do we wonder if McCain or Obama represent American men suitably? It's regrettable that a sort of tribal mentality still exists; that when we disagree with a woman, particularly one who is supposed to be representative in some way, we oust her from the sex. Palin is a woman, and one whom I passionately disagree with about almost everything. Personal politics notwithstanding, the question is whether she is capable of running the country "tomorrow"-- a criterion McCain famously called for--and the answer is clearly no. This can be substantiated without the acrimonious gender politics that will in the end give spin-happy critics more substanceless ammunition.

Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman.

I guess she is some sort of neo-gendered creation. Perhaps the greatest hypocrisy in feminist ideology is the pretense that all have the be the same. If having lots of kids and driving them to school disqualifies you what qualifies you? Aborting as many as possible?

Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman.

I guess she is some sort of neo-gendered creation. Perhaps the greatest hypocrisy in feminist ideology is the pretense that all have the be the same. If having lots of kids and driving them to school disqualifies you what qualifies you? Aborting as many as possible?

You are in error. "It" is not in the constitution.

With all respect, I don't think you fully understand the real concept of Feminism, and a womans RIGHT To choose, that liberals push so ignorantly.

A woman has the RIGHT to give birth to her unborn child just as much as she has the right to kill her unborn child, in this country. What about that don't you understand as true feminism and equality for all women.

But I'm curious, what is it about the God that Sarah Palin and many others believe in scares you so much? Is it, that He has the same standards of a civil society that values life of all? Including the unborn?

You claim she is pushing her agenda that it REALLY IS OKAY for women to have children and raise a family, and work, or choose to stay home and have kids and raise their kids. But yet, you want to push your agenda that those things are some how wrong.

Do you believe as Obama does, that Children are some how a punishment?? When you reason that type of thinking out to it's most logical conclusion about what he's saying, he's telling his own children, they are a punishment to him and his wife. How sad it will be for them when they are old enough to realize that is how their parents really feel.

you see, that is the difference in thinking between those who push abortion and those who stand for life of the unborn, those who stand for life of the unborn see children as a Blessing not a punishment.

But are you afraid to face that truth? Did your own parents believe you were a punishment for them? Is that what you grew up to believe? Or do you believe that your parents love you and that you were a blessing in their life? If they believe you are blessing how could someone elses child therefore be a punishment???

Thank you, thank you! The cynicism that guided McCain's choice--as in, she's got a womb(I wanted to use the v-word but someone will probably say it's profane) so other women will vote for her-- riles me to no end. I really don't care that she photographs well or is tough, gun-toting mama, like one of the boys. What I care about are her stands on the issues.....I wish more women would peer through the haze and see her for what she is - another right-wing, anti-choice, book banning, etc etc candidate that the Republican Party has been spitting out for a long time. And there were many other qualified, experienced Republican women he could have chosen, but they were not far enough to the right to appease the minority right-wing base of their party. McCain keeps talking about change (a line which he stole from Obama because he isn't that original) but he's picked yet another clone.....what a disappointment.

Any more of your "Save the Caribou, Kill the babies", psycho-babble and you might have a coronary arrest.

Calm down. We're all in this together. Stop the hate!! Besides, it makes you look foolish.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman"

Wow! That is perhaps the most breathtakingly evil statement I have ever read in my many years of following politics.

It's no wonder Gov. Palin has made such an impact...and would have without even opening her mouth. She just runs a dagger through the heart of people like yourself, who in your ivory towers (the Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School....SO impressive) are so far removed from real life that when someone REAL like Palin comes along, so many people are so energized and embrace her so heartily.

I'm sure the Obama campaign is just thrilled to receive this kind of support!

When she mentions the constitution she's referring to Thomas Jefferson's discussion of the first amendment, and within that, the separation of Church and State. Abortion, being an issue combining of sexual & religious values, and having no bearing on the governance of the state, falls on the Church side of the separation

But in the past eight years have lost sight of this incredibly important separation. Mixing church and state is what leads to countries like Iran, and I fear soon, the US. Please, please, consider the consequences of such a leader (Palin) in such contentious times. And drop all the self-righteous hate-mongering & pathetic indignation. It doesn't become proud Americans.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. "

Do you realize what you just said? She's not being hypocritical by claiming that she's a woman, she IS one!!! That's one of the stupidest things I've read yet on the smears against Sarah Palin. And another thing, I don't know if you jealous Dems realize this, but she's not the one running for President. Oh I know, you all love using the fear tactic, "OMG! McCain is sooo old, he's going to die in office, then you know who will have to move to the # 1 spot!"

You Dems are just pissed that you couldn't produce a woman candidate like Sarah Palin, so you attack her and her family mercilessly like the sad curs that you are. You're pathetic.

Research this nut job! She believes she can cast spells on people. She believes in Unicorns and regularly practices levitation.

SHE IS ON DRUGS OR IS MENTALLY HANDICAPPED.

The Washington Post has gone off the deep end this time. In constantly trying to influence the public's vote by spreading LIES and outright HATE towards the Republicans, they actually had a "Professor" that believes in FAIRIES write a commentary on how PALIN is actually a MAN???

This "News Source" is a joke.

You're kidding, right?

Was that article meant to be a joke, or an exercise in poor writing and poor communication skills?

Since when is a woman who has given birth to five children not a real woman?

When an angry, left wing, deranged individual says so?

There is no way that person is a real, authentic "Professor."

If they are, then that speaks volumes to the poor quality of education and the selection process in this day and age.

They'll let anyone become a "Professor."

Next article in this site should be written by our cat, who has better communication skills than this hate filled "Professor."

The hatred and distortions drips off the page!

Ms. Doniger,
Please provide us with the excerpt of the "mother-lovin' Constitution" where it says that one of our inalienable rights is the right to have an abortion on demand. I am not in favor of reversing Roe v Wade, and, despite all the clamor to the contrary, I have never heard Palin or McCain, or any conservative politician on the national scene say they would reverse Roe v Wade if elected. But, to claim, as you have done, that the Constitution of the United States guarantees the right to abortion is ludicrous and exactly why conservatives claim that liberals are constantly rewriting the Constitution to fit their own peculiar take on life. It's curious to me that a professor of religious history is such an avid supporter of abortion on demand. And it's further curious that such a professor thinks that all modern women want is the right to have an abortion whenever they want. It's exactly how the left has misjudged American women for years now. The feminist agenda is rejected by the majority of women in this country because it is so life-negative, secular to the point of being anti-religion, and suffused with the notion that "Sex in the City" is a realistic portrayal of what women want.

I know the Washington Post has been one of the furthest left "news sites", but....come on!!! This article is so horrible that I am saving it for future posting! To think that someone out there let this wacko write an article shows how desperate the left is! This old lady believes she can CAST MAGICAL SPELLS AND RIDE UNICORNS!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHA.

What about this "Palin is not a woman" remark? Hilarious! How desperate you look! Why don't you just CAST ONE OF YOUR SPELLS ON HER?? YOU ARE THAT THREATENED, AREN'T YOU????? Unbelievable. I normally read the articles in the Washington Post for a laugh, but letting this nut job write an article MUST BE A TAX WRITE OFF. LETTING THE MENTALLY HANDICAP EARN A PAYCHECK????

I hope that she reads this and realizes what a fool she looks like. The epitome of someone trying to be TOO ELITIST while maintaining that they are INTO ART. In the end, we know you look for substance in this world because YOU LACK ANY YOURSELF.

DIAF.

As a Pastor serving a large mainline church, I am glad to have this opinion piece as one more proof: No wonder the mainline protestant churches are dying!
Mean, uninformed pieces like this one stand as such wonderful examples of the hypocrisy/double standards of liberals. Liberals- and the out of touch people who claim the title "professor"- love to talk ad nauseam about their compassion, inclusivity, love, tolerance, etc. Yet this is only practiced towards those who agree with them.
Comrad Doniger is a perfect example of a small and petty person, who uses her position and title to get attention for her hate-filled worldview. The good news is that statistics continue to show the truth that fewer and fewer people are listening to her or people like her.; they have become cartoons characters!

Also, the drastic over-representation of the right wing in these blog comments (as well as nearly every OTHER blog on the damn internet these days) tells me that the responses here are being coordinated and manipulated to try and give the impression of an overwhelming consensus against the author. Classic Rovism, it's called ASTROTURFING.

NOONE'S BELIEVING THE ASTROTURD, DUMMIES.

I think Ms. Doniger's, to use her own words, "greatest hypocrisy" is her pretense that she understands women. Granted, she is a woman and likely understands herself. But Ms. Doniger's projections of her own beliefs and ideology on the rest of America's female population is over simplified and naive. Maybe she can relate to a specific beltway class of "hyper-educated" progressives, but she must concede that a significant percentage of women in the rest of America (outside SF, Manhattan and other bastions of liberal thought) are, like Gov. Palin, pro-life.

Ms. Doniger might consider taking an impartial look at why women like Gov. Palin choose to give birth to a child with down syndrome. She might also consider a candid look at why a large percentage of women find Gov. Palin so energizing and fresh. As a result, maybe Ms. Doniger would see a less partisan, more respectful and more excogitative discussion of the issue.

This "Professor" is a by product of our educational system. That is one area Sarah should focus on during her next term at the White House.
Is there mandatory Drug Testing of Professors ?

I don't need the future commander in chief of my military blowing kisses to people during an acceptance speech.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. The Republican party's cynical calculation that because she has a womb and makes lots and lots of babies (and drives them to school! wow!) she speaks for the women of America, and will capture their hearts and their votes, has driven thousands of real women to take to their computers in outrage."

It's exactly this kind of venom that makes up the tiniest people of the world. Sarah Palin doesn't need to worry about defending herself as a woman, it's obvious you believe a woman must be for all things and all people, what a joke. What a small person you are...

You certainly are full of your self.

You stated that Palin used, "a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska." This is, in fact, not true. Since you have based your opinion on false premises, your opinion is groundless. Know your facts before you base an opinion on them.

Thank you.

Thanks doc, one less school for my very gifted children to interview now that I know the caliber of mind "teaching" at U of C. You might want to wander over to the law school and read a book. Even very leftist jurists admit that abortion rights appear no where in the constitution, hence the need for penumbras and eminations. But of course the religion department joined the long marxist march of the english and social science departments long ago. I'm encouraging my kids toward the science world where facts, not feelings (with exception of global warming) still matter.

This is just another example of the extreme liberal view many of our educators convey to our children while they are captives in a classroom.

I am making sure my child is ready to weed through the liberal propoganda and make his own decisions based on well grounded beliefs.

I have always said, "beware the politician that wears his faith out on his sleeve". It is evident and plain to me that the idea of Palin becoming Vice President was not seriously entertained until recently - how may years has she prepared herself for such a position?

I am distrustful of anyone that wears their faith out on their sleeve when trying to earn my business and/or when asking for my vote.

We hear the talk of less government. It is not a question of less government but more effective government.
Come on folks! Snap out of it!

This poorly written, poorly thought ought screed was written by a professor??? Is far left zealotry the sole qualification required to be a professor today?

In Wendy's world, the desire to punish a thief for stealing is the imposition of one's morality on society. Someone who opposes criminal punishment then is also imposing their morality. State voters who vote for OR against gay marriage are imposing their morality on others. Every election is about one's sense of what's right and what's wrong, one's own morality.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, including Gov. Palin, who speaks for no one but herself.

As to comments made about Jesus being a community organizer, and Pontius Pilate being a Governor.

A couple points:
It was not Pontius Pilate who was the decider to put Jesus to Death, but the 'masses'. Pontius Pilate said that he had found nothing that would cause him to sentence Jesus to death. He would gladly have acquitted Christ, and even made serious efforts in that direction, but gave way at once when his own position was threatened by the masses / mob rule.

Jesus is certainly beloved as my Saviour, but I don't know that I would vote for Him to be my Governor or my President. As Jesus said Himself in the Gospel according to Luke, Chapter 20, "24 Show me a penny. Whose image and inscription hath it? They answering, said to him: Caesar's. 25 And he said to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things, that are Caesar's: and to God the things that are God's." In this comment, He clearly shows that He is of God, not of the local government. They have their role and He and God the Father have Theirs.

Would you please show me where the constitution advocates murder?

Was the receding of the icebergs from the US the work of human hands?

For a professor, you are pretty gullible in believing liberal doctrine.

In paragraph six you speak of how Obama said that we should leave people's families out of the election. While I agree with him Ms. Palin is quite a pickle here. If she covers up her daughter's pregnancy she will be ridiculed when it comes to light - and it eventually would have. So from a public relations standpoint it is better to get this out in the open early to prevent a scandal later. At any rate, this is a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. People are looking at her and saying she shouldn't have made this announcement. While others would have thought that she is devious, dishonest, and unworthy of being a VP in this country because she didn't tell us up front. Either way she loses. I Believe that women in your position are jealous because you didn't get the nod. Could this be the female equivalent to penis envy? I think so.

Apparently, Dr. Doniger didn't even "review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions" for this blog as some of them are very apropos for posting as well. Shame on her for that. Twice the shame on the Washington Post for not accepting her article.
Furthermore, the U of Chicago needs to review its tolerance policies and apply them across the board... Don't think that will happen.

Prof. Doniger:

Isn't all law about imposing your beliefs on others? Why exactly is it wrong to kill someone or to steal? If I don't think it's a problem, why should your religion-based morals be forced on me? I really don't see how we can separate morals (religious or otherwise) from legal issues. I don't know why there's a difference between opposing abortion and opposing lying. Shouldn't they both be controversial since they are fundamentally belief issues?

Wow.

You've taken a full drink of the Kool-Aid, that's clear.

Shorter Doniger: "You are a woman if you deny your womanhood, kill your babies (especially the retarded ones) embrace APGW, agree with everything I say and vote Democratic. Anything else with a uterus that does not meet these guidelines is a hermaphrodite at best, monstrous alien at worst."

Time for the U of Chicago to find another Eliade Professor.

Basically, your article is a dishonest attempt at honestly analyzing Sarah Palin. You are obviously a left-wing person who may understand the "history of religion" but does not understand, or believe in religion. In fact, you probably fear people who believe in God unless it is done your way...if at all.
It is articles like yours that convince me and millions of Americans like me that hate is what the media is about. College professors are just as intellectually dishonest.
Maybe "you know who" really exists and you are wrong? Maybe global warming is partly caused by the normal cycles of the earth (there is lots of evidence to this point even if you don't want to acknowledge it). Can you admit that to be a contributing factor? Probably not because it is not according to your agenda.
At least on abortion and her daughter's pregnancy she has been open and honest. And she did not say so disingenuously, "it is above my paygrade."
You folks in the colleges and in the media just don't get it. You do not represent America's conscience!

Ms. Doniger:

This is one of the best articles I have read on the circus that has now become this election. Bravo for your honest comments and for pointing out a few "inconvenient truths" about Sarah Palin. I don't have anything against her, but for some reason people are only seeing that she has pretty glasses, is a "working mom," and so, therefore, somehow has the ability to lead our country. We are headed in such a dangerous direction that I shudder to imagine what would happen if Sarah Palin was suddenly our president. Thank you for such brilliant, on-the-nose observations. I am forwarding this to everyone I know. You've just won a new fan.

Hey Paul,

Thanks for all the facts you used to support your assertion, hypocrite!!!

Having taught for some 36 or more years in both public and private high schools here,in New Hampshire and Vermont, I have been on the lookout for a good example of what the decline in education has turned out to be. To be sure, we did succeed in teaching our students to write. What we failed to do was to teach them to think about the validity and accuracy of their writing.
I want to thank you for providing me with the case, in point, I have been looking for.
If you had turned in the above piece as a writing assignment stipulating fact and only fact, you would have been given an F for a grade.

Sophomoric persiflage masquerading as erudition.

I smell jealousy on you. Try another perfume, Sweetie (in the words of your savior, BO)

Your appearance shows that you have absolutely no respect for yourself. No wonder no man will have you.

Dog.

Ms. Doniger brings up some good points, but her method of presentation only seems to validate the assertion made by some moderates and conservatives that feminists look down and/or hate women who are strong advocates of conservative values. Ms. Doniger should have left such sneering comments as "Her greatest hypocrisy is her pretense that she is a woman" and "... that because she has a womb and makes lots of babies she speaks for the women of America" out. In fact, the entire column seems scornful. I am personally acquainted with many women who share Mrs. Palin's beliefs. Rather than attacking the views of these women with scorn, Ms. Doniger should have calmly and rationally explained why she disagreed with these views. Instead, Ms. Doniger only alienates those she disagrees with.

Why do you all leave responses for Wendy Doniger, do you actually think she would read them? She is far to enlightened to listen to us hopeless racist sexist bigots, who cling to our guns and religion.

Fortunately those on the left know whats best for us and will guide us to a greater understanding. Since we failed our indoctrination at the Government run liberal ideological schools, Obama can create a program of re-education camps.

The point of this piece, to all you conservative reactionaries that had to post personal attacks directed at the author, is to indicate that religion is individual and ANY attempt to legislate your religious morality runs counter to the first amendment of the constitution (Melvin, the first amendment trumps the fourteenth amendment, that's why it's called the FIRST amendment). I would argue that any time any religious person of any religion attempts to legislate their religion's morality, tax exempt status should be removed immediately from that religion and all of that religion's property across the entire country and it should never be restored again for any reason!

Hard to believe this ugly, hyper-partisan rant was written by someone associated with the same institution as Martin Marty.

Denigrating anyone's gender, race, religion, or social status for petty partisan reasons is the mark of a truly weak character and intellect. If this tripe is the product of a "distinquished professor", it's no wonder Amercians have little regard for modern academia.

You need to put some clothes on and stop pretending you are a woman.

I am so embarrassed for Sarah Palin after watching her interview with Charlie Gibson. If anyone including even the most partisan republicans still thinks she is ready to be a heartbeat away from the presidency I have some beautiful swampland I would like to sell you.

Being a Democrat I have to admit that I was expecting her to be highly coached but I had not idea that she would ramble on when she obviously didn't have a clue about what the answer should be. I had no idea how scary she would be either. If I had a son heading overseas I wouldn't be thumbing my nose at Russia, especially when most of the credible evidence supports Russia’s story about the clash being Georgia's fault. It sure didn’t give me a safe and easy feeling learning that Palin was in contact with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili. I wonder is she also got Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin or Russian President Dmitry Medvedev take on what happened or did she just take John McCain’s version of the events? She say she doesn’t like corruption. I wonder how she would like to find out that the attacks were orchestrated to effect the U.S presidential election.

I knew the Republicans were capable of doing almost anything to stay in power, but I absolutely sincerely pray that George Bush and his cronies had nothing to do with encouraging Georgia to attack Russian peace keepers to effect the U.S presidential elections. I hope even they can’t be that hungry for power that they would risk a nuclear war. Explain to me how all of us being dead would help their corporate backers?
Russia has flexed their muscle a little recently, but nothing like the days of old. This is a Russia that is getting rich on energy sales to Western Europe. So why would they jeopardize such a good thing for so little gain and such bad public relations?

This woman is not only not someone that I don’t want as president, but the idea of her attending State funerals around the world as Vice President with her nonstop blabbing and know it all attitude scares the hell out of me. After hearing her I seriously question if she is even sane. What kind of person is asked to take on such a momentous task that will not only change her life but everyone around hers life and doesn’t even hesitate for even a split second to think it over? Only an insane person with grandiose delusions would act this selfishly. She is acting like someone called up and asked her to help make sand bags for a flood or asked her to go bowling. She doesn’t even have a clue of the vast amount knowledge that is in the heads of the people that are actually qualified for this position. You can’t learn it in a quickie cram session. It takes years to have a firm grasp of these matters.

For those of you that think Joe Biden doesn't know when to shut up, wait until you hear this woman drone on repeating herself in an attempt to try to avoid the next question.

How could any serious candidate for national office and especially a republican not know what the "Bush Doctrine" is?

Some might find how absolutely naive Sarah Palin is as refreshing but frankly I think it is dangerous and down right scary and choosing her was an absolute insult by John McCain towards the people of America, Democrats and Republicans alike. How could anyone that claims to love his country betray the American people in this way? He had so many better choices of both men and women most of which I would not have agreed with politically, but at least I could not have said they were absolutely incompetent for the job at hand.

I imagine after last night most of you Republicans feel the same way even though you dare not breathe a word of it for fear of being ostracized by your party bosses, but I beg of you to stand up and be heard and demand that your party put a qualified person in her position, please for the sake of our country.

"But he has gone out of his way to insist that he would not impose his personal views on others, and has indeed voted against curtailing abortion rights and against criminalizing abortion. That is the right answer. It's in the Constitution. It's not in the Bible, or the Qu'ran, or the Bhagavad Gita. It's in the mother-lovin' Constitution."
****

I must have missed that secion about Abortion in the Constitution - can the esteemed professor please point me to the Article wherein our Founding Fathers established the right to kill our children? It is not in the base document; maybe is it in one of the amendments? Or maybe it is just another instance of legislation from the bench, contravening and bypassing the Constitution and the people's right to vote on this atrocity.

Wendy,
I thought your assessment of Palin intellectually dishonest and an unconvincing rant.
Accusing Palin of pretending to be a woman because she doe not conform to a lock-step ideologue, dishonors all feminists.
Pam

I'm amused when Extremists scream that Liberals are trying to make everyone believe the same ideology. This is just the opposite of what is really happening.

If you don't want an abortion don't have one. But don't restrict everyone's choice. Don't force your narrow definition of religion on the population. Don't ban books that don't agree with your limited view of the world.

In other words, "Live and let live". Now, were have I heard that before?

Eric

Amen, Sister! You have hit the nail on the head. Thank you!

It bothers me that women are only allowed to believe that abortion must be an option and that feminists invariably speak for us. Feminists do not speak for me and I do not consider abortion an option. I consider it murder. It is refreshing to me that Sarah Palin exemplifies many of my beliefs. There are too many of us who haven't been allowed to have a voice. This article is quite disrespectful to me and to my views, which I have not just accepted from others, but have thought out for myself and firmly believe. At the same time, even if we disagree with this blog, we must treat the author with respect. That's just basic courtesy, and I'd hate to live in a would without it.

I am the proud "fly over" parent of 3 young women who are voting McCain/Palin, because they believe in the right of freedom of thought as independents, not as hypocritical socialists.

They attended college in the Midwest (not East), they attend church by choice (Catholic) and they believe that abortion is wrong, and that leftists are "mean spirited" and elitist.

I am very proud of them, and their understanding that all women, not only leftist women, can reach for the stars.

Too bad for you, that your world is so constricting. Just another angry socialist.

Try reading the 14th Amendment: "... nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

There is nothing quite like a political hack dressing up like an intellectual. This is nothing more than an in kind contribution to the Obama campaign. If you want a real eyefull, read some of the other article by this "Professor".... This person has propelled herself so far above it all that she can hardly be expected to relate to normal human experiences. When she makes the absurd assertion that Palin's claim to womanhood is a pretense it begs the question "how would she know?" Is the "Professor" now the arbiter of all things relating to womanhood? I don't think so. She is merely a frustrated person who seeks to find personal meaning by projecting her own sense of self loathing onto a perceived enemy. This is a pathetic individual. How enlightening that she is a University "Professor".

Karl's comment

"I agree with Wendy 100%. Barack Obama is our Hope. Only he will bring Change into everyone's life. People like McSame and his pig with lipstick have no business running for President. They are Nazis, just like Hitler Bush.

Barack Obama and Joe Biden had already anounced they will bring criminal charges against Hitler Bush and crimenal Cheney. They should go to jail, and this Palin pig and McSame should be put to jail too.

Obama/Biden 08"

With such a rational and reasoned debate being put forth, it's amazing how people can maintain different points of view!

---chortle---

I agree with Wendy 100%. Barack Obama is our Hope. Only he will bring Change into everyone's life. People like McSame and his pig with lipstick have no business running for President. They are Nazis, just like Hitler Bush.

Barack Obama and Joe Biden had already anounced they will bring criminal charges against Hitler Bush and crimenal Cheney. They should go to jail, and this Palin pig and McSame should be put to jail too.

Obama/Biden 08

Great Work Wendy,

I could tell way back when that you were smarter than the rest of us, and this article (or whaterver) proves it!

You Go Girl!!!!

Your pretence that you 'speak for women' demonstrates how blindly full of your self you are. You are blinded by hate and anger. Your intolerance and hatred of diversity is impossible to hide. You are hateful.

Wendy,
I actually dig your glasses, you've a got a late 80s/early90s chic thing going on(seriously), but back off of Sarah. Until you have the facts, and being able to put them together in a less hateful way, please do us a favor and shut up.

People actually read this crap and pay for a subscription besides. Incredible! This isn't journalism it is just liberal hate of all that is different than themselves. A liberal's idea of free speech is to take away all speech that is not in line with their own by calling it hate speech. I only see hate in this article. I guess it is the pot calling the kettle black.

Abortion seems to be the high sacrament of feminism. It is like offering your children to Moelek.

Is this idiot a colleague of William Ayers at U of C?

These are Obama's pals... Yep, let's let them govern this country.

Are those TV screens on your face, or are you a fashion disaster as well as a faith disaster?

This is probably the most disgusting piece of trash, disguised as journalism, that I have read in a very long time. WP should be ashamed for allowing stuff like this to be published on its pages. This is beyond the partisanship, this is vile.

It seems that the only ones that are losing their minds are Obamaniacs, such as this one. Can a woman really be so hateful towards another one?

I am a former Hilary supporter, and now a proud supporter of John McCain and wonderful Sarah Palin.

No Obama! No way! No how!!

Sandy

"And as for religion, I'd love to know precisely how the Good Lord conveyed to her so clearly his intention to destroy the environment" Wendy Doniger

I'd like to know how the Good Lord conveyed to you so clearly that slaughtering an innocent child is in the Constitution.. Hint.. It's not!

This blog is riddled with inaccuracies and shameless distortions.

First, legislation is written and passed because its authors believe that it is good for society. How do we know that it is good? We don't. We just know that the majority of us BELIEVE that it is. In democracies, the majority rules. So any law could be considered right by some people and wrong by others. Those who think a law is wrong will always feel like others' beliefs are being forced on them. Some people feel that government programs like welfare and social security are the result of someone's beliefs being forced on other people in the country. Why should some be forced to pay for social programs that benefit others? Because some lawmakers believe that it's the right thing to do, and they're forcing their beliefs on Americans.

So why is abortion any different? Some people think that abortion is okay. Others don't. Why not go through the normal democratic process of voting and see which one wins out? What are you so afraid of? Are you afraid that the majority of American women might choose to forfeit their right to abortion? If they do, then who was wrong? Them or you? The majority is right, of course. That's why society works. If everyone did whatever THEY thought was good, anarchy and chaos would follow.

Secondly, it was very distasteful of you to speak about Palin and her daughter the way you did. Everyone makes mistakes, especially when they're young. We've all done some things in our lives that were contrary to what our parents taught us. Do you really think that when a child does something wrong, it paints his/her parent as a hypocrite? If that's true than the world is full of them.

Besides that, I don't quite know what you mean regarding abstinence only applying to Palins. Parents create rules in order to protect their children from having to endure certain difficulties in life (The same reason God gives rules to all humans). When a child fails to live by those rules, he/she will suffer the natural consequences. In this case, the Palins taught their children to strive for abstinence until marriage in order to avoid the physical and emotional trauma that sex outside of a permanent committed relationship can cause. Pregnancy is one thing that can result from premarital sex, and it's obviously something that can disrupt life for a young girl who is still working to get an education and become independent. Because of this, Christians would prefer not to get pregnant until they can provide a stable home and loving family environment for the baby. If a teenage girl gets pregnant by a person that won't be around forever, the baby won't have a father, and that's not the ideal situation. However, that happens sometimes, and when it does, the same families that cautioned against premarital sex must come together and work to make the best of the situation. It happens every day in America, and that is what Sarah Palin is doing right now. The fact that she still loves her daughter even though she made a mistake does not mean that Palin is a hypocrite. It means she's a loving mother who is trying to help her daughter through a tough situation. What would you have had her do? Disown her own child? For someone who teaches about religions, you don't seem to know anything about forgiveness.

When you talk about Palin "outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people," and say things like "don't humiliate members of your family in order to get elected to public office," it sounds like you think it was inconsiderate of Palin to tell the truth about her daughter... If you think that was rude of her, when are you going to criticize the radical left bloggers who forced Palin to "out" her daughter? After all, she had no choice. They claimed that Palin's daughter was the real mother of Palin's youngest son. The hateful rumors already made her daughter out to be not only an unwed mother, but also a liar. Palin had to step in and say "hey, it's physically impossible for her to be the mother of my son because she is 5 months pregnant right now" Palin had no choice, and I think you know that. Why do you have to be misleading?

Also, Palin did not cut funding for the teenage mothers program. She actually increased the funding from $1.3 million to $3.9 million. The accusation that she cut funding was misleading. The program was expanding, and they proposed to increase the funding to $5 million, and she decided to increase it to $3.9 million instead. That's not cutting funding, that's increasing funding by 300%. Do you ever look at primary sources?

Your fourth paragraph is just an outrageous and stunning rant that makes no sense. What makes a woman less of a woman? Because she has different opinions and a different sense of right and wrong than you? Wow, you're so enlightened.

Again, I really think it would be a good idea for you to check into some primary sources before you just spread every rumor that crosses your path. For example, a quick trip to youtube would show you your error in saying that Palin believes God is rooting for the destruction of the lives of thousands of soldiers and innocent bystanders. I believe you're referring to the accusation by some that she claims to know God's will and that the troops were sent on a mission from God. That's based on a quote which was deliberately taken out of context so as to destroy its original meaning. The people who quote this can't even quote the entire sentence or else the truth of what she meant will become clear. The full quote was this:

"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God...That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."

This was a simple, standard Christian call to ask God for guidance. She wanted people to pray for the government and for the troops. She wanted people to pray that God would guide our leaders in their decisions so that God's plan would be fulfilled, whatever that may be. She never claimed to know God's plan. Again, you should understand that if you teach about religion.

Here's the link to the youtube video (Skip to 3:17):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0UQbA0ZmmM

As for the guns. Whatever. The notion that anyone who gets their hands on a gun is going to kill someone is just laughable. If you take guns away from good people, the only people left who will have guns are the police (and there will never be enough of them to protect everyone), and the bad guys. Nobody else will have any way to protect themselves from criminals.

Another rumor you tried to make people believe was that Palin tried to have books banned. That is completely untrue. The person who was librarian at the time says that Palin NEVER tried to ban any books, EVER. If you have seen a list of books that she supposedly tried to ban, you can rest assured that it's fake. Some lists include the first four Harry Potter books which hadn't even been published yet at the time.

And finally, you remarks about Biden are truly comedic. You just said that Biden should not vote according to his convictions. But if he's not voting according to his own convictions, how can you trust him to represent the people who elected him? People elect others based on their convictions with the faith that those people will represent them accordingly. If I were to vote for someone who believes that the social programs are essential and that it's a moral duty for those with more to provide for those with less, I would expect that person to vote for legislation that funds social programs. If they don't vote for the things they said they believed in, then what was the point in voting for them?

Abortion is just another issue like all the rest. People holding office (including Joe Biden) "impose [their] personal views on others" EVERY SINGLE DAY, and if the majority doesn't support a candidate's personal views, then they don't have to vote for him/her. That's how a republic works.

Sorry for the length, but there was just so much garbage I had to wade through.

Jaldhar:

I am a Hindu priest and what I want to know why on earth this story has a Hindu tag on it? While I suspect the majority of my community support Sen. Obama (not me BTW) they are conservative in their personal lives and they are apalled by the scurrilous attacks on Gov. Palin. She is practically the ideal woman by classical Hindu standards. On Faith should make clear that Prof. Donigers perverse views are entirely her own and do not represent Hindu opinion in the slightest.

September 11, 2008 8:57 AM

________________________________________

I concur! Not Hindu at all.

Governor Palin is an authentic and admirable woman who has achieved much with her own efforts. It is shocking that being against abortion counts as *not* being a real woman, when logic and feminine instinct would conclude otherwise.

The Obama-Biden team have some great policies, and it would be quite right for them to win the election. But there is no need for this kind of unfair attack of Governor Palin (and Senator McCain) in order to show support for the Dem team. And quite shocking it is when it comes from someone who teaches religion and has specialized in Hinduism among others.

As a fellow scholar, I find your lack of support for statements, poor logic, and use of incorrect and/or falsified information an embarrassment to acedemia. Unfortunately, I'm discovering more and more professors who espouse similar points of view and flawed logic. I am embarrassed to be even distantly associated with such tripe.

Thanks for sharing your views Wendy. I am glad that you support Joe Biden and his desire to impose my will on all unborn babies and potential conservative voters. You are right. A mother of five is certainly no represenatative of today's free thing enlightened woman. Keep up the great work!!!

Beelzebub

I'd heard of people that think like this.
I didn't believe they really existed.

Despite Wapo, Newsweek. and the Academy in the banner, Doniger (O’Flaherty) exhibits a surprising lack of erudition in this distortful little screed. Sadly, our nation still has several years to wade through the righteous but vapid indignation from the boomer generation of which Doniger (O’Flaherty) is so obviously a member.

I'm sorry Wendy, you get an F.

Sarah Palin is everything most feminists have ever wanted women to be - except wives, mothers, and conservatives.

This gives the lie to the feminist mantra of being “pro-women” and “pro-choice.” Many of them, apparently including yourself, have proven by their own words over the last week that they are only pro-women-who-agree-with-them, i.e., pro-abortion, etc., ad nauseum. I’ve never forgotten my mother’s comments when we were discussing feminism years ago and, more recently, Sarah Palin’s nomination. My mother’s generation came of age during the 1960s when a more radical feminism was being born. Her choice to stay at home and be a mother to four children, one of them with special needs, was devalued and denigrated by many women in the radical feminist mold who went to college and had careers. Some of them haven’t been shy about informing her that her choice was unimportant or that she was, somehow, a lesser person for having made such a choice. Nevertheless, like Sarah Palin, motherhood hasn’t stopped her from being involved in many activities outside the home.

As for myself, I am not of the impression that many feminists are looking out for our best interests. The advancement of women’s issues always seems to come at a cost that is more than I would want my son to bear, and because it generally involves injustice by one group towards another. I do not think that the ends (equality for women) justifies the means (oppressing men, unborn babies, and anyone else not agreeing with radical feminist ideology). It leaves me with a very bad taste in my mouth. All women are equal, but some women are more equal than others.

(By the way, that's not a religious argument. It's rational argument using, of all things, logic! And what's this about "embryological theology?" Who do you think you're fooling? Embryology is science and it's either true for all or it isn't true at all. The University of Chicago apparently needs to raise the bar in its hiring and tenure processes.)

Of course, we’ve seen all of this before during Clarence Thomas nomination to the United States Supreme Court. I made this observation early on after hearing some of the ridiculous comments about Sarah Palin that have poured forth. Feminists like you are now doing to Sarah Palin, what black activists did to Clarence Thomas. They considered him a traitor to his race. Palin is considered by radical feminists to be a traitor to her gender. It’s all eerily familiar. And unfortunately, par for the course.

Clarence Thomas explains it best:

"My new friends and I also made an effort to develop relationships with black staffers on the Democratic side of the aisle, many of whom viewed us with a mixture of curiosity and disapproval. Since nearly all of us were political moderates or outright liberals, I couldn’t see why they should be so disapproving, but they were, not because of our political views but simply because we were willing to work for Republicans. When Coretta Scott King visited Senator Danforth to ask for his assistance with a fund-raiser for the Martin Luther King Foundation, Alex Netchvolodoff asked me to accompany her to the Capitol to meet with the senator. After the visit was over, I walked Mrs. King to her waiting car, mentioning on the way that the senator was a good man who cared deeply about the plight of blacks in America. (He had a long, close relationship with Morehouse College, a historically black college, and had been a member of its board of trustees.) I lamented that so few blacks had voted for him. “Well, he is a Republican,” Mrs. King replied. I knew at once that I just learned something very important about the way most blacks felt towards the Republican Party

It didn’t surprise me, for I, too, had reflexively disliked most Republicans (John Bolton had been an exception) prior to going to work for Senator Danforth in Jefferson City. Still I found it hard to accept. “Black is a state of mind,” one black Democratic staffer told me, by which I assumed he meant being a liberal Democrat. That kind of all-us-black-folks-think-alike nonsense wasn’t part of my upbringing, and I saw it as nothing more than another way to herd blacks into a political camp."

Thomas, Clarence, My Grandfather’s Son, Harper Collins, 2007, pp. 124-25, [emphasis added].

This woman will not be herded. I, for one, am grateful that Sarah Palin speaks for me. I would venture to say that many other women, who have been woefully unrepresented by the radical-feminists-in-charge, will feel the same way.

To bad your mother didn't believe in abortion.

The real tragedy is the amount of bandwidth, and perhaps even a tree or two, sacrificed to put this in the public view.

This screed isn't journalism and it certainly isn't about faith. What can anyone expect from graduates of our institutions of higher learning. Communism has prevailed.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman." Who are you to define the limits of what a woman gets to be? It seems to me women can be anything they choose to be (including conservatives).

"her faith in abstinence applying, apparently, only to non-Palin". It is clear to any halfway-intelligent (or honest) person that Palin's support of abstinence is referring to underage and pre-marital sex. (I'm not so dense that I don't get sarcasm, I just don't think it adds to the conversation very often.) And clearly, the fact that her daughter chose to have sex is not a decision Palin is happy with, but an abortion would in her opinion be a worse choice. Contrary to what you believe, many even today still practice(gasp!)abstinence before marriage.

Why is it that religious people on the left are absolutely clear about what God thinks about killing people (peace, not war, no death penalty, etc.), taking care of the poor (every government program you can possibly think of), but absolutely refuse to listen to what God says about sex, i.e, "thou shalt not commit adultery"?

Dear Wendy,

You might consider taking up jogging. One, it really does help clear your head, and given your apparent inability to construct a factual intellectually coherent argument, that would be a great benefit to you. B, it can help with moving your bowels. Clearly you need this as badly as anyone.

And thirdly, you really could stand to lose 60 or 70 lbs. And you'll contribute less to global warming in the process!

wendy, you are possibly the least intelligent person i've ever had the misfortune of reading their opinion

Wendy Doniger - take some time off - you're flipping out. This is the biggest load of hooey I've read in a while.

Oh, and you don't get to say who is or is not a woman. Oddly enough, the world does not revolve around you and your opinions.

Folks take a close look at this woman and her writing.

THIS is the type of garbage that has infested the modern American university in the guise of "scholarship".

Wow, that was a whole load of crap in just one post. Wendy should be congratulated on her colossal ignorance. To write several paragraphs and to get nearly everything wrong in her assessment of Gov. Palin is just astonishing.

Doesn't William Ayers also teach at the University of Chicago? Hmm, they'll employ any lunatic there, won't they? Wait, didn't Obama teach there as well? Birds of a feather, I'll say.

There always seems to be a common theme among these liberals. Stick together no matter how stupid it may make them look, distort a political opponents religious views as extreme and promote abortion whenever possible.

Oddly enough, when I googled "Feminism" I had to search through several definitions before I finally found one that actually mentioned abortion. I found that odd because it seems to be the only determining factor by the liberal hacks as to whether a woman can actually be called "a feminist."

This article also proves Rush's Undeniable Truth of Life #24: Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women access to the mainstream of society. What's up with those glasses? I haven't seen glasses like that since Robert Deniro wore a pair in the final scene of Casino!

It's sad what the liberals claim to be in the constitution, isn't it? Explains why most of them believe that the SCOTUS should base their rulings on fairness. They're just not smart enough to know that they're not that smart.

Assclown Wendy Doniger has done the impossible...unanimity within the blogosphere.

Mrs Doniger,
are you OK?
Is everything alright? I mean, from your commentary, it seems that you are very unhappy.

I hope you manage to work through your troubles.
You know, God has not provided a theory as an answer to our problems; he's provided a person.

All the Best

It would do Wendy Doniger good not to force her beliefs on others and take her own advice.

Jealousy sure isn't pretty

It's truly impressive the response this piece of garbage is getting. I have rarely seen any post anywhere, no matter how one-sided a blog or news site it is get such a universally bad reception.

Wendy Doniger may just be the dumbest person to ever post on the internet. How can she not have ONE positive response? Sorry, I haven't read all 600+ responses, but what I have read is universal panning of this ill-thought piece of agit-prop. Surely SOMEONE has to have a good word to say for the fine professor... Someone... ANYONE!?!?

What I am impressed with is the number of people who have found ways to respond to this without being offensive. Considering the utter worthlessness of the original screed, for that I commend all of you commenters. Way to bring your "A" games!

Firstly I am very curious as a person who has studied the constitution vigorously, in which line do you believe that the right to kill an unborn child is written on? It is certainly not anywhere I can find. Furthermore, Sarah Palin did not throw her pregnant daughter to the wolves that are the media, the wolves came to the door and she fought them off by giving them what they wanted: information. Sarah Palin's daughter made a mistake, something all humans are destine to do eventually. After all to error is human. But with this mistake they decided to do the right thing. They decided not to murder the child, and to have its lifeless body cast away into a dumpster behind an abortion clinic. They decided to act like adults and live with their burden. A burden that will become a beautiful child and live a long productive life. It will receive the chance to live and love and become a valuable member of our society. Lastly I find it terribly ironic that you even mention Governor Palin's inexperience, when the democratic presidential candidate is so severely lacking. In his entire tenior in the US and state senate Barack Obama has never found the time to author a single bill. Furthermore, when it came time to make the important decisions, entrusted to him by the American people, the junior senator has voted present eighty percent of the time. And he expects to bring change, I would say that is extremely unlikely.

P.S Sarah Pailn never banned a single book in her tenure, next time check the facts before you publish an article.

Respectfully, an angry and bitter American who clings to guns and religion;

Soph Paparodis

Amazing that a vile creature such as this is allowed to post on the Newsweek/WaPo website. Just sorry I don't subscribe to the print edition of Newsweek/WaPo; I won't have the pleasure of canceling my subscription.

moron

Wendy, Dear, Mrs. Palin "outed" her daughter in response to rabid rumor mongering by Democrat leaning blogs who were claiming to have the goods that Bristol was the mother of Trig. The pregnancy was already known in their home town and with Obama's dirt squad (his paid staff and the in-king contributions of the media) headed there, it would have been exposed soon enough. So they controlled how it came out and did not allow the slime merchants the satisfaction of trying to shame Bristol.

As for "concealing" her own pregnancy, what kind of a horrible woman are you? Mrs. Palin knew she had a disabled child in her womb and I'm not sure if you know people who have children, but women, especially women who are near the end of their fertile years, often are slow to announce their pregnancies. Especially if there are known problems.

There's something wicked and vile in the inuendo of your post.

As for your comment about her "faith in abstinence", are you consuming more internet rumors? If so, that's pretty uncivil of you. One would expect a person of learning, especially someone who is a professor of any kind of history, to follow the basic principle that facts should be verified before being repeated.

Now go slink back into your hole.

I believe that Doniger is incorrect in her supposition that a public statement of faith, even by a member of government, equates to forcing a religious belief on anyone else.

Even public servants are protected by the first amendment. Both to freely practice their faith and to freely speak. Stating articles of faith are not the same as enacting them into law. Doniger cannot categorically state something that Palin has not stated. It is pure obsfucation. Palin has not stated, in any way, that she believes anyone else should believe as she does or that it should be enacted into law.

Neither am I convinced to be a Catholic nor a Pentecostal by either Biden or Palin respectively.

Frankly, I believe that Doniger and many others attempt to twist the first amendment to actually mean that people are not free to say anything, but may only practice their faith in quiet dark corners, away from public eyes that might be offended. Based on Doniger's argument, we could imply that her insistence that they not speak publicly on their faith (unless she agrees with them) could be construed as forcing her ideas on others and should be equally restricted.

You may not agree with their views and may even be offended, but you may not imply that they are acting outside of the articles of faith that we have enshrined in our constitution.

I find it interesting that you don't allow offensive comments to your posts, but that you allow yourself to be so patently offensive in your posts.

Good luck with the religion thing...no wonder you find people's public expressions of faith so offensive. If I had your religion, I wouldn't want to expose my bile either.

"But he has gone out of his way to insist that he would not impose his personal views on others, and has indeed voted against curtailing abortion rights and against criminalizing abortion. That is the right answer. It's in the Constitution. It's not in the Bible, or the Qu'ran, or the Bhagavad Gita. It's in the mother-lovin' Constitution."

Would you cite the specific part of the Constitution that pertains specifically to abortion rights? I don't remember reading that passage.

Women like you make me sick. You do not represent normal women, you are the fringe. Way out there in outer space. You hate Palin because she is beautiful, intelligent, and is a good mother.

You shouldn't hate pretty women just because they're pretty.

You shouldn't hate smart women just because they're smart.

And you should really think before you publish words that demonstrate either (a) your severe moral corrosion or (b) your extreme intellectual weakness. To say this:
"Joe Biden's views are most relevant to the question at hand, since, as a Catholic, he shares much of Palin's embryological theology: he believes life begins at conception. But he has gone out of his way to insist that he would not impose his personal views on others"

Is to say this:

"Joe believes Jews are human beings, but Joe is too good a German to impose his views on others."

Reduced to my formula, you said:

"Biden believes life begins at conception, but Biden is too good an American to impose that view on others."

Then why should impose views that killing anyone for any reason is wrong? If a life is fair game for the blender simply because it is small enough to fit in the blender, then the Jew is fair game for the gas chamber simply because he fits in the gas chamber.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/2306/saturday-night-live-point-counterpoint-lee-marvin-and-michelle-triola

You are not a feminist. You are a fraud. By criticizing Sarah Palin you show yourself for who you really are. Sad.

This article was ridiculous and a waste of time - I am a woman and while I wouldn't vote on someone based solely on their gender, I have plenty of liberal friends that would have voted for Hillary for that very reason. Just because you don't see eye to eye with another woman is no reason to try to take her and the cause we have worked so hard for down. She has obviously worked hard to get where she is and I applaud that in any woman.

Wendy, please back up your accusations that Governor Palin has tried to push her religous beliefs on others. Give us your proof. When has she tried to legislate her religous beliefs?

Well, this makes everything clear now...

You're only a "genuine woman" if you think your womb is a place designed to take life instead of nurturing it.

See, I always thought you were a real woman if you had two X chromosomes.

How wrong I was.

You have enlightened me so much Wendy, how ever can I thank you for showing me the only true women are lockstep 1960's era leftist automatons. You know, women who think big government is a substitute for fathers, free love is actually free, and unfettered, unrestricted abortion is the primary indicator of a modern society.

To use your formulation vis-a-vis Sarah Palin, I'd like to know precisely how the Lord conveyed to you so clearly his intention to destroy children in the womb, which, I remind you, he explicitly states his knowledge of in the Bible.

The difference between Christianity and Feminism is that Christianity tries to influence society based on belief in a benevolent being that prohibits harming others whereas Feminism tries to influence society based on failed social policies that have led millions to poverty, starvation, and death ala China, North Korea, and the Soviet Union. Among these are in-utero murder, socialized medicine, and unfettered promiscuity (free love, exploring sexuality, etc).

The Right to an Abortion is not in the Constitution, no matter how much you wish it were. Abortion is the deliberate destruction of a scientifically identifiable human life. Last I checked, nowhere in the Constitution does it say you have the right to murder someone else.

Or is yours one of those "living, breathing" Constitutions. You know, the ones where the explicit text of the Second Amendment can be discarded but the shadowy, penumbra-ey (thanks Ginsberg) text preserving abortion is unassailable?

She needs medication

Wow, your Obama'ism is showing.

Note to self: dont let any of my children learn about religion.

"Parading her children around, only applies to Palins" Thats wonderful rhetoric there, but I don't seem to remember Sarah doing any of that. In fact, if it were the Democratic candidate, I daresay your words would be in praise of a woman willing to take on the status quo.

Its people like you who are changing the polls in favor of Palin. Please please please, keep this kind of hateful writing up. It will make Republicans job easy.

If you believe praying that our country is on God's side is unAmerican, you need to go back and study the history of the birth of our nation.

Our constitution gives us freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. Of course everyone has the freedom to practice NO religion if that is their wish, but our country is founded on the principles of being blessed by God and for his people.

You seem to agree with Sen. Biden that life begins at conception. Therefore, an abortion is the taking of a human life. Truly, those who do not wish to have a child should not be forced to raise it, but there is always adoption and many other ways to take care of that problem without killing an innocent human being.

Way too many ultra-educated people have lost sight of what is truly right, and have talked and written so much that is wrong that many people have begun to believe it. Ask God about it. His is the final and only true answer.

This is your brain on liberalism.

Governor Palin is not a woman? How do you figure?

As an Evangelical Christian and a graduate of one of the remaining liberal arts women's colleges in America's Northeast region, I must say that this professor does not speak for me.

I have lived around REAL women all of my life - many who show the characteristics shown in Sarah Palin's life and work. They have shown REAL guts in their life's decisions - including the birth of children with disabilities and the full support towards daughters who fall on the wayside, one way or the other. Funny though, they are just like Sarah Palin. Or do they pretend to be women, too?

Your gratuitous insult towards Gov. Palin is an insult towards every woman who has overcome (or is overcoming) obstacles on her own, with the full support of husband, children and the rest of their families. Your mask has slipped, "Professor": you preach "freedom" in "feminism" when you are enslaved by totally corrupt Marxist constructs. (Or do I have to remind you of a certain Saint Peter, who talked harshly against false teachers like you? - 2 Peter 2:19, if you ever want to read the Bible... Maybe you should focus on reading the Bible and let God shape you to His liking, instead of you shaping God to YOUR liking. It may be more liberating than you think.)

It is interesting how it all happens. Sarah has become like sunlight that exposes the intellectual cockroaches that have overrun our culture. Win or lose, she has done a lot of women a huge favor. You? No, thanks. We don't need intellectual hypocrites who pretend to speak for us!

P.S. Are you reading the Pretend Constitution the Sarah Weddington brought forth? Or the Real One, which says absolutely nothing regarding abortion?

Charles Nelson Reilly called, he wants his glasses back, if you don't mind.
http://www.foxnews.com/images/286666/0_61_reilly_charles_nelson.jpg

Could the author please show me where the Constitution EXPLICTLY states word for word that a woman has a right to an abortion? And then show me the sentence following it which clarifies that this is an inalienable right?

The Constitution nowhere states that a woman has a right to an abortion. Roe v. Wade was based on a bad interpretation of the Constitution. This is a moral issue which was decided on a very questionable interpretation. The legality of abortion rests on an interpretation which can be overturned by the same court. It seems to me that this issue is in no way settled. And because it is of grave concern to many members of the public, I see nothing wrong with politicians openly opposing abortion and passing legislation against it. This is not the action of shoving beliefs down throats.

In the case of Biden, you praise him based on the assumption that abortion should not be made illegal, that it is a firm, explicit constitutional right. Biden acts as if abortion is an issue which should be left up to the personal conscience of the individual. But if it is murder, then his hesitancy is despicable. Abortion is not enshrined. It is not a right guaranteed by natural law. It is legal on the national scale through judicial fiat, not the will of the people. I find your piece most disappointing. But you probably don't care.

Prof. Doniger,

You are irrational - also, you have a weak grasp on factchecking (and that is a charitable observation you lazy .... liberal.)

Also, stop claiming to speak for all women - you sure don't speak for me.

Read the Constitution of the United States. Evidently, you haven't bothered to do that, ever. Hint - the word privacy doesn't appear in it. If you want to make a change to the constitution, follow the rules - don't pull an end run with illiterate justices.

Last: I think Sarah Palin is a fantastic choice for VP of the US.

Try not to be too upset in November.

I enjoyed Ms Doniger being called a fascist by American commentators...Ms Doniger, in her quest to support corrupted hypocrites, and AK47 touting revolutionaries in other countries have branded so many innocents as fascists .[ Even though Ms Doniger didn't mean to hurt people, some good people have lost voice because voice of education is hizacked by foolish and arrogant professors like Doniger ]

It is not a hypocrisy that Sarah Palin is an woman...There is a bikini clad picture of Sarah Palin in internet, that depicts openly herself to be an woman...No hypocrisy involved there, unless there is plan to take away womanhood by fraudulent understanding and theories...as Doniger do. ...

Thank you.

From Wiki:

Wendy Doniger (born November 20, 1940) is an American scholar of history of religion....Her work on Hinduism is controversial; the most high profile issue resulted in Microsoft Encarta investigating her scholarship and removing her article on Hinduism their encyclopedia due to alleged factual errors and charges of anti-Hindu bias.

Game, Set, Match

Geministorm,
You need to study your law before posting stuff like this.

"Forth, to overturn Roe vs. Wade would require an Amendment to the US Constitution or for the SCotUS to over turn it. As such, a super majority (getting an Amendment passed) would seem to indicate that our populace desired as much, regardless of your views. Sarah Palin would have to sway the opinions of a large portion of the US to get an Amendment through during her potential career (remember how long it took the ERA to get voted on?) on an almost evenly divided populace."

No, overturning a law does NOT require an amendment of the constitution. It merely requires that the law be declared un-constitutional.

You guys all forget that there are several issues which liberals take as concrete proof, and to deny their view of it is heresy of the highest degree. She might as well have a huge arse LIBERAL (sic) stamp on her forehead. I love reading this kind of stuff cause Ann Coulter is spot on for one thing. The more liberals freak out about a particular position/person, the closer it is to being what Americans really want and Republicans usually support.

I am not even going to bother with going over this drivel line by line. It won't change her psycho liberal attitude, and it has been WELL covered in other postings here. What kind of a statement is that when the "professor's" post is boring drivel while I will be going through 200+ replies to this cause there are some gems in those replies. :)

This is so sad. A woman doesn't need to be a lesbian to be a feminist. And oh, by the way, pro-choice means -- choice; not you must choose to abort. The old school feminists are appalled that a pretty, sexy woman got ahead of them somehow and they have to try to shut her down. Sorry, in the real world, pretty women who are comfortable with their sexuality are the majority now. You old folks indoctrinated us to the way of feminism and we are grateful to you, but we have found an even better alternative, leaving you all as dinosaurs. Get with the new program or go home -- we don't trust you anymore...

I may not agree with much that you say, but I definitely appreciate the approach of describing the policies which you favor and disfavor to further discourse.

However, a few points;

It would be hard for you to know what sympathies that Sarah Palin has for others, and the evidence in the polls shows that she has had an affect on people.

Second, the earth does go through warming and cooling cycles. Man's presence is not required for either. We can disagree about the time table and causes for warming/cooling, but no scientist believes that the system is static regardless of mankind.

Third, it matters not what Sarah Palin thinks about gun ownership. The fact remains that the 2nd Amendment guarantees that unalienable right. The candidates of both major parties support this right, as well they should.

Forth, to overturn Roe vs. Wade would require an Amendment to the US Constitution or for the SCotUS to over turn it. As such, a super majority (getting an Amendment passed) would seem to indicate that our populace desired as much, regardless of your views. Sarah Palin would have to sway the opinions of a large portion of the US to get an Amendment through during her potential career (remember how long it took the ERA to get voted on?) on an almost evenly divided populace.

Please don't stoop to fear mongering, Sarah Palin can't legislate anything, ban books, or much else without the consent of the Democratic-controlled Congress and Senate. Also, please get your time lines straight. The smear campaigns against Sarah Palin began the moment that McCain announced her as his VP. Despite how the media outlets played it, Obama was reacting to the vicious smears (Palin's 5th child wasn't her's but her daughter's for example) not a reaction to Palin "outing" her daughter. Palin was contacted by a media outlet claiming that they knew of Bristol Palin's pregnancy and would out her if Palin didn't do it first. That is why Obama broached that topic, he was chiding the media *not* Sarah Palin.

"Obama said reporters should 'back off these kinds of stories' and noted that he was born to an 18-year-old mother.

'How a family deals with issues and teenage children, that shouldn't be the topic of our politics, and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that's off-limits.'"

That is directly at the media and his supporters.

But, those in the media didn't get it, yet again, just like they don't get that Obama doesn't want them to continue smearing Palin (don't the Obama supporters see the big, "Fight the Smears" links on Obama's site?) because people will rally around her simply because of these attacks. The recent polls reflect this.

Thanks for your time.

HOLY COW!
No, HAHAHA no not you Wendy, I wass wonderin' where I put tose damn things!

Wendy Doniger writes: "The Republican party's...calculation [about Palin] has driven thousands of real women to take to their computers in outrage."

Perhaps; thankfully, though, millions more REAL women have responded to Palin's genuine nature and formidable qualifications, and will vote for her in November. In my opinion, this is what terrifies the left about her.

Let's be honest. If a woman of Sarah Palin's caliber and biography had liberal beliefs and had been picked as Obama's running mate, she'd be roundly celebrated by the left as the genuine article, a "blue-dog Democrat" who would help them to win the White House.

Vendy, I achgree wit you completely.

What is amazing is that a narrow-minded bigot like Ms.Doniger is actually in the position of getting paid to lecture to students. I didn't realise that the academic bar was set so low in America for university professors but I guess she spouts the correct, bile-filled, party line so she got the job. It's stunning how many of these bitter leftist fascists are living off tax-payer's money and how eager a rag like the WaPo is to feature their rantings.

Well, you've eliminated ONE school my daughters should not even consider. Thanks for helping me narrow the search. Seek counseling!

Yes, the government should not force religion upon its citizens. That goes for socialism, environmentalism, and political correctness, which are all forms of "humanist" religions.

You are obviously only a student of religion. But not a believer in God. The Bible says that those who think themselves intelligent are really just fools. When the end of times come I will wave at you from heaven while you will be in hell, for an eternity.

Veronica... You cracked me up, almost peed myself, or was it just a thrill running "down" my leg, ROFLOL...

One less vote for Obama, or with this article, may 10,000 less votes for Obama.

Sorry - but you are speaking for the "elite" class of America. Sarah Palin speaks to the remaining 99 percent of us who have to take care of our children and balance a job. And she at least has a husband who is willing to step in and become "Mr Mom".

So sad that you cannot see what most American women go through in our lives.

But Sarah Palin knows what we go through every day.

She gets my vote.

"Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions"
WTF is that??? Is that where you were taught to make idiotic statements? And, the WAPO has stooped to an all time low to print this. Yes, I know, you'd rather have Rev Wright and have him spew his hatred of America. Just another American hater.

Pathetic.

We who are religious try to live our faith daily. It's not a private thing, to be hidden away or diluted when politically convenient... If we do that, we are hypocrites and deserve that judgement from both our peers and our God.

Palin may not be someone you personally like, but she is living her faith seemingly without contradiction. She chose not to abort, affirming her personal commitment to the Right to Life, even though her child will be an extra needs child. Long before that child was a gleam in her eye, she tripled Alaska's budget for educating special needs children, showing compassion for those truly in need. She will become a grandmother when taking her daughter down to the abortionist would have prevented that. Her daughter and the man who impregnated her will marry, thus providing (hopefully) that grandchild with a stable family.

None of the above is easy, but all of it shows an external commitment by her and her family to her faith -- a visible faith that you disparage.

We can contrast Palin's living of faith with recent words by both Joseph Biden and Nancy Pelosi -- expressions of their "everything is gray" religiosity which show that their Catholic consciences are seriously uninformed.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman"

Hmmmm, EPIC FAIL Wendy - maybe you need better glasses...

Palin really has you 'people' panicked, doesn't she? You have no idea how much diatribes like yours hurt your cause, do you? I hope you keep it up. You can only help Palin by displaying this kind of bitter ugliness.

How flippantly you say, "It's in the mother-lovin' Constitution".

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you meant the Bill of Rights. Even so, I can find no reference in that document to one's inalienable right to end any life (or even potential or future life) that happens to reside within one's body.

Unless, of course, you believe a fetus is a soldier and a womb is a house, in which case the Third Amendment specifically prohibits the quartering of said soldier in said house without consent of the womb's owner.

Or perhaps you believe the fetus is conducting an unreasonable search and seizure. Then you are correct; women would be protected against fetuses via the Fourth Amendment.

Or perhaps you harbor the delusional thought that the termination of a fetus is a religious issue. It is simply a scientific (when is a life a life?) and criminal (ending it after said point is a felony) matter. It would be foolish to claim that the only reason anybody could possibly object to abortion is because of Christianity. It is an error of logic to say it's a religious issue because certain religious segments of society are opposed to it.

But if you'd still like to make that claim, the Constitution is silent in that regard. The Constitution, with regard to religion, only prohibits the state from establishing a religion (as in The Church of England) or preventing the free exercise thereof. So unless women are getting abortions because their religion requires it, the Constitution does not protect abortion.

Is it a volatile issue? A murky issue? A complex issue? Absolutely. Do I have the definitive answer? No. But it is not a religious issue, and the guarantee to abortion access is not in the "mother-lovin' Constitution".

Thank you.
Wag The Dog
Long Live Free Speech

Please show me where abortion is referenced in the constitution.Or for that matter in any of the amendments.

It is clear that modern feminism isn't about women at all. I have known for years the ugly secret is that the leaders of "the feminist movement" are a bunch of lesbians who hate men. It's fine to be a lesbian, but it's not okay to denigrate those who don't agree with you. The reason I had the light bulb come on about liberal think is that they really are NOT open-minded. They have small boxes they put everyone in, and will be outraged if you dare try and escape. It's really sad, but also gratifying to see this type of stuff coming to fuller light.

why does Gov. Palin scare you so much. Does she shine the light on your evil deeds? Does she make you seem less in some way. I do not understand the hate...yes hate that you and the left see in this woman. Gov. Palin is an example of a true woman. Not some feminist that has burned her bra but one that has not blinked at life's challanges and has done it with class.

As far as abortion being in the founding documants. Would you please show me the passage. I see the one for a right to a gun, and I see the one for the right of free religion (not just indoors but also free to practice outdoors too). I see the right to freedom from search and seizure, and the one about freedom of speech. I just can't see the one for freedom to kill children. Maybe I'm missing it.

You are a psycho. She embodies everything you "feminists" claimed to be about in promoting women: independantly rising to the top without riding the coat tails of her man (see Hillary Clinton), while at the same time having a strong loving family. She is dangerous to your liberal line of thought because she has shown can achieve all this without playing the victim card, and expose the left's definition for what feminism really is- a phone cause using women to advance a far left, liberal policy agenda.

Wendy, Harry Caray called, he wants his glasses back. Thanks.

Ouch. There are some personal attacks on this message board that are downright awful. It's terrible to have to read them. While some here are attacking this poor woman personally, I think you are missing the point.

With the statement, "But I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people."

...This professor is actually giving us her religious view and asking us to accept. She says that she things one should not take their theology out in public, and push it on others- but by making that statement she is pushing a very particular theological view of privateism (and i guess pluralism) on others that she thinks is right and wishes for others to believe in.

I don't get it when people say "keep your religion private" because the minute they say that they are telling me what they think we should all do about metaphysical beliefs- but they use a metaphysical belief of privatized religion to do so. Isn't that hypocritical? If we have a value of the true, the good, and the beautiful which can't be proven- then we have a religious belief and if we express it, then we wish others to buy into it. There is no way NOT to push our beliefs, unless one never says anything to anyone...

Wendy, maybe if you had such a mother as Governor Palin, you would not be such a bitter person. Good luck in your career.

Another fetal alcohol adult, spawned by a drug using, pot smoking hippie. Give your Mom back her glasses.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

Are you serious with this assessment? Is this the best analysis that you can offer? "She does not speak for women". What nonsense. You're simply offended because she doesn't speak for *you*. Well, I'm afraid that America is not all about you, and women don't speak with a monolithic voice.

This isn't well thought-out analysis. It's a stream-of-conscious diatribe using stereotypes as "proof".

So Mrs Lib..how many babies have you killed?

with extremist views like yours, I can only surmise that you need to get out more, there, "sweetie", as your Savior might say.

You had me until you misrepresented the fact that Palin, as you put it "after using a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska" It does not take very much research and virtually no time at all to show that this statement is not true. The department asked for an increase in funding to the tune of 5 million dollars. Palin gave them a 3.2 million INCREASE. Hardly a cut in the budget. You need to research "man-made" global warming as well. That theory, and let me repeat that it is a theory, is slowly and steadily being proven wrong. I respect your views and thank you for sharing them, but expressing them while you are angry may not be the best time to do so.

Nice job taking her prayer out of context. How did you get a job, anyhow?

maybe she doesn't speak for you because you couldn't pay a man enough to mate with you. Pathetic. Who the he'll are you?! Most woman do care and can relate to palin. You along with the rest of the left live in a fantasy world were woman aren't woman and babies are worth less then an rotting tooth. To people are disigusting.

What faith is this about? Wendy should remember that to bare false witness against another is a mortal sin.

The remark "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman." was more than a bit harsh and takes away from the points you're trying to make.

If I had taken any classes from Doniger, I'd be demanding a refund. This runt with a capital C apparently wouldn't know the truth if it knocked on her door.

Runt, you don't speak for us. STFU.

Interesting that Biden gets a pass. Let me see if I have this right..he knows at conception human life has started yet he lets it happen and that is laudable? In fact he creates an environment that encourages abortion and even funds it. Do you really find that to be a sign of a man with
any integrity? He knows its murder and does nothing. Truly sickening. What a crazy world we live in. The right to kill our own children is celebrated.

She's not a woman???????

I'm a working class woman, but apparently I wouldn't count by your definition either. Who gave you that right? Who made you the person who decided who is and who is not a woman or who counts or does not count as a "real" woman?

This is the most pathetic attack against her I've read yet.

You have definitely spoken for the N.O.L.W. The National Organization for LIBERAL Women. What an embarrassment you are to your gender! Talk like that keeps setting your organization back decades.

Is this some kind of satire or spoof?

I guarantee that Prof. Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty) the Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School......has hair in every crevice of her body.

God, your effing stupid.

Nice attack article Wendy. You could be the poster child for the Stupid Broad Assocation, but you really do look like a dog with lipstick.

Thank GOD a woman like Sarah has come along. She's not like you man she's that flop into any bar because you have the right to choose. Picking up any guy because you have the right to choose. Picking out any sleezy hotel room because you have the right to choose. Maybe getting pregnant, because you had the right to choose. Then having the right to choose killing the baby the first two months orwaiting until in your eight or ninth month and bashing in the little baby's head. Yeah , Tell us some more what a terrible woman she is and how sick you are.OH, please take a shave and change your picture on your site . Timberwolf

Gee Wendy. Get angry much?

Sarah Palin is definitely a woman, just one who doesn't hold your beliefs. I would think a liberal like yourself would be a bit more open-minded.

Professor Doniger

Abortion rights is not found in the mother loving US Constitution . Pray tell on what amendment can one find your abortion rights because I want to know on how that supposed amendment came into being and how did the elected senators and congressmen and women were able to add that amendment without the knowledge of the American people . Can you please explain me that ??

Another psychotic diatribe by a bitter and UGLY woman. It seems the only qualification needed to be a professor of the history of religions is a healthy dose of mental illness coupled with a face that no amount of lipstick could fix.

A stunning diatribe of half truths, untruths, and completely wrong thinking.

The facts of whether or not women think Sarah Palin speaks for them will be known on November 4, and for you to presume that you speak for them is egotism gone wild.

Shut up and teach religion.

God save us all from the University of Chicago. This is the most embarrassing writing from a woman I have ever to read.

I never belived that Satan existed until I read Doniger's article.

With the vitriol that's oozing out of Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty)'s very pores -- for the sake of those she lives and works with -- I hope she's remembering to roll on plenty of antiperspirant in the morning.

You say that the right to have an abortion is in the Constitution. Where?

Wow, what a hit piece, you should be writing for US magazine.
Not in one provable instance has Sara Palin ever forced her opinion on others. She brought her daughters pregnancy out for two reasons. 1. The lies told about the parentage of Trig, and 2. because moral values allow one to not compound one mistake with another. (For those who cannot comprehend, not aborting or single parenting when a father is around).
In trying to make the case for not having someone impose their thoughts on you, you sure have a lot you would like to shove down the throats of your readers.

One of the more ridiculous commentaries I have read recently. Apparently this writer thinks she can read others' minds.
Please read Obama's mind and tell us how he could attend a church for 20 years - a church that preaches hate. Read Obama's mind and tell us how he can justify his friendship with a person who bombed to kill other Americans. Read Obama's mind and tell us his justification of allowing babies born alive to die.
While the writer is at it, please list three of Obama's accomplishments.

this article is so off the charts idiotic and illogical, only a phd could have written it!

this thing is a real human being? take your meds, dear. please!

Wendy Doninger's "greatest hypocrisy" is her pretense of editorial objectivity, which fails to mask her purely political motivation for scornful and inaccurate characterizations of the life and choices of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. It is merely populist hysteria, unsupported by either science or logic, that connects Ms. Doninger's demeaning of Mrs. Palin's gender (which is biologically unassailable) and her theology (of which Ms. Doninger is demonstrably and admittedly ignorant) onto the lives of soldiers, civilians, polar bears, wolves and the Democrat candidates for president and vice-president.

That's the biggest load of crap I've read in a long time, and with the nature of the recent debate, that's saying somethig. To paraphrase both Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, Wendy Doniger might put on lipstick, but she's still a pig!"

UN FREAKING BELIEVABLE!!! A proffesor? REALLY???

Uh... Joe Biden doesn't believe at life at conception: HE'S A DEMOCRAT!!!!! Don't let that fool you that he's Catholic!!! The same thing with Nancy Pelosi... she's Catholic, and she said that Catholic belief says that they believe in ABORTION! FALSE, FALSE, FALSE!!!!!!!!!! Read your theology, woman. Sarah Palin is more of a woman than you are.

"...But he has gone out of his way to insist that he would not impose his personal views on others,..."

Uh, so he would impose others' personal views on others?

While campaigning and debating, is he explaining others personal views? ;)

Or is he explaining his personal views that he won't impose on others?

I want to know a politician's personal views which they will try to impose on others. Or is this a way of saying Obama/Biden won't go through with their campaign promises? Clever!

Dear Mrs. Doniger:

It seems you may have lost your mind!

I imagine Mircea turning in his grave!!!

one word: meltdown.

If this woman was seriously considered a scholar, she's thrown any credibility away.

Is a college degree worth anything anymore?

Thank you for clarity in a dualistic, good and evil Republican fanatic world view. To further pound home your points...Palin said in her FIRST interview that she would go to war with Russia over Georgia.....Wow, what a great loving christian she is....NOT.

Everything you say, virtually all that you say, is pure rubbish,
just reading the first words of many paragraphs.

What's more, your ugly face tells about your ugly insides.

There's no right to abortion in the Constitution. It is not a religious issue. And it is NOT about the woman's body. Nobody argues with a woman's right to make decisions about her own body. Abortion hinges solely on whether the unborn child is a human being. If it isn't, then abortion is up to the woman. If it is, the woman has no legitimate right to abortion.

The "pro-choice" movement, in all its arguments and by its very name, obfuscates the true issue by reframing it as a woman's right to her body, all the while accusing pro-lifers of being invasive Nazis. But depending on the humanity of the unborn child, either side could be violating someone's right to decide over their body (in one case deciding to destroy it).

This is why abortion has dominated every political election and why Sarah Palin doesn't even have to utter a peep about it to get feminists and "liberals" (another misnomer) in a tizzy. In my experience, the side that obfuscates an issue is the side that secretly knows it doesn't have a leg to stand on. Roe v. Wade is patently UNconstitutional, it's days are numbered, and the left knows it.

Anyway, for the sake of argument, let's assume Joe Biden's right and it's a person. If he really believes this, is he still doing right, as you put it, by "not imposing his beliefs?" Were complicit Germans that believed Jews were human beings "right" not to "impose their personal beliefs" on the people that perpetrated the Holocaust?

Your argument about Palin's teenage daughter is beyond ludicrous. How does it follow that not believing in abortion, or supporting your own kid's decision to keep a baby, means you therefore can't oppose halfway houses for pregnant teens funded by taxpayers? You contradict this flimsy logic two paragraphs later: Biden is personally pro-life but would never force his views on others as policy and you call this the "right answer." Yet Palin personally supports her teen's decision but, like Biden, wouldn't force her views on taxpayers as policy and you call her a hypocrite. The government isn't supposed to do stuff like this anyway, which you should know as a Constitutional scholar. (Couldn't resist.)

The book-banning rumor has been totally (and widely) discredited. The Harry Potter book she supposedly tried to ban hadn't even been published in 1996 when she supposedly did this.

And no matter what you think a fetus is worth I think it's gotta be worth more than a moose.

You'll have to show me where Palin said global warming is the "work of God." If all your going on is that this "must" be her view, that's beyond silly. There is no scientific certainty or conclusive evidence that global warming is man-made. So in saying she, like the scientific community, is not sure, Palin shows herself to be prudent, rational, and non-prejudiced (not to mention free-thinking and willing to buck establishment views).

These are values they taught me as a student at Chicago. But I guess the tables have turned now, and Palin's little college in Alaska—the one you liberals heap scorn on—is teaching these values better than my ol' alma mater.

If not for the link on Ann Coulter I would not have bothered but this has to be the dumbest, most mind-numbing drivel ever written by a human being, let alone a professor.

I'm pro-life and an athiest. I just think abortion is murder. I know murder is unconstitional and I believe its an outrage that America has allowed something so obviously unconstitutional to go on.

I have scanned the comments and am surprised nobody caught this:

Ms. Doniger repeats the completely basis and utterly refuted lie that Trig is not Sarah Palin's child. Ms. Doniger wrote: "As for sex, the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people, HARD ON THE HEELS OF HER CONCEALING HER OWN PREGNANCY (her faith in abstinence applying, apparently, only to non-Palins) . . . ." (emphasis added).

It is shameful that the Washington Post would allow this offensive slander to be published under its aegis.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. The Republican party's cynical calculation that because she has a womb and makes lots and lots of babies (and drives them to school! wow!) she speaks for the women of America, and will capture their hearts and their votes, has driven thousands of real women to take to their computers in outrage. She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women."

Possibly the dumbest paragraph I have ever read in my life.

Umm, she is a woman, and there is no pretense involved.

It seems to me that liberals are coming undone, unglued, unhinged over Sarah Palin. I'm glad for this, because it is revealing who liberals really are deep down inside and America is getting a chance to see it.

But, for sure Sarah Palin is indeed a woman...and it has everything to do with having a womb.

1,000 words vs. one picture of The Being Disguised As A Woman according to Prof. Doniger:

http://perfunction.typepad.com/perfunction/images/2008/09/11/palin_piper_homecoming.jpg

Wendy Doniger is arguing that Sarah Palin is not a woman because she 'chooses' life.

Apparently Wendy Doniger has no sense of irony given her blindnes to her own effort to force her beliefs upon others.

Also... further propagating the lies that Palin 'outed' her daughter, clearly the fault of a malicious and biased MainStreamMedia, or 'hid' her own pregnancy or 'cut' funding for teen mothers, only discredits the entire column.

These frauds, and many othere, have been debunked.

This article is a perfect example of a person who is completely out of touch with America. This is what happens when people in the media and universities never speak to real people. They start thinking like Ms. Doniger. Yes Ms. Doniger, Sarah Palin is not a woman because she does not agree with your radical leftist views. Only radical leftists are women.

This is just plain nuts. Where does the Post get these whackos.

You state, referring to the "right" to an abortion: "It's in the Constitution. It's not in the Bible, or the Qu'ran, or the Bhagavad Gita. It's in the mother-lovin' Constitution."

Please point me to the Article (I'll find the section myself) of the Constitution where it can be found. And, please, since you said it's in there, don't give me a lecture on penumbras, etc. Just show me where it is.

When you say "I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people. In both sex and religion (which combine in the debates about abortion), Sarah Palin's views make me fear that the Republican party has finally lost its mind...." one must observe that it is you who have possibly lost their mind.

I can find nothing that suggests Mrs. Palin tried to alter any abortion laws or similar socially divisive laws in Alaska (that so animate many religious and political discussions) to demand they conform to HER religious view. So, apparently to you just holding a personal "religious" point of view IF IT COMES FROM A RELIGION THAT BELIEVES IN GOD, as opposed to some variant of the religion's of atheism or secular humanism, is some sort of public "sin", regardless of any policy proposal such a person has given. I cannot imagine your "lost" mind, offering the same objections to those who take their "religious" point of view to office in opposition to what is believed to be the beliefs of Sarah Palin.

I see nothing but hatred and vitriol in your reference to the presence of Sarah Palin's seventeen year-old daughter as either an "outing" - the pregnancy was NOT a secret, it was NOT conceald by Sarah Palin or her daughter - or as any form of "hypocrisy". What would have been hypocritical is if the Palin family had shunted their daughter into the dark closet you seem to think she belongs.

Unlike you, while the Palin family surely wishes their daughter and her young man had waited before conceiving a child, they are doing what loving and honorable parents do, regardless of their religious faith - love their children and help them make the best decisions going forward, and more so, particularly after they stumble. Unlike you, the Palin family and millions of others like them do not deny that we all fall short of God's perfection, but doing so does not excuse us to continue to wish and pray we would always do better.

And, apparently your activities do not provide you with the time for any independent research. If you had done even just a little research then you would not have propagated the internet myth about Covenant House Alaska and any of Governor Palin's line-item vetoes. She did not "cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska".

Covenant House Alaska has many programs besides those for transitional services to "teenage mothers". None of Covenant House Alaska's basic programs, for "teenage mothers" or anything else, had grant amounts from the state reduced. In fact, the total funding for Covenant House Alaska was more than twice the amount of the previous year, in spite of that generous amount being less than the legislature requested.

The difference is not in any grants for regular Covenant House Alaska programs, but in funds for a long term building project. That project will take many years and over those years will cost $5 million. The governor reduced the immediate grant in the last fiscal year from the full long term need of $5 million to a current contribution of $3.9 million towards it. If you even just checked with Covenant House Alaska, they would have told you their funds were not reduced.

The American people know you have "lost" your mind when your vile, hate-filled feminist vitriol refers to the obvious female gender of Sarah Palin as a "hypocrisy" and a "pretense". No one in the world but you seems to believe such nonsense.

You also seem to have some misguided animus toward women who have more than the politically correct two children. Certainly your complaint is a problem of your own creation. If your publisher really seeks Mr. Obama's election, as the American people know they do, their editors maybe should have screened your post for the blatant "hypocrisy" and vitriol you present not just against Sarah Palin, but against millions of American women like her, simply because they have and hold female values that differ from yours.

Actually, contrary to the mindset in the political closet you operate from, the "thousands of real women" who are taking to their computers in outrage" are the religious, and independent and moderate minded women who see through your rhetoric for the blatant hatred and vitriol it is. They know, the rants like yours are what is cynical, not Mr. McCain's selection of a strong, independent, reform-minded political maverick like himself.

But, in sum, I imagine even Sarah Palin has compassion and sympathy for you. I'll pray you regain your "lost" mind.

I encourage everyone to read this previous post. It clearly states the facts about Sarah Palin - and also the lies that Obama and his people are spreading, aided by Sally Quinn.
----------------------------------------

Disgusted Washington Post reader:

Actually, Wendy Doniger (O'Flaherty) I think it is you that has lost her mind, not the Republicans. And I say that as a Democrat.

Let's review some of your false, misleading uninformed and deceptive statements, which seem to be the norm from Sally Quinn these days. It is hard to believe that these outright lies are permitted by this so-called newspaper.

1. "But I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people."

Question: When did Palin ever inflict her views on anyone and when did she "try" to take her theology out in public? Just because the overzealous media is trying to make an issue of the fact that she is a Christian does not mean she has imposed anything on anyone. Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum.

2. "As for sex, the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people"

As you know but refuse to acknowledge, it was Obama supporters that suggested that her baby Trig was really her daughter's baby. They were posting photos of her daughter who looked pregnant and suggested that they were photos from earlier in the year and that she was the one who gave birth to Trig. This prompted Palin to announce that her daughter was currently pregnant. You can thank your Hyde Park neighbor, Mr. Obama for igniting the despicable smear of a teenager and her mother.

3. "after using a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska"

It might help if you stopped repeating the lies from the Obama surrogates. It's really not that hard to verify the facts. She INCREASED funding for the non-profit Covenant House from 155,000 to 3.8 million dollars. This is not a government program. It is a non-profit organization that gets grants from the govrnment as part of its funding. Their funding was increased by over 240%

3. "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman"

This doesn't even deserve a response except to ask what makes you think that you speak for women? She never said she did but you seem to think you do and that is very condescending. You seem to be against her because she chose to have a baby. And here is a newsflash for you Wendy...she is working class. She is not a professor that sits in a classroom and talks about things and then writes nasty trash for newspaper blogs. She is actually out there doing things to help people in their lives. Hmmm talking and writing but not doing....what other Chicago resident does that remind me of??

4. "An even wider and more sinister will to impose her religious views on other people surfaced in her determination to legislate against abortion and in her attempts to ban books, including books on evolution, and to fire the librarian who stood against her."

These are 2 more deceptive statements. Where is the legislation that according to you she introduced against abortion? This is absolutely false. With regard to a list of books she wanted to ban, this is another myth spread by chain emails from Obama surrogates. You really need to check your information or you should not be writing here. That list was cut and pasted into an email. It is a list from the University of Florida of books that are commonly banned but the email said she tried to ban them...which is an outright lie. From fact check.org: "She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term."

Is telling lies and presenting false information the writing standard at the University of Chicago? If so, that is far more frightening to me than having a woman with a record of accomplishment on the ticket. Just because I don't agree with her on everything doesn't frighten me. What frightens me is people like you from a university who make things up and then they get published. It's even more hypocritical that these lies are published on a blog that is supposedly about religion. I guess

Anyone who peruses the blog will see it is really a blog to advance Sally Quinn's and the Post writers' political agenda to influence the election in favor of Obama.

For those readers coming to this blog for the first time, this particular Chicago smear piece is all part of Sally Quinn's search and destroy mission to eliminate Sarah Palin. She did the same with Hillary Clinton because she wasn't elite enough for her cocktail parties and luncheons. In this particular case, she found a so called "religious" female from Obama's hometown to write false and deceptive information about a strong accomplished woman who actually has more executive experience than Obama or Biden. She and McCain are leaders with experience delivering change, not just talking about it.

That's the REAL reason they are frightened of her. They are trying to frighten you with made up material designed to make her look extreme. Most of us see right through it.

Not a woman? Did you do a thorough exam to find out? What constitutes being a woman to you? Does she have to agree with you? Did you forget or purposefully ignore that Governor Palin's family was being savaged by the unhinged Left claiming that Governor Palin's baby was actually birthed by her 17 year old? No of course you didn't forget that, you chose to ignore the reason her family appeared. You are everything that is wrong with many University Schools of Theology...God is absent from the teaching you provide.

A fine example of how the professoriate in America are poisoning our society and corrupting thought. Just look at the base nonsense they spew.

"I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious"

Well, madam, you're taking YOUR religious views public here, aren't you? Of course you are. Personally, I object strongly when anyone uses a university position or their association with a major newspaper to take their beliefs out in public. So where does that leave us?

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

It doesn't strike me that she's pretending to be a woman. By information and belief, I would call her an actual, real, live female. But then I haven't had the benefit of the gender studies classes you no doubt are burdened with.

"she speaks for the women of America, and will capture their hearts and their votes, has driven thousands of real women to take to their computers in outrage."

Ah, I see it now. What wakes a woman "real" is that she jumps on her computer to express outrage at the same things that YOU do.

"She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women."

So a woman who inhabits the opaque bubble of academia has decided that a woman who's actually been working class doesn't know anything about working class women. Marvelous!

I detect a pattern here, and it's one you often see amongst the academic left. They're all for something so long as it is something THEY are for. Free speech? Oh, they'll tell you they're all for it-- as long as it's the kind of speech they agree with. Speaking out for women? They love it-- as long as it's their sort of woman-- you know, with the right thoughts and pedigree. To hell with them if they work with their hands and haven't attended an Ivy League school.

You're so transparently bigoted and biased it almost makes the eyes water. Really, do you ever get on your knees and thank whatever diety (or dieties) you may believe in that someone of your low intellectual capacity is given such a forum? You should. How did higher education ever come to this? It was once admirable. It is a sad thing to see it brought so low.

I really love the tolerance on the left. Since she doesn't belive in your narrow view of feminism "womanhood" is her hypocrisy. Nice. She may not speak for you or for all the other "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bike" feminists but look around Wendy times are changing. You don't get to define the "right" kind of woman anymore. The left is so obsessed with race and sex it's appauling. Everytime a Republican ingnores sex or race Democrats rush to cynically define the choice as based soley on them. Sandra Day O'Connor, Clearence Thomas, Colin Powell, Condeleza Rice, Sandra Palin talented and inteligent people. So pathetic that you see them as black or female first.

Ms. Wendy Doniger, "divinity school" is a mind police. Sorry you cannot brain wash real people.

I think that it is important to remember that all laws that are made by the government impose someone's view or personal belief on others. If guns rights are restricted, than someone's belief about that has been imposed on others, many of whom do not share that belief. Even in something simple, like building a road, someone's belief that the benefits of that road outweigh the costs to taxpayers has been enacted. Certainly some people will not share that opinion, yet it has become law.
If it were wrong to have laws that some people disagree with, I think that we would not have any laws.

The Declaration of Independence recognizes the "right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Life is the most fundamental right that society rests on. If government can't protect life, even the lives of those who can't vote yet, what is the point of government?

Which section of the Constitution makes abortion a right?

Wendy is intelligent but she is a naive thinker. She is blissfully unaware of her own deeply religious convictions which shape her thinking about public policy. Separating religion and public policy is not demanded by the constitution. The constitution merely prohibits the establishment of one church or one religion as THE religion of the land. Every man and woman in public office is in some way religious and their policies always reflect their religious beliefs. As for Wendy being a woman, well, we won't go there. But I have my doubts ...

You are a very sick and pitiful excuse for womanhood.....May our Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on your soul

The essential weaknesses of the ideas presented in this post is in thinking that there is only one "correct" point of view for women on this issue -- and that one single issue should trump all in determining your vote for President. Such stridency does not allow for the serious and meaningful debate on the subject. Many believe, and its not farfetched, that abortion is bad for women and for also for society. Personally, based on personal experience, I feel that the casual and easy availability of abortion (and birth control, among other factors) contributes to a culture of casual sex and therefore increased unwanted pregnancy. Many on the "pro-life" side are really seeking to roll-back the casual sex part that came with the so-called sexual revolution, something that I applaud as I believe it is harmful for both men and women, children and families. But why is it that those who are pro-choice are so quick to assume and declare in the most alarmist of tones that our politicians who declare themselves as anti-abortion necessarily seek to outlaw it or criminalize it. This is not so. For example, this has not happened during the eight years of this Bush Administration, and, as well, there is no evidence that Gov Palin has sought to impose her personal religious and moral beliefs on the people of Alaska. As for the conservatives on the Supreme Court, should Roe v Wade ever be struck down, they would only be sending the issue back to the states for them to rule as they see fit -- simply because the Constitution implies that that is where the issue properly belongs. Pro-choice feminists would do well to take a deep breath and consider that good women (and men) have a wide range of opinions on the subject and that there are a tapestry of issues to consider when voting for a President.

Sigh. This so-called enlightened person is nothing more than run-of-the-mill leftist schtick. She reminds me of a professor at the Naropa Institute in Boulder; all for tolerance and enlightenment but only if it is from the left.

Such a sad being.

Apparently I too have been wrongly posing as a woman. Where do I turn in my ovaries and uterus? The DNC? Although I am single and childless, I do believe in God and that abortion is murder so I must be faking being a woman because according to this article we all believe the same thing. I'll give up my ovaries when the author of this article gives up her brain, its clearly being wasted.

Wow. You must be a mind reader. To know all those
things about someone you never met. Golly!

Is it just me or is the title of this opinion piece a misnomer?

"All Beliefs Welcome, Unless They Are Forced on Others" by Professor Doniger is an interesting use of reverse psychology and irony to demonstrate a point. As she so clearly emphasizes her political opinions in her essay with the intent to get others to agree with her, it is clear that she is demonstrating the "you're opinion is right as long as it agrees with mine" type of tolerance which she is railing against in her title.

I hope that was the intent - demonstrating the problems of religious intolerance under that guise of political opinion intolerance.

Otherwise I weep for the future of academia and our children's education.

Dr. Dongle, I know a woman when I see one, and I can assure you that there's no doubt that Sarah Palin's a genuine XX woman.

Trust me on that one.

I am continually amazed of the amount of hate and distain professors of religions have for the rest of us - simple believers in Biblical truth. Mrs Pailin's attraction is that she does not attempt to be anything other than what she is.. a flawed human being, anxious to work for causes she sees as important. As an American she has as much right to voice her opions as you do.

Dr. D., you owe me a keyboard.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

As for the absurd assertions that Sara Palin is somehow to be reviled because of her womanhood and motherhood is irrational or just evil.

Additionally, this nation's founders were men of faith. The documents verify that their intent was to incorporate profound spiriuality into the fabric of this Representative Republic. This government was prohibited from faith based discrimination but there is nothing that banned spirituality and prayer. Quite the contrary, even money bears, "In God we trust."

Any pretense that Global Warming is the sole creation of the wicked human industralists also fails under the microscope of valid science. This earth is and always has experienced climatic change. Only those who are delusional and suffer with a Diety Complex would utter such nonsense as to pronounce that some cave deweler caused any of the ice ages. Nor did any human influence the interglacial periods of continental warming and temperature modification. Before making any further foolish remarks please consult Dr. Willie Soon at the Simthsonian Astro/Physics Dept.

Is contemporary humanity influencing the enviroment? Yes! But will the climate, earth, solar system and universe halt it's evolution if you start riding a bicycle and put a polar bear in your chilled jacuzzi? Think again.

Wow. A scary peek into the bowels of academe. This professor might be incapable of embarrassment, but her university must be mortified. No, probably not.

Wendy Doniger,,,,You are full of it.
democrats were the ones who first shouted to the roof tops and crowed like strutting chickens about Palin's pregnant daughter,,,not Republicans.
You are a baldfaced liar !
David L. George
Spring, Texas
and
Plymouth ,Pennsylvania

"As for sex, the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people, hard on the heels of her concealing her own pregnancy (her faith in abstinence applying, apparently, only to non-Palins), is nicely balanced by her hypocrisy in gushing with loving support of her teenage daughter after using a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska"

How is it hypocritical to support your child under such circumstances? If my child was accused of murder, say, I would support him. With legal and financial aid, or however. It doesn’t mean that I couldn’t say murder was wrong. And how is it hypocritical to feel that families should support each other, but that no one should be forced to support anyone, as would be the case in a situation of public-funding?

How is it that a grown woman, like you, has managed to live to adulthood without ever actually understanding the concept of hypocrisy? Because it would apply to you, maybe? Sarah Palin is not a woman? Who are you to judge?

But its ok to impose liberal permissive views on to be executed fetuses, right? Ms. Doniger's views need some "nuance".

Dr Doniger says, "I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people."

But she has no qualms about seeking to impose her views on others. Her metaphysical presuppositions may be different than those of a conservative Christian, but that does not make them any less a belief system or a worldview. It is impossible to not speak from a "religious" position; we all have convictions about the nature of ultimate reality that shape our opinions and our actions.

Mircea Eliade would be embarrassed to have his name next to yours. He knew how to make sense and to base an argument on fact, not insane rumor.

You owe Palin an apology. And you owe yourself a top-to-bottom rethink of your entire philosophy, for it is based on lies.

I just spoke with Dr. Doniger - she is vacationing on Cape Cod.

A quick review of our converation can be found at
http://thismodernage.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/dr-wendy-doniger-on-gov-sarah-palin/

"Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty) is the Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School. The “On Faith” panelist also teaches in the University’s Department of South Asian Languages and Civilizations"

You must be kidding. A person that despises religion is a professor of religious history at Divinity School? Typical stuff from the academy, like having a communist at Wharton teach the history of capitalism or a wahabist muslim instructing classrooms full of future pastors in christian history. Our colleges go out of the way to find people that will use half-truths, uninformed opinion and outright lies to tutor our leaders-in-training to hate themselves and their past as I'm sure this lady is doing in Chicago.

"That's not even wrong."

-W. Pauli

Somehow today's article doesn't seem to match up with your convocation speech this year at the University of Chicago. Unless, when you talked to those students about overcoming predjudice and bias you were reminding yourself of one of your own failings that you would like to imrove.

Regarding Obama's refusal to answer a theological question: he was not asked one. He was asked about rights, which we are endowed with by the Creator (as stated in the Declaration of Independence), but which are recognized and protected by the government (as we see in the Bill of Rights).

By supporting abortion "rights", Obama has indeed made a decision as to when a human being gets rights--not until birth (or somewhat after, in the case of babies who survive abortions). Whether the fetus is a human being or not is not a theological question but a scientific one, which thanks to advances in embryology, has been solved (also, does anyone question whether the fetal pig they dissect in science class is actually a pig, since it hasn't been born? This confusion seems only to apply to humans). Of course if he is honestly unsure as to whether this is an ensouled human being deserving of protection, the correct choice is to err on the side of caution and protection.

Indeed, some (atheists, presumably) would argue that no one has a soul, and some academics argue that babies outside the womb are not yet "people". So why is this idea that "no one knows, there are various arguments and points of view" so therefore we can kill these "things" only accepted in regards to abortion?

Regarding "imposing your religion" or morals, as the case may be: that is what the law is--saying one thing is wrong and another right, choosing to make one thing a priority over another. We impose our morality on those who kill adults and children every day. We pass laws against beating one's spouse and children because we think that such behavior is wrong--even though others may disagree and despite the fact that such crimes occur in private. If we are not allowed to "impose morality", then we are not allowed to legislate.

I take considerable comfort in the fact that this sad old hater has probably gotten Palin another fifty thousand votes.

She didn't "out her pregnant daughter in front of millions," as you say. You liberals did that to her. She to this day has never talked about it. Your religion must not abide to the "thou shall not judge" theory, as you seem to be very judgemental, and not at all open minded as you hypocritical democrats claim you are. (Only if it serves your cause, right?) It's pretty obvious how terrified you are of Palin. Here is a real woman that the majority of us american women not only identify with, but love the fact that there is a woman in power who doesn't share the extreme hypocritical views that those like you and Pelosi do. Now, either you think that most americans are ignorant and blind to not see the lies and false claims you have written in here, or else you are just too blind and ignorant to find out the real story yourself. Either way, you and this article are pretty pathetic. And you should be scared of Sarah. She is going to help keep you fantasyland liberal dwellers out of the White House. People like you are pretty sickening, and it's obvious that americans agree. All your hate against Palin and unsubstantiated smears are backfiring, and only making her and McCain more popular and liked. Too bad you libs are too ignorant (or is it too elite?) to realize that.

http://www.crosswalk.com/blogs/EWThrockmorton/11581311/

"Sarah Palin signed a budget increasing funding for troubled youth"

Maybe you should read this article, Wendy.

Palin increased the funding by 300% for troubled teens. She did NOT cut funding. From the article:

"In Alaska, the governor is allowed to reduce spending allocations in the service of sound management and fiscal accountability. To prove his contention that Palin slashed funds for teen mothers, Kane produced the Alaska 2008 budget with Sarah Palin’s line by line adjustments. It is true that lawmakers allocated 5 million to Covenant House Alaska and that Mrs. Palin cut that allocation to 3.9 million dollars. However, what is misleading about the Post headline is that the allocation of 3.9 million is three times more than Covenant House Alaska received from government grants in 2007. According to records on the Covenant House Alaska website, the organization received just over 1.3 million dollars from grants in 2007 and nearly 1.2 million in 2006. Even with the reductions, Governor Palin signed a budget which provided three times more funds than the organization received in 2007."

Dr.Doniger seems to be very much the standard among professors in US institutions. It is alright that every day her and fellow radical socialists indoctrinate others in their particular view of life. However, when anybody puts forward a different view - they get attacked.
'I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people.' There are so many like myself who where mistreated and abused by so called professors like you. Verbally and physically bullied in class, marked down on papers and exams because we disagreed and ultimately intimidated into silence and obedience.
No longer though, (even though I am a Canadian and can't vote) I know others will vote against Obama/Biden because of all the elites such as yourself. I thank you for helping to remind us what it would be like under an administration supported by the likes of you.

Wow. Just WOW!!! Wendy is the epitome, the poster child, of RANK hypocrisy. My "gag meter" is rising rapidly (oops, have to run to the bathroom now to vomit - sorry.)

So Wendy, did you have a DNA test done recently to PROVE scientifically IF you are indeed a woman??? Because, just because your name is Wendy, and you have the appearance of being a woman, does that really, truly mean you are a woman, and part of the female gender? Can you actually prove that? Because I don't know anyone named Wendy not being a woman. But hey, you've caused me to question that, and to now require scientific proof.

Well gee, as far as I know, and have known (or at least believed)for the past 56 years, I am a woman. But now, I'm wondering if I too, should have a DNA test to confirm that. But then again, I'm sure the test would also involve a questionaire regarding my world view and belief system, and certainly what political party I belong to. And that if I should fail that test, then nooooo, I would not be considered a woman.

Well then, what would I be? A man, an alein from space, a nothing, a subhuman, a figment of my own imagination? Oh please, gag with a major spoon. (Oops, gotta run to the bathroom again to vomit. And now I have the dreaded "dry heaves", which is all your fault, dear Wendy.)

As far as Sarah Palin goes, she is ten times, no, 100 times the woman you could ever, ever hope to be, in your wildest dreams, missy!!! Oh my, did I dismiss and insult you by calling you "missy"? Well good, because you insulted and dismissed Sarah and millions of American woman, and yes, real women, with your totally out of touch and insane writing.

What does my heart good is that the vast, vast majority of comments here are from smart, rational people who see you for the incredible fraud you are. Gee, I wonder if you were expecting that???

(Oops, gotta run to the bathroom again to barf.)
You, MISSY, (that is if you are indeed a woman genetically) are despicable. The fact that you are actually a professor at a university is totally sickening to me. The fact that your are getting paid to indoctrinate young, impressionable minds with your insane, poisonous, evil world view totally sickens and angers me. Gee, I wonder, do you know Bill Ayers, are you friends with him?

I could go on and on here, but suffice it to say, I consider you human garbage, ready for the landfill. How did our fine, fine county get to this point? It makes me want to cry. Ahhh, but the answer is, it got to this point due to people like you, and Bill Ayers, and "The One". It got to this sorry, sorry low point, thanks to all you insane LEFTISTS, you Marxists, you Commies -- all the people, just like you, who want to have CONTROL over the rest of us normal human beings, just trying to live our lives, obey the law, and persue life, liberty, and happiness.

(Oops, gotta run to the bathroom again.) I was infected with a virus called Wendy. But I know I can rid myself of it by reading some normal blogs by normal, rational people. Meaning non-insane people, unlike Wendy. Meaning normal American people, who love our country, and are totally grateful to be true Americans.

Go McCain/Palin. Amen and amen.

You're a professor? Of an actual subject? This is ridiculous drivel. Of course Sarah Palin doesn't speak for all women, but she speaks for a great deal of them, thank the Lord!

The fact that you just used Joe Biden and his illogical world-view to support you claims shows how you truly just don't get it. First, we elect leaders because we agree with their views and desire that they govern with those morals and ethics. If Joe Biden doesn't believe strongly enough in his own personal view it shows a lack of true conviction and that he is really not ready to lead. Secondly, for someone to say something is wrong for them, but okay for others is really the worst type of logic possible. It is secular hedonism at its highest level, and if you follow that type of logic out to its final conclusion than how can people like you and Joe Biden ever say anyone is guilty of any crime. I mean hey if that's what they wanted to do then I guess it means its okay. Far be it you or anyone else to put your understanding of the law or constitution on someone else.

Since belief in God, and sexuality is a private matter, can we make political beliefs, beliefs about what constitutes womanhood, and all of Ms. Doniger's rants private matters too? I'd rather not have this stuff out in a public forum. Please respect my rights in this matter. It's in the constitution in a little note I wrote in one of the margins.

Actually, Wendy Doniger (O'Flaherty) I think it is you that has lost her mind, not the Republicans. And I say that as a Democrat.

Let's review some of your false, misleading uninformed and deceptive statements, which seem to be the norm from Sally Quinn these days. It is hard to believe that these outright lies are permitted by this so-called newspaper.

1. "But I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people."

Question: When did Palin ever inflict her views on anyone and when did she "try" to take her theology out in public? Just because the overzealous media is trying to make an issue of the fact that she is a Christian does not mean she has imposed anything on anyone. Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum.

2. "As for sex, the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people"

As you know but refuse to acknowledge, it was Obama supporters that suggested that her baby Trig was really her daughter's baby. They were posting photos of her daughter who looked pregnant and suggested that they were photos from earlier in the year and that she was the one who gave birth to Trig. This prompted Palin to announce that her daughter was currently pregnant. You can thank your Hyde Park neighbor, Mr. Obama for igniting the despicable smear of a teenager and her mother.

3. "after using a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska"

It might help if you stopped repeating the lies from the Obama surrogates. It's really not that hard to verify the facts. She INCREASED funding for the non-profit Covenant House from 155,000 to 3.8 million dollars. This is not a government program. It is a non-profit organization that gets grants from the govrnment as part of its funding. Their funding was increased by over 240%

3. "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman"

This doesn't even deserve a response except to ask what makes you think that you speak for women? She never said she did but you seem to think you do and that is very condescending. You seem to be against her because she chose to have a baby. And here is a newsflash for you Wendy...she is working class. She is not a professor that sits in a classroom and talks about things and then writes nasty trash for newspaper blogs. She is actually out there doing things to help people in their lives. Hmmm talking and writing but not doing....what other Chicago resident does that remind me of??

4. "An even wider and more sinister will to impose her religious views on other people surfaced in her determination to legislate against abortion and in her attempts to ban books, including books on evolution, and to fire the librarian who stood against her."

These are 2 more deceptive statements. Where is the legislation that according to you she introduced against abortion? This is absolutely false. With regard to a list of books she wanted to ban, this is another myth spread by chain emails from Obama surrogates. You really need to check your information or you should not be writing here. That list was cut and pasted into an email. It is a list from the University of Florida of books that are commonly banned but the email said she tried to ban them...which is an outright lie. From fact check.org: "She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term."

Is telling lies and presenting false information the writing standard at the University of Chicago? If so, that is far more frightening to me than having a woman with a record of accomplishment on the ticket. Just because I don't agree with her on everything doesn't frighten me. What frightens me is people like you from a university who make things up and then they get published. It's even more hypocritical that these lies are published on a blog that is supposedly about religion. I guess

Anyone who peruses the blog will see it is really a blog to advance Sally Quinn's and the Post writers' political agenda to influence the election in favor of Obama.

For those readers coming to this blog for the first time, this particular Chicago smear piece is all part of Sally Quinn's search and destroy mission to eliminate Sarah Palin. She did the same with Hillary Clinton because she wasn't elite enough for her cocktail parties and luncheons. In this particular case, she found a so called "religious" female from Obama's hometown to write false and deceptive information about a strong accomplished woman who actually has more executive experience than Obama or Biden. She and McCain are leaders with experience delivering change, not just talking about it.

That's the REAL reason they are frightened of her. They are trying to frighten you with made up material designed to make her look extreme. Most of us see right through it.

Somebody help me with this:

Evolution and man-made global warming are scientifically proven processes no longer open for debate (position held by secular humanists and environmental socialists).

Is not human conception also an event that can be subjected to scientific scrutiny to decide when life begins?

Now that we've got all you McCainites and Palenites gathered together here, just take yourselves over to that big jumbo jet near the parking ramp that has the word TEXAS painted in big red letters on the side. Hey, I think we got the color right, don't you?

We'll fly you all back home at government expense - if McCain wins of course. See the rebate coupon attached to your ticket. If Alaska doesn't secede, maybe Texas will. Bingo - your own country!

I love a good republican rally - it really brings out the Jesus in a person, don't you think?!

Well, let's just ignore the un-Christian cutting remarks, shall we?

Whew! Some of you repubs have a nasty mouth on you, and that's a fact. Do you really shovel food into that same piehole?

All in all, I think the democrats can live without you - the whole lot of you, and still win by a landslide.

You are proof that the elitist, snotty members of academia are some of the most useless and moronic members of American society. You are also proof of the adage "...those who can't do it, teach".

Universities are the realm of self-important, self-absorbed intellectuals. The thought of subjecting myself to the indoctrination of the likes of Ward Churchill, William Ayres or you sickens me.

It's little wonder the enrollment in the nation's universities is declining.

This is one messed up woman. I think she needs to get some therapy and possibly be put on medication. I"m not being sarcastic it's just this woman is really scary messed up.

See below...

Mike:
Oh, but all you right-wingers forget; Obama was a community organizer, just like Jesus was. Pontus Pilot, (you remember, the guy who murdered Jesus?) was a Governor, just like Palin...

****

Pontus Pilot - now that's just hilarious. You can't buy humor like that.

Don't you know it was actually Pontius Pilates? His family made a killing in the exercise business...

Mao Zedong was a community organizer...Franklin Roosevelt was a governor

Professor, I've looked in the Constitution for the past few hours, but have not been able to find the provision permitting abortion rights and disallowing the criminalization of abortion. Could you point out which provision of the "mother-lovin' Constitution" says something about these topics?

If you don't want a baby, don't have sex.

Its really that easy.

When a man(not uncommonly, pressure from a boyfriend, or a grandmother, lies behind the abortion) or a woman

borts a child

he or she "imposes" his or her beliefs on an innocent "other."

Nice try, Professor Doniger, but "don't impose your beliefs on me" won't work. Abortion is a justice issue, not a religious belief issue. If the unborn child is indeed an individual of the human species, then it is an injustice to kill it. If the unborn child is not an individual of the human species, then no injustice is done.

Determining whether it is an individual of the human species is a matter of science, not religion.

Determining that killing an innocent human individual is unjust is a matter of universal reason, not religion.

But one thing remains beyond any conceivable challenge: when a mother or father kills a baby, someone's beliefs get imposed on that baby.

Oh it only gets better. It appears through her own admission that truth is of no concern to rather mere profligacy of the written word:

Doniger said, there was little use in discussing the merits of the various books, or her Encarta essay on Hinduism. "It does not matter whether the article published under my name was right or wrong," she said in an e-mail. "The only important thing about it was that I wrote it and someone named Sharma did not."

Her primary field of study appears to be Hinduism
and to that matter, this notation from Wiki,

'Wendy Doniger has been criticized by Hindu Indian immigrants in the United States for her negative portrayals of Hinduism[3][4]; in particular, her article on Hinduism for Microsoft's Encarta encyclopaedia was so criticised. Subsequently, Microsoft removed Doniger's article and replaced it with an article by Arvind Sharma, Birks Professor of Comparative Religion at McGill University.[5] A Washington Post article [6] covering the controversy quoted a former Microsoft engineer (Sankrant Sanu), a persistent critic (Rajiv Malhotra), and various academics, including Doniger.'

No surprises there.

heilige Scheisse! You're a professor of religion at the UofChi Divinity School?#^&!

Wendy, honey, my mother was a traditional feminist and a devout Catholic, and - like my father - she was an army officer and decorated WWII veteran who raised five children while working in a management position in the medical field. She accepted me, her youngest and gay son, with a total love that I feel certain you've never known in your bitter and angry life. In terms of courage, integrity, dignity and just plain simple decency, she was a truer example of a feminist woman than you could ever hope to be.

Oh, and Wendy, sweetie ... tone down the red lipstick. It makes you look fat.

By your logic, I could revive the Aztec faith and practice it if I find volunteers to sacrifice. Isn't the environment important to you? Only your still-beating heart cut out and thrown into a brazier can prevent the Sun from burning out! Only you can save the environment!

What? Human sacrifice is murder, you say? You're imposing your morality on me!

(Note for those with defective sarcasm meters: I neither believe in, nor wish to practice, the Aztec faith.)

If that argument is too strawman for you, let's look at Mormonism and the admission of the state of Utah to the Union. Congress would only admit Utah if it banned polygamy, and lo and behold! A Revelation! Mormons became monogamists.

Were polygamous Mormons not consenting adults? Was Congress wrong to impose its view of marriage on them?

Governor Palin is not a hypocrite. She doesn't hide what she believes, and she practices what she preaches. She didn't disclose her daughter's pregnancy to the public until after the media had already done so. And I believe her husband, if not her gynecologist, would be willing to testify that she's a woman.

Shame on you, Ms. Doniger.

You know I am as pro-choice as one can be, But its this type of over the top and yes intolerant BS and disrespect of others that is pushing me away from the democrats and making me likely to vote for McCain and Palin.

You can not come up with one actual backed up with a cite attempt of Palin ever to try to force her morality on others because there is simply no such evidence.
She didn't try to change Alaska's abortion laws, nor the educational laws, nor did she try to ban any books. Further she vetoed legislation that was trying to infringe gay rights on the grounds that it was unconstitutional. So the only evidence disproves your point. She follows the law not her own morality.

In effect no different from Biden who has said he is personally pro-life but respects Roe as the law of the land.

So the only thing you are proving is the right's arguments that for many being pro-choice must mean being pro-abortion since you denigrate anyway who "chooses" to act differently.

That is not the kind of thinking I can support. I am pro-choice because I am tolerant. And this intolerance of those who are religious and pro-life just shows that the democrats are seriously losing thier way.

It would be helpful to understand Palin's political views on abortion rather than the assumptions about them. Here is Palin's response to a questionaire from the Anchorage Daily News:

"6. If Roe v. Wade were overturned and states could once again prohibit abortion, in your view, to what extent should abortion be prohibited in Alaska?

Under this hypothetical scenario, it would not be up to the governor to unilaterally ban anything. It would be up to the people of Alaska to discuss and decide how we would like our society to reflect our values. "

http://www.adn.com/sarahpalin/story/510378.html

Oh, but all you right-wingers forget; Obama was a community organizer, just like Jesus was. Pontus Pilot, (you remember, the guy who murdered Jesus?) was a Governor, just like Palin...

"All Beliefs Welcome, Unless They are Forced on Others"

I hope the good Professor Doninger will join my continuing campaign to overturn any laws that make it illegal for me to kill those who annoy me. After all, what right does anyone have to force a belief about the immorality of "murder" on me? And besides, "Though shalt not kill," is one of those "Ten Commandments." Thus, not allowing me to kill those who annoy me is equivalent to imposing religion upon me.

Such laws also violate my constitutional rights. The majority opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States of America states, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, that I have, "the right to define [my] own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life." I do not believe that those who annoy me are human. Nor do they, it follows, possess human life. To keep me from killing them is to impose upon me a view of "the mystery of human life" that is contrary to my own, which is a grievous violation of my constitutional liberties.

I hope all who read this article are convinced by the sound argument presented and join me in my campaign for my moral and Constitutional right to kill all those who annoy me.

Have I "reducio"-ed enough to make the "absurdum" obvious?

I'm a 37-year-old woman and mother. I notice that the women up in arms over Sarah Palin are of the older generation. Perhaps in your view it's because you somehow "did all the fighting for us" etc. and we don't have to. I don't know. I do know that a lot of us see through your hypocrisy and true anti-family agenda, and have *chosen* to stay at home because we feel like it's best for our kids.

I believe in absolute freedom for women. I also believe that newborn babies have the right, the right as humans and as citizens of the United States, to not die on utility shelves after abortions that didn't work. I also think it's illogical to think that pulling them out backwards and sticking a knife in their heads is somehow not killing them. We American women are well-educated, and can see facts staring us in the face.

Also, I don't see you older feminists up in arms over the treatment of buried-alive muslim women, burned-to-death hindu women, and hanged teenaged women in muslim countries and now in Britain and Europe. Where are you on that? Where? Maybe I'm missing something. But I think you're one-agenda hypocrites. I think you're more for anti-Americanism, period, and truly don't care a fig for the real rights of women, especially the unborn ones.

All you ever talk about is the right to kill babies, kill babies, kill babies. It's getting old.

Dr. Doniger,
Thank you for your article on faith in the public sector. I respect your opinions.
My question concerns the opening paragraphs of your article. You said: "I object strongly when anyone...tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious...views on other people."
I know this is a common understanding of the relationship between faith and the public sector. However, this seems to be impossible for anyone, including you to do.
Aren't you bringing your faith into the public sector by demanding that religious people leave their beliefs at home or in church?
The contradiction I am trying to point out is the assumption that humanism is the default. Only humanists can bring their values and beliefs about what is good and right and healthy for society to public debate. But, any religions person must never appeal to their religious tradition when discussing public policy.
Why is this the case? Humanism is as much a faith as Judaism, Mormonism, or Christianity. Every person has values and beliefs about the way the world works morally and socially, and these beliefs are at the end of the day tenants of faith. Don't our beliefs determine how we interpret the Constitution even? Can we possibly read without our beliefs? For instance, isn't the debate over abortion really about what constitutes a person who is protected by the Constitution. Humanists in general tend to argue that life doesn't begin at conception while many religious people (not all) believe it does.
It seems unfair to me that religious people are told they can't bring to bear on the issues that framework which is fundamental to their understanding of the world but humanists can.

I haven't read all the comments, but don't need to. It is obvious that you are a stupid c**t; not as an isnultbut because c**ts don't have brains, and neither do you. She is not a woman? You are a mental case, and belong in a home for the criminally insane. That you are allowed to teach law with such an aberrant worldview is in itself a crime. I feel sorry for anyone who is forced to take your class.

From a previous poster:

"David:

My God, what is happening to America?

Palin has yet to answer questions from a serious reporter about her beliefs and her record... yet she's Presidential material because she's a great liar and a hockey mom.

Creeping American fascism."

You could also say:

My God, what is happening to America?

Obama has yet to answer questions from a serious reporter about his relationship with Bill Ayers, his relationship with Larry Sinclair, his belief in Black Liberation Theology, his relationship with Tony Rezko, his lack of executive leadership experience....yet he's Presidential material because he's a great liar and he's black.

Creeping American socialism.

I strongly disagree that we should be constrained in such a way that our belief should remain behind closed doors and not effect the public or other people. This is just an unrealistic, insane expectation secularists place on religious people because they would prefer to keep God and religion out of their life and impose a secular world on others. So call your belief secular, and you are doing the same thing by saying that everyone must live in a world that is only influenced by secular beliefs.

In the case of abortion, if I believe that the baby in the womb is a human life, and that life deserves protection from wrongdoers. Clearly, excecution of a human life without legal reason to do so is murder. Every human life is deserving of protection from the government from murderers. So it is perfectly reasonable for people who believe that the baby is a human life to seek the government to protect the lives of those babies from murder.

Okay, let me see if I can succinctly and eruditely outline the main points of Dr. Doniger's piece:

1. SARAH PALIN IS THE DEVIL!!!!

2. EVEN WORSE, SARAH PALIN IS REALLY A MAN-DEVIL IN HIGH HEELS!!!!

3. SARAH PALIN IS HYP-NO-TIZING AMERICA!!!!

4. SARAH PALIN IS DRAINING OBAMA'S PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS!!!!

5. SARAH PALIN IS HIDING UNDERNEATH YOUR BED AND WILL STEAL YOUR COPY OF "HEATHER HAS TWO MOMMIES" WHEN YOU'RE NOT LOOKING!!!!

6. SARAH PALIN WILL FORCE YOU TO HAVE A KID WHO LOOKS LIKE THAT BANJO PLAYER IN "DELIVERANCE!!!!"

Have I missed anything? ;)

I echo much of the feelings on this post. Professor(?), I encourage you to disseminate your opinion on this matter as widely as possible across the electorate, and be scrutinized for the hypocrite you are. You are a blessing to the Republicans.

I am amazed that you actually write a column on religion. Your praise of Joe Biden's stance either shows your ignorance, or perhaps your disregard for the teachings and doctrine of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church does not support the kind of moral relativism, that Biden professes, ("But he has gone out of his way to insist that he would not impose his personal views on others"). No matter what he says his own personal views are, which according to him are based on his being a "a Catholic", in continuing to allow an act that the Catholic Church condemns as being "intrinsically evil" he is going against Church doctorine and is in-fact automatically self-excommunicating himself from the Catholic Church, latae sententiae. What he is saying is equivalent to someone saying: "I'm personally apposed to murder, but I won't impose my views on you, so go ahead and murder somone". Doesn't that sound rediculous? Some of these politicians that have no compunction about conveniently letting us all know they are "Catholic" need to get their relationship with the Catholic Church and it's teachings straight before they talk about their views. As a devout Catholic myself, I can tell you that ardently following any religion is not an easy thing. Some people may not like that, nor are they required to, but that's just the way it is. Following the teachings of the Catholic Church is not like being in a supermarket, where you go to one isle and take something from there and another isle and take something from that one, ignoring the rest of the store. You either follow all of the tenets and teachings of the church, ie:Catholic, or you don't, ie: not Catholic. Politicians like Joe Biden, who always like to remind us that they are Catholic, should maybe find another religion that allows them to follow their beliefs, which are not in line with the teachings of the Catholic Church. As for you Ms. Doniger, I don't know what religion you follow,(if any), or if you are even a Catholic yourself, but you need to learn more about teachings of the Catholic Church. So you can better address these issues when you write about them on your column.

Help me understand how the logic you've defended in this piece isn't incoherent? To begin with, abortion is not, per se, defended in the constitution. Rather, a very small group of people (namely, the supreme court), has made the decision that the United States will will not, in fact, provide for the common defense of the unborn and not secure the blessings of liberty for them, our posterity. Now, how can this be? How can the Supreme Court decide blatantly not to uphold what the constitution makes expressly clear is its very reason for existence? Well, according to your logic, they defend this position based upon a theological judgment about "embryological theology," namely, whether or not "life begins at conception." They've decided it does not. Apparently, they have imposed their theological perspectives on the rest of us. Can that be the right answer? Is that right afforded them in the constitution? Hypocrisy indeed!

Sarah Palin is a woman.

Perhaps, in a few years, after you've grown up a little, you'll be a woman too.

Shame on the Washington Post for publishing such ill-thought out, unintelligent and contradictory tripe.

I agree with every word Andrew Garland said.

This is a very interesting piece, and for a number of reasons. First, I find it is ironic (and a bit amusing) that Dr. Doniger chastises Mrs. Palin for supposedly attempting to speak on behalf of all women (not to mention that Doniger appears to be able to read the intentions of Palin's heart, "she has no sympathy for the problems of other women"), yet herself "speaks for all women" when she expounds her views on ethics of the life-abortion debate.

Does she not see the inherent contradiction of her position? She would refuse others the ability to do the very things she herself does in this article!

Also, contra Biden (and those that follow suit), the issue of when life begins is not a matter of faith. And it has essentially been a platform for pro-abortion advocates to state the conflict in terms that say that pro-lifers believe what they do became of religious convinctions. This simply is not the case, the pro-life position is firmly rooted in the scientific claim that human life begins at conception, or as Dr. Jerome LeJeune, (“the Father of Modern Genetics," University of Descartes, Paris) says, “To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion . . . it is plain experimental evidence.”

Likewise, Dr. Hymie Gordon (Mayo Clinic) states, “By all criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

Palin's position is not whether or not the abortion issue boils down to the 'right to choose", but on whether or not the fetus is a human being. If it is (and it is, according to Dr. Alfred Bongioanni [University of Pennsylvania] who said, “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.”) then we do not have the legal right to choose to kill it any more than we have the legal right to kill our teenage children if their lifestyle becomes an emotional, cultural, or financial burden to us.

And if the fetus is a human being there likewise should be a law protecting that life, outlawing the ability to take it's life in the same way that there are laws forbidding parents from taking the lives of their teenage children, friends, neighbors, co-workers, etc. It is simply being consistent in our "anti-murder" laws. And lest the issues of rape, incest, etc. are presented, I note that the pro-life position is and always has been primarily on the topic of abortion on demand, not the 1%-2% of abortions that fall under the "hard cases" (we should also recall the truism, "Hard cases make for bad laws").

This is not about "forcing" or "inflicting" privately held, but scientifically unverified, beliefs upon others. To state the case this way either a) demonstrates ignorance of the issues involved, or b) is an intentional attempt to erect a smokescreen and obscure the true pro-life position. The pro-life case is built upon the facts regarding the status of the fetus, and until those facts are refuted, the case stands.

And, to make this a religion v. science issue is to misrepresent the nature of the debate.

PS: Please pardon any and all typos

@anonymous 8:40 AM: "I hope [this] article receives much wider coverage. ... Americans would greatly benefit from understanding [Doniger's] position as an Obama supporter."

Doniger's not just Obama's supporter, but Obama's neighbor, too. They live less than a mile apart. Isn't Hyde Park wonderful? Ayers & Dohrn live right nearby, too. Go 60615!

Kidding aside, this column is further proof of the existence of several weird bubbles in our fine nation. Reality, logic, manners -- they're all very different inside vs. outside The Bubble. Inside The Bubble, you simply dehumanize/dewomanize someone you don't like; inside The Bubble, Bill Ayers is a respected and non-controversial figure; inside The Bubble, it's only Obama's candidacy that makes anyone proud of America. _Why are you looking at me that way? Doesn't everyone think that way?_

Obama is a creature of The Bubble; so is Doniger. And, viz. the famous and possibly apocryphal Pauline Kael quote, if you're inside you don't even realize it. _Why, of course everyone thinks like me._

Of course, The Bubble has its own rules, and they could prove handy. I'd love to see some enterprising young person file a complaint against Prof Doniger for violating UofC's Harassment Policies. (http://www.thefire.org/index.php/schools/466) They're pretty draconian when it comes to sexism and sexist speech. How would the policy deal with the act of telling another human being -- thankfully a member of a Protected Group -- _You don't exist, I nullify you._ ? I'd love to find out.

Her "faith in abstinence" is not hypocritical because her daughter got pregnant, nor because she did not react to it...how? With an abortion? Or hiding it? This is what today's Left has made of what they imagine to be the Christian Right's "hypocrisy." If you or your family cannot or do not maintain a record of behavior in perfect accordance with your moral beliefs, that is not hypocrisy, it is imperfection, something, though I myself am a lifelong Buddhist, I think most Christians readily acknowledge. Certainly those I have known throughout my life do. Hypocrisy is when you maintain that the codes of behavior that apply to others don't apply to you...Sarah Palin aborting her Downs baby and saying it was morally OK would have been hypocrisy. An alcoholic falling off the wagon is weakness and imperfection. I would think a professor of religion, or at least one not devoted to leftist political doctrine, would know that.

You really go on a tear above about the benighted faith of Palin and her ilk. But you appear to buy the global warming religion, despite a decade of no temperature increases and the recent cycle of low or no sunspot activity portending, as it always has in the past, a period of cooling, and the dozens of other holes in the catechism, and your mourning of the polar bears, whose population has tripled in the last 4 decades because of hunting restrictions, and so on. But like the willfully ignorant Christians, real or imagined, you so clearly deplore, you obviously don't adequately read or think outside the limits of your preconceived notions. You are blind to your own blind faith. Maybe that's hypocrisy, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say it's only weakness and imperfection.

BTW, I agree with what I take to be your view expressed in the last paragraph above---I think the origin of human life is a metaphysical decision beyond the competenmce of government...except when the fetus reaches a point of development that most people agree is viable, which is the view of Roe Vs. Wade. But leftistss have no problem imposing all manner of moral views on others in in non-sexual contexts, particularly through edicts from unelected and politically unaccountable judges. That is hypocrisy.

My daughter is a thrid-year at UChicago, and I am a great admirer of Mr. Eliade's work. I am sad to see you reciting the drearily predictable catechisms of the insular Left that so dominates our academic institutions of today. I doubt Eliade would approve.

(Yes, I know Erimita is misspelled.)

Sounds like the typical, "Have as much sex and kill as many babies as you can for fun and profit" ideology of the neo leftwingnuts that seem to dominate the Democratic Party these days. I must be getting old because I still remember when the two major Political Parties actually vied to be recognized as the most Conservative, Patriotic, and Prudent.
I just had a conversation with a newly recruited Obama suporter whom I know to be little more than an incoherent Drunk that now plans to "Take Back our Country" by voting for the new Dems. This guy is collecting Full Disability for PTSD he recerently claimed to have acquired from his service in Germany in 1960, Geez, I was in Germany in 1960..and all I did was chase the girls and drink the beer for a couple of years. Well...I guess a vote is a vote, but between this guy and the so called enlightened College Freshman with credit cards, I'm thinking the Dems are truly scraping the bottom of any barrel they can find.

Lets see, Rabid leftest loggers claim that Sarah's baby is realy her daughters. and also question why her daughter looks pregnant. all of which the main stream media regurgitates without bothering to check out. Making it Sarah's fault, when she clears the air by admitting that her daughter is presently pregnant. Sarah Palin has never tried to use her position as either mayor or Governor to force her religious beliefs on others. In fact she vetoed a bill that would have taken away medical coverage from same sex partners because it was unconstitutional. She also said that she would not try to force her religious beliefs about creation on the schools. She did say she saw no harm in the opposing views on creation being debated if the subject was brought up. As to her being qualified on foreign policy, She just recently successfully negotiated a international pipeline contract where she dealt with a foreign nation, Canada, and foreign company. That does not make her an expert on foreign affairs, but it puts her miles ahead of Mr. Obama.

The question of when life begins is not a theological question, it is a biological question. Once the sperm and egg come together, there is a seperate human being, with a heart, brain, spinal column, along with other viable growing human traits. It is really simple; when an abortion takes place, a human is killed. Believe me, thee are not aliens, animals, or plants that reside in human wombs.

If you want to be honest about your "pro-choice" views, then admit that a human life is being taken. Then, argue the point of WHY that human being's life had to be taken. Enough lying and trying to obfuscate the point that these aborted beings are indeed human. Please, at least be honest, and don't try to hide the obvious point here.

Once again, when an abortion takes place, a human being has been terminated/killed. BE HONEST.

I will choose a few of your statements as examples.

()"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

This makes no literal sense. Figuratively, I suppose it means that she may be a woman (should we investigate?) but is not a "real" woman. I appreciate opinion based on fact. It is harder for me to understand political poetry.

() "She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women."

Did she claim to speak for (all) women? (What is the citation?) I would like to understand your point, but you are assuming that I already have all of the facts and that they agree with your facts. Possibly I am ignorant; I would appreciate some enlightenment from your article.

You say that she has no sympathy for "other" women, meaning all women other than herself. Not even Republican women, it seems. A strong accusation. What facts or source do you use to form this opinion?

() "As for sex, the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people, hard on the heels of her concealing her own pregnancy (her faith in abstinence applying, apparently, only to non-Palins), ..."

Did Palin out her daughter, or did she respond to press attacks?

() "... is nicely balanced by her hypocrisy in gushing with loving support of her teenage daughter after using a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska."

A Professor should be making distinctions, not blurring them. Did Palin veto all transitional homes, or just one for whatever reason? Possibly she is insensitive to pregnant teenagers other than her own. Hypocrisy would be to use a state transitional home for her daughter while denying sufficient resources to others.

++
Here is my complaint. You are presenting conclusions and sweeping statements without telling what your sources are. If I already agreed with you, then I would of course agree with you. If I have any questions or doubts, then I have no way to verify your conclusions or even have a reasonable discussion with you. Without citations, you are safe from criticism.

Presenting your sources takes some time, would require more care, and would be very helpful to me in evaluating your opinions.

As a professor, you should have great respect for precision in expression, logical correctness, evaluating evidence in context, avoiding sarcasm, and presenting the basis for your observations and opinion. This limits your freedom to express opinion in sweeping and poetic ways, but it preserves the values of reason and intellect that help us all find the truth.

Seriously, does anyone proofread this garbage? Sarah Palin increased funding for transitional homes by $3.9 million. Only in the world of the left does that much of an increase count as a cut. This smear was debunked almost immediately. The fact it is still being repeated says a lot for the quality of discourse on this website.
The Sarah Palin is not a real woman comment is so stupid, it embarrasses the author. I'm curious, when did Wendy Doniger become the ultimate arbiter of real womanhood? And for that matter when did womanhood become defined by ideology instead of biology?

Since when should one's religious beliefs play no role in the political realm. Does a person need other justification for believing abortion is wrong other than their religious belief that it is wrong? Regardless of how anyone wants to spin the "separation of church and state," a candidates faith will always crash into the political and cultural realm. Anyone who abandons their core faith beliefs just to hold office is someone that shouldn't get the trust of the American public in the first place.

Sarah Palin is not a real woman? This is, without a doubt, the stupidest comment I have ever read in my life. So now it seems a real woman is only one who follows a liberal ideology and belongs to the Democratic Party. What a bunch of garbage.
The not a real woman comment is only slightly more stupid than your implication that all working class women are left-wingers who support abortion on demand.
Seriously, you would think a major newspaper would have thinkers who are a little more rigorous.

As someone who thinks Sarah Palin is just about what this country needs as President - a pragmatic semi-populist libertarian with a clear understanding of the separation of church and state, who seems to embrace the fact that she and her family don't seem to know how ever to take the 'easy way out', I just want to suggest to Ms Doniger that if she succeeds in expelling Gov Palin from the female gender, we males will happily accept her as one of us. She's certainly got more balls than the Metrosexual Left.

The strangest part of this whole exercise (when viewed from the outside) is how tightly both sides cling to what they “perceive” to be correct and there for all other people who do not believe as they do are either deranged or oblivious to the truth. If I chose to believe in “Global Warming” and I chose to share that belief with you does that imply that I am forcing my views on you? Why does this change when someone runs for public office?

I would like to know when (as you so kindly phased this) did the “Good Lord let you know that Global warming was caused man?” It is clear that you are inferring that because the lord has not engraved on a stone tablet that Global Warming is a natural cycle of the world; that man must be reasonable for something that even science cannot fully explain. How arrogant of you to pretense that you are entitled to speak on behalf of the all of us in regards to how we believe that the “Good Lord” works.

Laurent Fourier - pretty name, but not so pretty otherwise, are you?

Sweetie go back to your academia(echo chamber) where you will be safe from those mean people..

Hey, all you Palin drones - the was not meant to be a Palindrome.

WOMEN UNDERSTAND MEN: FEW MEN UNDERSTAND WOMEN.

I can't spit out the word LIBERAL with the same venomous animus as the Palin drones here - I think it's a born-again lip twist thing.

Could be congenital like rolling your tongue. I'm almost positive it's brain-function related.

Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach. (And those that can't teach, teach gym).

You should probably go home now and hang out with your 100 cats as they are probably the only things that might give you the time of day.

Saying I am personally opposed to abortion because I believe it is the killing of a baby, but fine with others who do it, is not rational at all.

I am surprised that this view is so celebrated and upheld by smart men such as Biden and other liberals. Its akin to, "I am personally against the enslavement of people, but I do not want to force that view on others." Either your irrational or you really do not hold that belief.

Good grief, since when did Sarah Palin need Ms Donier's approval to be a woman? This is probably one of the more misogynistic & manipulative articles I've ever read. I wonder if there is an editorial staff or if having letters after your name is enough credit to publish such garbage. I really don't give a rat's behind about Ms Donier's opinions, but shame on the editors for not executing the slightest standards against such open hatred and strong arm tactics of the author.

You say "But I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people."

That is exactly what you're doing here. You claim one's theology should be private, and then pull yours out to lecture others about how theirs is wrong. You are a hypocrite.

Wendy Doniger is the ugliest human being i've ever seen in my life.

My view is, that you seem to be an idiot and a LIBERAL! (same thing)
She did not "out" her daughter, your beloved Leftist media did in their attempt to crucify this woman.

If Sarah is not a woman, what the hell are you. Scary to think what that is! Libs and lib writers have NO credibility anymore.
This is fun watching you guys self destruct over Sarah! Don't you think you guys would like to even look into your "Messiah" Barry Os past, just a little. Talk about scary. 15 years with terrorist Bill Ayres, 20 years with racist American hating Rev. Wright, corrupt deals with convicted felon Resco??
Barry Os choice of infanticide vs life!
Talk about someones "judgement" being really crappy!
Your article make you look almost as smart as Matt Damon. Do a little fact checking before posting next time. It is sad to read such stupidity. Typical LIBERAL. Oh, I think I just personally attacked by calling you a LIBERAL.
Thank you for writing this, It is helping the undecideds migrate to Sarah!

Hey Al Gore's cult is forcing his Global Warming religion on me.

Post modernism
It's all relative man.....

Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School - fancy title for a moron

here's the real hypocrisy:
If Sarah had given fetal Trig up to the fires of Molech, had coupled with moose instead of shot them (see the Bedtrick), engaged in Chicago cronyism instead of Alaskan politics-involves-some-compromise, and been Obama's VP pick, Doniger would have been singing her praises.

Wendy - great read but you're too damn smart for most of this crowd, as another poster pointed out. Those close to Obama have made the same observation about him - and of course that's true too.

Now McCain has no problem talking at the same level as the multitudes - as for George W. Bush, most of his supporters probably felt superior!

Sarah Palin just waves her arms and manages to look like the new girl on Survivor! Done deal..

Hell, Al Gore probably had double digit IQ points over GWB - but that was just his problem. He acted like it.

So then, how does one (temporarily) unlearn good communications skills in order to get elected?
It's called Method Acting 101 - every smart politician and would-be populist communicator needs a refresher.

I love it when these Palin drones refer to you disparagingly as 'an educated liberal' - it almost sounds like profanity rolling off their mealy-mouthed tongues. I don't which word sets them off more - educated or liberal!

PS. Always loved Eliade! You wrote a nice forward to the recent edition of 'Shamanism'.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

You know something funny? As a man, nobody has ever said I have the wrong ideas, thoughts, or principles.

If I reversed them all, nobody would say I have the wrong ideas, thoughts or principles.

So apparently, as a man, I'm given free will, independence, and free thought.

I guess women didn't bother to get that right while working for equality. And, seeing who is fighting for women's rights, the current fighters don't even want that equality... weird.

it seems women should still have the same thoughts, ideas, principles, etc. as all other women. We've changed who should set these ideals, but the limits and controls remain (and apparently should remain).

I'm just curious what the whole hubbub about equality was when all you wanted was a different group of people forcing women to toe the line?

This article has more fallacious reasoning than most. It is amazing how low the University of Chicago has fallen as an intellectual institute if this woman's writing is an example of the University's intellectual prowess.

I used to actually think the University of Chicago was a high level academic institution. Now, I realize it is just another bastion of incoherent political correctness.

I'm sure it's been said, but keep up the good work. Get this and similar pieces published widely. Every little bit is a blessing to the GOP ticket.

If you really keep it up, maybe you can help clean up academia. If more people notice the useless postmodernist frauds running universities, maybe there will be a serious movement toward reform.

My God, what is happening to America?

Palin has yet to answer questions from a serious reporter about her beliefs and her record... yet she's Presidential material because she's a great liar and a hockey mom.

Creeping American fascism.

There is irony, which will probably be missed by Ms Doniger, that the rules for posting prohibit personal attacks. I guess saying, "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman" isn't really a personal attack. I might reply, that Ms Doniger's greatest hypocracy is the pretence that she has a brain but it explains why she works in a university. But that would probably be considered too personal. Oh well, liberals run this ship and make the rules so contrary opinions are suppressed. And the rules somehow never apply to the liberals.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her (Palin's pretense that she is a woman." Only an educated liberal is capable of making such a stupid comment. The greater pity is that she has no idea how ridiculous she appears.

In terms of the essay's central argument, if you read it carefully, you will notice that Prof. Dolinger does the very thing that she condemns. She claims, as her title states, "all beliefs are welcome, unless they are forced on others." However, she offers her understanding of the nature of religious beliefs as the only correct guide by which religious citizens ought to engage the public square. So, ironically, no other belief about beliefs is welcome, except hers. Thus, she is "forcing" her belief about beliefs on others.

Dear God,
I pray for Wendy right now. I pray that she would come to know you and you would soften her heart now to your Truth. Lord, show her who you are, reveal youself to Wendy so she can glorify you and be a testimony of who you are so her story can reach others. Amen.

All I can do is pray.

What you're really afraid of is anyone with conviction, anyone with a real belief.
In fact you are being rather forceful yourself with your own opinion: "I object strongly when someone tries to take their theology public..."
The real hypocrisy here is in the professor of the history of religions who believes one's religion is only carried out in the ivory towers.

By the way, the seperation of church and state is not in the constitution. It's from a letter written by Thos. Jefferson.

You'd think a shrill professor in a divinity school would know what.

Woman, you are a disaster. It's not in the mother-lovin' constitution.

Wow. You have absolutely no idea how out of touch you are.

Keep it up. If people get the idea that Obama supporters are people like you, and McCain will win in a landslide.

Oh my goodness! You are again repeating rumors that simply are not true. Palin didn't cut funding for a transitional home for pregnant women. She actually drastically increased their funding!

Next, while preganancy "should" be a private matter, Palin had no choice but to "out" her daughter since the nut roots were going nuts over speculation that Trig was actually her daughter's baby. If Palin hadn't admitted her daughter's pregnancy the nut roots would have banged her over the head for that too! Plus, it's pretty obvious and everyone in Alaska already knew. Pregnancy isn't something to be hidden; it's not a nasty dirty little thing. Bristol made an error in judgment and is holding up to the responsibility of the consequences of that action. Big deal!

Now, if preganancy is a private matter, why are you critizing Palin for making her own decision not to announce her own pregnancy? There weren't any rumors running around then; there weren't any people standing in mass waiting to pounce on her.

You forgot Barack Obama's comment that if his daughters made a mistake, he didn't want them "punished" with a baby. Babies aren't punishment; but they surely can be a result of teenage sex. If one is old enough to engage in sex, they are old enough to bear the responsibilities that come with that choice.

By admitting that life begins at conception, Joe Biden is saying that he condones murder of unborn children for the convenience of the mother. Sarah Palin has not insisted that her choices must be other people's choices; she's only stated her beliefs that abortion is wrong.

Quoting:

[A LITTLE ADVICE:
I'm an Obama supporter, and after reading all these comments absolutely trashing you, I want to come to your defense. But you've made it impossible. You're not helping the cause. This kind of article is best written on a faculty blog for those of us who already see the light. When dealing with the public, it's best to deal with facts and easily understandable arguments in a positive, affirming way. We have to promote Obama the way they promote Scientology -- make it look fun for the masses. Like an elite club. The little people identify with Sarah Palin because she's not very bright or accomplished, just like them. When people like you attack her, they feel hurt themselves.

Remember, if every smart person in America votes for Obama (and they will), he'll still lose. He needs dumb people too -- like the ones commenting here.]

I assume you're being sarcastic, but just can't tell. Either way, congratulations are in order. Either this is one of the best trolling posts I've seen, or you have submitted one of the most unintentionally ironic comments in recent memory. Good work!

what a petty person you are. not only small minded but ignorant as well. it seems that your misplaced faith in Obama has made you a very angry person. What a shame.
too bad we are not as perfect as you are but you fail to sell and you leader fails to close.

Folks, try to leave global warming out of this. It may prove to be right. And the Left can be right a couple times every century. Remember, a broken clock is right twice a day, to the tune of about two minutes.
Unfortunately for Ms. Doniger, a broken clock has to have intact hands and legible numbers to be even accidentally correct. With her terrible logic AND wrong "facts", she's in danger of missing both.

After weeks of reading this column regularly, I have come to the conclusion that Newsweek and WaPo - if they are determined to feature only agendized liberal "believers" or non-believers under a vague idea of "faith", always mixed with politicis - are wasting their time.

This screed is ungenerous and unreadable, and has nothing to do with faith except as it may be experienced through a political lens, and with due prostration before the sacrament of abortion.

I think I'm done reading this drivel.

So let me see if I've got this right. Only functional agnostics and atheists should have any say in public policy? How convenient.

Where, pray tell, does the right to abortion; or privacy for that matter. Moreover, where in the Bible does it advocate for abortion.

I love that you embrace Biden's position. "I believe life begins at conception and I believe it is absolutely moral and right to take and innocent life, if it is not actually breathing independently of its mother." his position is a purely political cop out. If life begins at conception than it is immoral to take that life, no different than taking that life when it is one day, one week, etc post delivery.

It is nice to see that what you really teach is your politics.

You, 'Professor' are a vile POS.

Clearly the professor's skills are misplaced-- she should be teaching a course in diplomacy, tact, and bridge building. (NOT!) She has learned well how to throw stones... what's the line from scripture about throwing stones... she should know it--unless as a professor of religions she hasn't studied the Bible.

Have gun...will travel...wire Palin...Juneau

I particularly enjoyed how the author of this column, while decrying any attempt to force one's individual religiously informed moral convictions on others, also seems to view restricting gun ownership rights as a moral good. Wouldn't the "correct" view, based on the substance of the argument, be that Ms Doniger should herself refuse to own a gun but count that a personal conviction, not to be imposed on others?

Of course, this is a glaring inconsistency. But is this example of enforced morality sufficient to alter Doniger's gender? At what point would she lose the title of "woman"? Are there objective rules for this game, or can we willy-nilly deny women their claims to femininity on any privately-held standard of gender-appropriateness we deem relevant?

Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. The Republican party's cynical calculation that because she has a womb and makes lots and lots of babies (and drives them to school! wow!) she speaks for the women of America, and will capture their hearts and their votes, has driven thousands of real women to take to their computers in outrage. She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women.

How elitist of you. You are a fraud.

It is intereesting that such a blog would be posted by someone from a divinity school. As if you talk or speak for religious people...demoncrats yes but not for religious people as a whole. I personally as a United Methodist pastor appreciate Sarah Palin's faith and what she brings to the table as a conservative republican. It is also clear from the movement and bounce in the polls that a lot of Americans share my sentiments and not yours. It will remain to be seen as whether the democrats or republicans prevail this fall. I for one pray that Obama fails in his historic attempt...not because he is black but because he is wrong for America as a liberal and as a socialist/communist organizer. Most Americans are not going to support his vision for America once they continue to see more clearly who and what he is. To attack the fact that Sarah Palin is a woman shows that the vision of reality both in terms of politics and in matters of faith is to be highly questioned when liberal "theologians" speak what they see as "truth". Sarah Palin may or may not bring a win home for republicans and for America but she will have represented women well. I know it irks liberal women that people like McCain or Palin or other conservatives have a different vision for answers on women's issues than they do but there are more of us than you might like or appreciate. My wife and most of the women in my congregation do not stand for the women's issues that the liberals espouse...and I apprecaite their feminity and womanliness much more than that of those who insist that a woman believe in the right to choose as the central issue of their time. Women should have the right to choose...whether to have sex or not...once the baby is conceived they should experience the natural consequences of that and have the baby...period. Have blessed day.

Careful Wendy, your political agenda is showing.

Since when does a parent control everything a child does? Just because her daughter got pregnant doesn't mean Sarah Palin doesn't believe in abstinence. How many children in your life have you been able to control? And where did Palin "hide" her pregnancy? She worked through it to prove that she was not "handicapped" by it to the world of men, who, like you, are so quick to throw barbs at a woman.

She most certainly does have the same problems as other working women. How to balance having children with a career, feeling awful about missing a child's game or event, working through pregnancy knowing that men (and apparently, some women) look down on her for that. Did you ever feel any of those pains?

Perhaps you should take a look at the historical perspective of the cooling and warming of the earth- over the span of several million years, before you adopt so quickly the Inconvenient lies about global warming being caused by fossil fuel emissions. No, Sarah Palin did not get God’s word about global warming- she read about it from scientists who have debunked Al Gore’s theories. And by the way, here’s a proven fact. Cows produce more gas- methane- that damages the ozone layer and creating "warming" than all the fossil fuels combined. Perhaps we need to rid the world of cows.

You really believe that Obama "defended" Palin's family's right to privacy? If you believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. Who exactly do you think has been digging up as much dirt as possible on Palin, and accused her of "covering up" her daughter's pregnancy by pretending the baby was hers? The Obama camp, that's who. Haven’t you read about the reporters flying in droves to Alaska to see what negatives they could find on Palin? SHE is only the vice presidential candidate. But because she is a Republican, all bets are off. I wonder if she will try to hide all the documentary evidence about her life that is missing and -inexplicably- unavailable from the public eye about Obama, such as his Occidental College records, Columbia College records, Harvard College records, Selective Service registration, Illinois Senate records (showing the vast majoirty of his votes which did not take a stand but said “present,” certified copy of his birth certificate, all published Harvard Law Review articles, and record of Baptism, to name a few.

But back to the last point-if you think it was admirable that Obama said to lay off Palin’s family and children, why are YOU bringing them up?

And what is your problem with a presidential candidate who tries not to be dogmatic about every issue, and give a little where is makes sense to the average rational human being? i.e. abortion in the case of rape, incest or saving the life of the mother. Are you so dogmatic that you can say abortion is correct in ALL circumstances? Tell me, are you in favor of partial birth abortion for babies who are 7 months along, who are born alive, and either killed or left to die? Have you even seen what happens in a partial birth abortion?

Please do show me where, McCain and Palin (who after all, is running for VICE president, a fact which seems to escape the liberal media today) are forcing their views on others, when even you admit that McCain is not seeking to overturn Roe v. Wade.

"Pretense that she is a woman"? As a woman, you should be ashamed. You can take Palin to task all your want for political reasons, but your article is simply a hypocritical personal attack under the guise of alleged faith. And as a Catholic, Palin is representing her faith far more than Biden, or apparently, you.

But perhaps most important of all, none of these attacks deflect from the fact that Obama is clearly unqualified to be president. Sarah Palin is so threatening that the left now resorts to personal attacks instead of dealing with the issues. Shame on you.

I challenge the Washington Post to print this.
Diane Kanca

Sad, anyway here is a good column to read
http://dougwils.com/index.asp?Action=Anchor&CategoryID=1&BlogID=5845

Wow! It appears that Professor Doniger needs a course in anger management. She obviously has some big issues to deal with; perhaps a tad bit of prayer would be in order.
Regards,
Susan Bachmann
Jacksonville, Fl

Sad that you believe that it is Sarah who "outed" her own pregnant daughter to the nation. You can thank the liberal media (and pathetic partisan hacks such as yourself) for that shameless bit of muck-raking.

When people like you think they can define what a "real woman" is, it makes my stomach turn, because you obviously wouldn't have a clue. A real woman is one who is strong enough not to be cowed into you narrow idea of what is acceptable for how a woman should behave or what she should believe.

So, to Ms. Doniger, a woman who is anti-abortion is perforce NOT A WOMAN.

Okaaayyy.

Backing away, not making eye contact.

Clearly, Ms. Doniger, you are out of touch. You seem to represent a minority of elitist, left-wing, women in your opinions just like the rest of the Palin haters and that can be seen a mile away. It is you who is completely out of step with the American people. But hey, keep writing hate pieces on Palin, it only serves to help her get more votes.

There seems to be much agreement in these comments. Ms. Doniger is obviously not worth our time. However, I wanted to add my voice and increase the total number of comments.. Ms. Doniger is elite, obviously. Better than me. She will remain unmoved by these comments. They will empower her. Convince her she is correct about the ignorance of the right. However, her blog post and the comments I read here, make my heart soar. Thanks Ms. Doniger for bringing so many thoughtful minds together! I respect your right to say such awful things...

Wow! I thought I had stumbled somehow into a Daily Kos thread. How did this drivel get thru the most basic stupidity filter of The Washington Post? Let me guess, this woman must have tenure.

Like so many on the elitest left, Wendy, you hide behind the pretense of toleration and enlightenment, but,in reality, are an intolerant, hateful,intellectual midget. Not only that, you lefties will buy any hoax, such as global warming. Learn to think for yourself. Get out of your echo chamber, and stop being a sheep.

I am stunned that someone might pay you for your thoughts.

From the first sentence, your article is ridiculous and fallacious. And since I do not have the time or pages of space to easily refute nearly every statement you make, I will focus on one.

Your attempted point that one's faith should remain only between one's self and their deity is completely absurd. If one has a belief about the ultimate being in the universe, and a moral code that ultimately comes from that being and that relationship, then the idea of that relationship being something to be kept quiet about is absurd. That goes double for a person who is going to be making decisions on behalf of an entire country. But let's be honest. What you really have a problem with is that Palin's faith in Jesus leads her to a moral set that you feel uncomfortable with. It isn't her faith that bothers you. It is that she actually wants to live out what her faith teaches. That is why you spent most of your article on ad-hominem attacks.

Case in point: Obama has talked freely about his faith. In fact, his minister has appeared in the public media quite frequently in order to tell his theology, and in the beginning Obama supported this. Interestingly, you don't fault him for making his faith public. I wonder why? You should be ashamed of yourself, especially for attacking someone's faith. You should keep that private.

WOW - What have you been smoking ?
This is all jealousy, because Sarah is a young and very successful lady with a great loving family.
You on the other hand probably hasn't had a man since WW2 !!

p.s. please shave those pits and legs !!!

GO SARAH !!!

I'm an Obama supporter, and after reading all these comments absolutely trashing you, I want to come to your defense. But you've made it impossible. You're not helping the cause. This kind of article is best written on a faculty blog for those of us who already see the light. When dealing with the public, it's best to deal with facts and easily understandable arguments in a positive, affirming way. We have to promote Obama the way they promote Scientology -- make it look fun for the masses. Like an elite club. The little people identify with Sarah Palin because she's not very bright or accomplished, just like them. When people like you attack her, they feel hurt themselves.

Remember, if every smart person in America votes for Obama (and they will), he'll still lose. He needs dumb people too -- like the ones commenting here.

Sarah Palin is not a woman, and Joe Biden is.

Wow. You could have fooled me!

Most "Divinity" schools make a mockery of the term, and I see this esteemed academic is no different.

This is deconstructed critical theory nonsense at its finest.

You wrote: "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. The Republican party's cynical calculation that because she has a womb..."

Isn't having a womb a good sign that one is IN FACT a woman? She's not pretending to be a woman at all. She IS a woman.

Wow! I did not know that in the female chromosome also lied liberal ideology?! I guess I missed the memo on that one and the flood of scientific research to announcing that.

This is troubling for me because it means that my beautiful wife is actually not a woman. How did I not discover this in all our years of marriage?

Dr. Doniger, it's frightening that someone who is smart enough to be a professor at Harvard is so uninformed. Most, maybe all, of your "evidence" cited against Palin has already been debunked. Check out factcheck.org.

So Wendy,

Are you trying to get invited to some Hollywood parties or trying to get an anchor job at MSNBC? I hate to break it to you but while God may have given you their spite and small minds, He didn't give you the physical attributes to make either of those things happen. Sorry.

I wouldn't get too worried about Doniger's assertion that Palin's womanhood is a pretense. You are all assuming that Doniger assigns meaning to the word "woman". Whatever meaning she attaches to it, I bet it's not what most ordinary people (that is, non-academics) assign to it. I base this on something I found on her Wikipedia page. She is apparently the author of something called "Women, Androgynes, and Other Mythical Beasts".

So if women are mythical beasts, and Palin isn't a woman, that means she's real and possibly non-beastly.

Once you start to understand how academics of this sort use words to mean whatever they want, they appear less insane/intolerant, but quite a bit more foolish. Sort of like my three-year nephew who had a whole secret language for his toys. It was fun for him when playing in his room, just not terribly useful when he grew up and had to interact with other people.

Time for Doniger to put away childish things.

Please keep it up.....you will turn every women in Fly Over Country to the GOP

Wendy- how did you become so angry?

What a babbling idiot. Not even worth discussing, a complete waste of air.

This is the first time I've read or heard a lefty telling the world that a woman (a 'breeder'!) is not a woman if she's a Republican. I've seen it many times with Black Repub conservatives. It makes facts useless in the world we share with them because they think with their feeeelings, every time.
Someone please tell poor Wendy that the VP cannot overturn Roe v Wade.

Much of what the distinguished professor has proved to be lies (Factcheck.org) and is a 'personal attack' on Sarah Palin. Please see your own policy on posting standards that's copied and pasted below:

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

Your comments are not surprising considering of your station in life, i.e. a professor at a "prestigious" university. Have you questioned Barack Obama's authenticity as a black man as you did Palin's authenticity as a woman? You are shrill and irrelevant.

So, then you're against gay marriage inflicted on those of who voted against it in California?

Huh - does this mean Bill Clinton was a woman, since he was on the "right" side of all these issues?

Wow - that makes him the first black president, woman president, lesbian president...the list just goes on and on with him, doesn't it?

Wow, Prof. Doniger is insane.

Almost nothing save for the spelling of Palin's name is true in the first few paragraphs attributing all sorts of evil to the Governor.

She did not out her daughter, her daughter was being accused of having mothered the baby, and that her daughter was five months pregnant is proof that the accusation from the Left was impossible.

She supports non-abstinence sex education and has funded it in her state.

She has funded, never cut, teen pregnancy programs.

She is everything a woman can be.

She doesn't speak for women? She speaks for herself, a woman; and millions of women are supporting her as evidenced by the tens of millions of dollars flooding into the McCain campaign from small donations.

Global warming in our solar system may have something to do with the SOLAR part. . . only a college professor would think otherwise.

Polar bears are thriving in Alaska, much to the chagrin of Al Gore and Doniger.

And wanting to deny gun ownership is to strip Americans of constitutional guarantees. . . why not take away their freedom of speech while you're at it.

The Associated Press has shown that Palin has never tried to ban books nor has she fired nor tried to fire any librarian.

And to think this Doniger received tenure?

One can only see Donigers accusatory and hateful column for what it is. . . envy.

They shall call evil good, and good evil. Doniger take note.

Thanks for clarifying the fact that you aren't a real woman unless you want to kill your children. And if any of them happen to survive, you certainly wouldn't want to be seen driving them to school - that would just be so...common. After all, isn't that what nannies are for?

Wendy - does it ever cross your elitist mind that some people actually enjoy their children and cherish the time they spend with them or do you just view them as a bloody pile of tissue to be thrown out with the rest of the trash?

>>>>
Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. The Republican party's cynical calculation that because she has a womb and makes lots and lots of babies (and drives them to school! wow!) she speaks for the women of America, and will capture their hearts and their votes, has driven thousands of real women to take to their computers in outrage. She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women.

Wendy Doniger is not a biologist - so I'll not take her word on who is and who is not a woman. The line of reasoning that goes: "If you don't think the assigned way for your gender/race/sexuality etc. - then you are not actually part of that group." exposes the moral, scientific, and logical bankruptcy of progressive group think.

On any level, in any situation, in any context this article is offensive, childish and disgusting to any civilized person.

Ever hear of a Rainbow? It's God's promise not to destroy the earth by flood, which is what all the global warming crowd say will happen. Whether you agree with Christianity or not, the Bible is what WE believe and therefore it is the basis of our faith and beliefs. Freedom of Religion guarantees that right. No where has Gov Palin ever threatened to force her opinion on anyone. Saying/Implying that is simple perpetuation of internet lies that have already been debunked.

This is the most hypocritical, ignorant, and hateful piece of opinion writing I have yet seen during this campaign. And that is saying a lot.

I would conclude that Ms. Doniger is simply deranged by her hatred and bigotry, but that would not account for the sheer stupidity and fallaciousness of her . . . "thoughts," nor for their ham-handed presentation. If my fourteen-year-old son wrote something this shallow, this fatuous, and this malicious, I would expect him to be failed. Even the grammar and punctuation are an embarrassment.

Ms. Doniger, although you somehow conned your way into a professorship at a supposedly distinguished university, you obviously are not very intelligent, and you are seething for all to see with hatred and prejudice. You should fervently thank whatever "god" you believe in for tenure. It surely isn't the God of the Bible or Christianity, about Whom you know nothing, along with the Constitution or the woman you have libeled.

Just another absurd, intolerate and bias attack on Sarah by those who will say or do anything to advance their political cause.

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH YOU PEOPLE??? Can't you see Ms. Doniger is only trying to protect us from a pit-bull with lipstick by pointing out what an extreme loon she is??? I mean I heard somewhere she's gonna outlaw vegetarians and FORCE them to eat moose. THIS WOMAN (er non-woman) MUST BE STOPPED AT ALL COSTS!!!

/sarc-off

As usual you liberals do not have a clue. Since most of you have never heald a real job. You sit in your colleges talking theory while real Americans live their lives. Most people rrespect her for standing up for her views. Christians want our children to practice abstinence but we forgive and encourage them when they fall short. These are the lives of most Americans.

Also most Catholic Americans (by that I mean people who actually go to church) find Nancy P and Joe Biden's failure to follow the tenants of their faith while still calling themselves Catholic disgusting.

It is sad that someone as ill informed, opinionated and ignorant as Wendy Doniger is teaching our children. And we wonder what is wrong with our schools today?

Considering the fact that much of this author's "facts" have been proven false by FactCheck.Org, one has to wonder if she got her degree from a box of CrackerJacks.

She may actually want to read the Bible before tell the resting of us what others believe and then criticize them for it.

Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman.

Is that so? You could have fooled me. BTW, what are you? And how are we to know it?

Wow, so since she believes in protecting the lives of innocent unborn children she isn't really a woman?

Hate to break it to you, but working class women are MORE pro-life than university women. But you keep clinging to that out-of-touch and out-of-date mantra that the only thing that matters to women is abortion.

But don't try to speak for me or other "working-class" woman. We are too busy raising our families, working and keeping it all together while our "sisters" at the universities waggle their fingers and attempt to tell the world they represent us. You don't, Sarah Palin does, end of story. Please sweetie, go put on some lipstick and stop worrying about us out here in the real world. It is obvious that you haven't a clue about what we think, feel or believe.

You are a faculty member at a School of Divinity?

Yeah, Gov. Palin is no woman, all right. Funny how I never saw a picture like this of the esteemed Mrs. Doniger:

http://perfunction.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/09/11/palin_piper_homecoming.jpg

Dr. Doniger --

Please accept my apologies for some of the truly crass comments left for you. They do nothing to add to a discussion -- or even a dismissal.

My comment is this -- reinforcing one of the other earlier civil commenters:

If you truly are an educated woman (which you appear to be by virtue of your position, and presumedly your credentials) the misinformation you so caustically displayed in your article is difficult to understand.

While your opinion is just that, your use of factual misinformation and presumption to attack Sarah Palin embarrasses you, your university and the Washington Post.

Do you really believe all those Pain horror stories that are chain-mailed across the net? Didn't someone tell you the basic net rule -- veracity is inversely proportional to the number of exclamation points -- (just as a starting point)?

Let your fingers do the walking and do some fact checking Dr. Doniger. You become a parody of what you accuse Mrs. Palin of: Ignorant.

You are a professor?

Your sophomoric smears aimed at Mrs. Palin are the stuff of dorm bull sessions, not enlightened thought.

Global Warming (and cooling) has been happening ever since there was a globe, and the influence of man-produced chemicals (CO2 is a pollutant??? Talk to the folks in your biology and Chemistry depts please) is so minimal as to be immeasurable. The Warmist/Alarmist scare is nothing but a control mechanism of the Left to scare people into being controlled by a central authority.

Speaking of taking 'theology' into the public sphere, that is precisely what Warmists are doing. They seek to control the actions of others thru their belief system. Global
Warming is NOT science. Current evidence points to Global Cooling, but control-freak Leftists will always seek a mechanism to run the lives of others. Especially those Leftists who live in the surreal world of the Academic sub-culture.

The desire for abstinence applies only to unmarried persons, but surely you knew that. Find me a Christian who believes in abstinance during marriage please? I go to church every Sunday and I have yet to meet one. As for her daughter not being abstinent. Mrs Palin has discovered what all we parents know. Kids have a tendency to do what they want and not necessarily what they're told. Were you aware of that professor? Abstinence works when it is put into practice, every time.

As for the US Constitution, Liberals like you dont respect the Constitution as written, they only respect the Constitution as interpreted by dishonest judges, who will twist and turn and plain make up wording to suit their tastes. Their is no prohibition in the Constitution as written against any governmental entity prohibition abortion. It is just not in there.

LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is. My pursuit of happiness includes a desire is that controlling liberals will stay out of my life, my wallet and my pursuits....and not kill unborn humans.

Jack Coles
Austin, TX

The Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School seems pretty bitter about Sarah Palin's "hypocrisy" about a perceived use of religious faith to promote political goals. In reality, it was a bunch of disproved internet hoaxes about Palin's supposed imposition of her values in public office that has spawned such assumption. While criticizing Palin, the "distinguished professor" uses her own credentials in the public arena which is the exact abomination that she supposedly abhors.

Codified law has always been the imposition of a culture's moral values on society, if they are a reflection of the culture's religious foundation so be it. It has been as such since Hammurabi, Leviticus, Justinian, Napolean et al.

If we were a tribal or barbarian society even then the cultural and religious traditions we hold would be imprinted upon our rituals though they may not have been written down.

From her writing I can just imagine the useless drivel her students must endure.

All Beliefs Welcome, Unless They are Forced on Others

Ah. I see. Like the Global Warming hoax.

You leftists want to prosecute deniers Inquisition style and deny climatogolists a license to practice their chosen career if they DARE question the existence of man-made global warming. How very tolerant of you.

In the words of Camille Paglia, there is "a disturbing trend in the Democratic Party, which has worsened over the past decade. Democrats are quick to attack the religiosity of Republicans, but Democratic ideology itself seems to have become a secular substitute religion. Since when did Democrats become so judgmental and intolerant?"

Indeed, when did they Ms. Doniger?

"I don't presume to be able to answer these kinds of theological questions." ...If I remember correctly, the question was: "When does life begin?"

This is a straightforward question, and one that can be answered scientifically. That is, directly through empirical evidence. If I may paraphrase McCain's answer, life begins at conception. That is scientific FACT. Short and sweet. The fact that Obama twists it into some kind of shapeless theological question speaks to his ability to dodge any and all questions that he feels his answer would cause the public to rethink his Messiah status.

"She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women." ...Forgive me, but this is foolish.

She does not speak for women ON THE LEFT, but she indeed does speak for millions of women. Women who think differently from you. Women are allowed to think for themselves, aren't they? Or shall we herd them all into your camp, lock the door, and demand they vote like you?

You are out of touch with many Americans. Being a conservative in NYC I know MANY women who think like you. They are my friends, and they are my family. I also know MANY women who completely identify with Sarah Palin. She indeed speaks for them.

Perhaps you should step out of your cocoon once and a while, and have lunch with a conservative woman from time to time, because you regurgitations of the stereotypical Leftist talking points and mantras is not only laughable... it has blinded you to reality.

Such a rant proves that a high flying education won't protect you from morons. My goodness, what tripe, what ignorance. No time for facts. Unbelieveable.

I sent an email to this pathetic lunatic.
Methinks she doth Project too much and it's obvious that Envy is her deadly sin. I believe it was Kevin Spacey's sin in his psycho role in the movie, Seven.
Dante would agree. 'Nuff said.

(sniff,sniff)....phewwww !!...douche much,sweetcheeks?

I checked out Wendy's homepage at the U0fC....and I kid you not, she has written a book called "Horses for Lovers, Dogs for Husbands." That explains a lot.

If this is what passes for intelligent political discourse on the Left, or intelligent religious discourse from a "Professor of the History of Religion" then both the Democrats and the Academy are doomed. This woman obviously has no understanding of religion or the meaning of hypocrisy, or even the effective use of rhetoric. She can't even make an intelligent argument. How she ever got to be a professor of anything anywhere is amazing.

William Ayers is a tenured professor of education at the University of Chicago, no?
And this confers intellectual integrity on the institution how?
I'd sooner take my chances on a bloated can of tuna fish than with the UoC brand.

["...]personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site."

If the subject article were posted as a comment it sould qualify as under consideration for removal from the site.

Pure fat idiot. I AM SARAH PALIN! SHE SPEAKS FOR ME!

Gee, what a surprise she is from the University of Chicago, one of the highest contributors to the Obama campaign.

Please just tell me where in the Constitution it gives one the right to murder?

Hey, Palin2012:
Yeah, but you know, that's part of Obama's new integrity in politics, didn't you hear? LOL...

Another unhinged leftie.

no wonder you are afraid to give birth - you are really ugly!!! Sorry, I am a pig without lipstick.

I've got an idea. Let's drop a bevy of researchers in Chicago to check out Doniger's dossier like the Dem's did Palin: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122098190668515511.html?mod=John-Fund-on-the-Trail
But ours would be hampered by that old thing called honesty. Nevermind.

Fat, liberal, and stupid is no way to go through life, Wendy.

But you see no problem forcing your socialist views on us, another angry, UGLY, jealous old hag.

The greatest hypocrisy of this column is its pretense that it has researched for this piece at all. It literally took me 30 seconds using google to find a credible source to debunk several of your assertions. Factcheck.org has an article presciently titled, "Sliming Palin" in which it checks the veracity of the many claims made against Ms. Palin on the Internet. The very first bullet point debunks the "fact" that she cut funding. She, in fact, raised it quite substantially.

She also, in fact, never attempted to ban any books. The list of books that you are referring to even included books that hadn't even been published at the time she was elected.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html

A woman isn't a real woman unless she agrees with your views? The intolerance of that statement is striking, especially since you seem to be using tolerance as part of your argument against Ms. Palin's supposed attempt to force her religious views on you.

This article is below the historical standards of this once great publication.

So Ms. Palin is "not a woman"? What exactly is Sarah then?

A robot?
An android?
A computer animation?

Your title at the University of Chicago Divinity School may very well be the "Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions", but there is nothing distinguished about you. This piece shows that you are clearly a piece of garbage.

Fat, liberal, and stupid is no way to go through life Wendy.

"Her pretense that she is not a woman"

easy enough, compare photos of this professor and Sarah Palin:(caution, contrast alert, view at your own risk)

Doniger
http://media.collegepublisher.com/media/paper983/stills/3e938f7d23f21-2-1.jpg

Palin
http://crucialtaunt.com/politics/images/SarahPalin380tall.jpg

What pathetic drivel.............no, you are right , she is not a woman BUT those transgender folks , now they are WOMEN!!!
Liberal lunacy runs amok and as professor at a college this airhead proves why dumbing down and lack of morality plagues America.

You are an elitist out of touch Chicago democratic hack disquising yourself in the name of religion. You are so hypocritical it is disqusting!!! Where is your concern for the pitiful lives the victims of Chicago gangbangers (of whom Obama wants to lessen penalities) or women living in the dreadful housing projects that Obama and his buddies left in your city. Reflect on that when you are munching on your arugula. And yes, try shopping in Wal Mart and get new glasses. You and your friends and cost Obama the election!!!

Wow, I'm glad I don't go to U Chicago! Guess their school isn't as good as I thought. Of course, what do I know? I'm just a hispanic girl working my way through college and I LOVE Palin...maybe I'm not a woman either? Please help me professor! Tell me what I really want as an American woman!

perfect example of a lefty running in circles and ending up biting their own butt again. i guess they are so smart we do not understand their inverted logic.

"I am on record in this blog (and have not budged an inch) as not objecting to any candidate's religious views."

So not judging is the ultimate sign of morality? That seems a little suspect. What if one of the candidate's religions was Satanism? Or Nazism? Would you still refuse to judge?

"As for sex, the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people"

Not really sure what she could have done here, as the press was reporting it, so she put out a press release explaining the situation. I guess you think she should've not taken the VP slot in order to prevent her daughter's pregnancy from becoming national news? Maybe she had this crazy weird idea that her and her daughter would be treated with a minimum of respect and not JUDGED. Oh look, there's that word.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

What an extraordinary statement! This is the greatest example I've seen recently where a political enemy has been turned into "the Other". She's not a woman... haha, haha! Good one! Of course, she is a woman, just simply one with different political views than you. I know, I know, that's frightening to you.

"She does not speak for women;"

Do you?

"she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women."

Please demonstrate any kind of FACTS to back up this OPINION.

"global warming, she thinks, is not the work of human hands,"

So the crime is believing that global warming is not the work of human beings? I think global warming is the new religion here. Don't question its precepts or you will be ostracized (but not burned at the stake, since that would increase carbon output).

"not to mention all the people who will be shot with the guns that she thinks other people ought to have"

Hmmm... where did I see a quote that would fit just perfectly here? Where was that... a blog, a newspaper... oh yeah, I remember, it was Wendy Doniger: "It's in the mother-lovin' Constitution." Perfect!

"her determination to legislate against abortion even in cases of rape"

Again, please provide evidence of her supposed attempts to legislate an abortion ban... we're waiting [foot tapping]. Methinks we're going to be waiting a long time.

"her attempts to ban books, including books on evolution"

Welcome to 96 hours ago. This has already been completely debunked. She did ask the librarian what would be her reaction to a request for banning certain books, but she never banned books, never provided a list, etc., etc. You'd think somebody who's going to a post an article for the ENTIRE WORLD TO SEE would try to get their facts a little straighter. And FYI, that "list" that's going around on the Internet of purported books Palin wanted to ban? It's a fake. It includes books that were published AFTER Palin was still Mayor. Lies on the Internet? Whodda thunk? :)

"to fire the librarian who stood against her."

Apparently, it had nothing to do with the book ban inquiry, but instead was a test of loyalty. The librarian was rehired the VERY NEXT DAY.

"it's evident that almost her only qualification in the minds of McCain & co.is her family."

Right. It had nothing to do with the fact that she's an expert on domestic energy production while we're in the midst of record high energy prices. Nothing at all.

"Moreover, it's hard to square Palin's attitudes to both family privacy and abortion with the shifting policies of McCain himself,"

Right, so McCain's lack of clarity and consistency should be MATCHED by Sarah Palin? That'd make you feel better? Do you believe that all VP candidates should have views that EXACTLY match those of the person at the top of the ticket?

"But he has gone out of his way to insist that he would not impose his personal views on others... That is the right answer."

Is it? So when I say that someone should die for committing murder, is that imposing my personal views on others? If I say that I think rape is wrong, is that imposing my personal views on others? Where does the non-judgmentality end?

What if you think all killing is wrong and thus you actively oppose all wars? Is that imposing your personal views on others?

I think Prof. Doniger is a little fact-challenged on Gov. Palin's views and history. Maybe she needs to read a better newspaper--or visit a better class of blogs. I suggest factcheck.org. When she has a little better command of the facts, she might write a more temperate comment.

This is bearing false witness and simple-mindedness of the first order. Apparently, Ms. Doniger believes everything she hears or reads if it lines up with her radical religious and political views, which she apprently has no compunction about seeking to mandate.

The notion that Sarah Palin does not speak to working class women is risible. Unlike Ms. Doniger, a member of the intelligentsia, if apprently not very intelligent, Palin is a working woman, the daughter of two public school teachers. Hers is a remarkable "only in America" story of a self-made woman who is making a real difference in the lives of her constituents.

Perhaps in your next column you can point to the clause in the Constitution to which you so assertively refer.

My word, this is living proof that there actually is a Palin Derangement Sydrome. What is most disturbing is that a person like Wendy Doniger is in a position supported by our taxes to influence our children. This article is petty lunacy.

Palin is a hypocrite for "outing" her pregnant daughter instead of letting the NY Times do it? Yet not a word of rebuke for that same NY Times running with three articles on the daughter's pregnancy on the front page.

This is followed by a string of lies, almost all of which have been refuted (Palin did not fire the librarian for not banning books, you ignoramus).

But there is hope. Doniger holds up the savior of women -- Joe Biden. The intellectual bankruptcy of feminism as a liberal fetish has never been made more clear than by this article. Palin isn't a 'real' woman because she dares disagree with Doniger. Who put Doniger in charge of making that decision?

This commentary on Sarah Palin is exactly what i would expect from someone teaching in a college today. I don't know where to start with all the blatant hypocrisy in this commentary.

Perhaps Wendy you should look out the college windows every now and then and see how the real world works. Obviously Sarah Palin revealed her daughter was pregnant because she wanted to control the issue, not let some rag like the Washington Post or the National Enquirer (comparison intentional) try to get a scoop and use it as a political gotcha moment.

You've also been reading the Democratic talking points memo, because Gov. Palin increased funding for teenage mothers in Alaska, she never tried to ban books or press her religious beliefs on anyone.

Oh and she IS a working class woman. She doesn't pretend or claim to speak for anyone. The media is making that assertion.

As for Global Warming, Gov. Palin never claimed it was divinely caused. Your assertion that there are only two possible causes of the phenomenon show your skewed view of the subject. Perhaps it's a cycle the earth goes through. Since our weather records of the world are less than accurate going back farther than 100 years, (no satellites, radar or weather balloons) it's impossible to know for sure. In fact, it's very obvious that the earth has had tremendous swings in temperature throughout it's history. Remember the Ice Age? Greenland (gee how did it get that name?)

There is NO proof, none, that Global Warming is directly related to humanity. Any talk there is, is theory and speculation only.

Your right, her prayers for soldiers in harms way are SO OUTRAGEOUS. Note to self, remind Ms. Doniger about 9/11.

The fact that you think thousands of women are outraged about Gov. Palin being picked for VP shows how isolated and narrow your life is. N.O.W. should be praising Gov. Palin, but because she's not a liberal woman, she's not relevant and not helping women progress. Please.

AH, so it's not really about women, it's about liberal women. Just like it's not really the NAACP, it's the NAALCP. You can figure that out i'm sure. Right...and Oprah isn't bringing on Gov. Palin because she doesn't want her show to promote politics. HA. Just keep your eyes closed and continue wishing on that one.

Your silly insinuation about her lack of respect for the Constitution because she doesn't share your views on abortion is comical. There is nothing in the constitution that grants women a right to an abortion. However there is something I remember reading about the right to bear arms in the Constitution. That one isn't left to interpretation.

As for Joe Biden, he wouldn't know a practicing Catholic if they handed him a communion waffer. His recently found opinion on when life begins is as transparent as his record. How convenient he came to this decision only after being faced with the popularity of Gov. Palin. to women. He's on the record saying just the opposite for his entire career.

As for problems facing older women in the world...everyone has challenges Ms. Doniger. Whether young or old, male or female, healthy or physically challenged, married or single.

Intelligent individuals just don't look to the government to solve them.

Professor at a Divinity school? This gal would have kindergarteners confused with her inane logic. Folks, this post ain't worth you good time responding to.
One of many errors: if Roe v. Wade is in the Constitution, then so is Dred Scott !
Some responders hit it on the nail: it's all jealousy. Wonder what the Bible says about that?

As a Seminary student, about to go into full time pastoral ministry, I have to admit that I am glad that you are not my teacher. I find it interesting that you use points that are not facts and you use rhetoric that proves your views are more enlightened by left-wing blogs then by facts.

What would you say is a woman ma'am. Because someone doesn't believe like you do she isn't a woman? May there be many women like that! I would appreciate you keep your views "private" and not push your beliefs on the rest of us. How I miss people who actually used logic in their arguments! When you stumble on a thought that makes sense, I look forward to reading it!

Judging from the comments, Palin's support is pretty impressive.

I certainly could be mistaken, but I think we've seen the turning point in this election.

fat dumb libs like you give women a bad name ...

You want to point out the word abortion in the Constitution? Because I am almost certain the writers never imagined we would be killing our unborn children, and certainly never intended give us a constitutional right to do so.

Aren't you glad your mother didn't abort you?

Harvard@Cal writes:

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

Hmmmm, double X chromosome set: Check
Female reproductive organs: Check
Determination: She is a woman.

What is it with collectivist/lefties that simple disagreement is not allowed, one has to be airbrushed out of existance, a la Uncle Joe Stalin? Is it the logic that if you invalidate the Others very identity, you don't have to engage in their argument? Sounds like cowards and hacks to me."

It's a good point and the reasons are twofold (Leaving out the obvious third reason: intellectual dishonesty.)

1. Many on the left regularly generalize about race and sex . The one who do appear to do it to validate their particular ideology about the groups they are commenting on. When an individual comes along who contradicts such views (Ward Connerly, Clarence Thomas, Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin, and many others) their vision of who comprises a group and the shared values of said groups is threatened. The only way they can repair the damage is to attempt to intellectually remove them from the group or publicly destroy the reputation of the individual.

And yes, I realize that this sounds an awful lot like the psychiatrist's explanation of Norman Bates at the end of Psycho. Make of that what you will.

2. A socialist view of the world An honest person with strongly held views about a group's supposed values, however narrow and dogmatic, would simply count those who don't fit into the mold as outliers. Unfortunately, I think that many on the left view people through the lens of collectivism, particularly social collectivism, that their capacity to recognize individualism is severely diminished.

Never mind that Palin isn't an outlier in terms of her general views (her toughness is another thing), the capacity to see Palin as a woman from a camp with different views is beyond some on the left because individualism to them is a limited spectrum of "choices" within a larger socio-ideological framework.

Marx could write about the proletariat from this viewpoint but Karl was partially blinded by the historical blinders of feudalism, which forced people into very static classes and roles. Doniger is writing from within a free-market society and a global economy which has rejected, for the most part, socialist dogma about social group think.

Politically it's still there though: "Iraqis/Arabs don't want/aren't ready for democracy (you see this one on the paleo right as well)." "Women are all predisposed towards 'feminism.'" "African-Americans all support Affirmative Action in all its guises." And so on and so on.

Doniger may think she's making an original observation or sounding/echoing some clarion callwith her nonsensical dismissal of Palin's womanhood. Instead, she's revealing herself as the exact kind of dogmatic, predicatable member of a class that her ideology forces her to accept.

She's trapped within her own prejudices and as such is unable to see Palin as an individual, and to marvel at her accomplishments while still disagreeing with specifics.

fat dumb libs like you give women a bad name ...

Wow. This column just proves that unless a woman believes in abortion as a sacrament, liberals will go all out to destroy and castigate you. Didn't liberal used to mean open minded? Guess it lost its way.
Also, Ms. Doniger knows absolutely nothing about the Christian faith. Oh, she may be able to cherry pick a thing or two, throw it out so she can earn her big salary at a university doing nothing, but an expert she is not. Ms. Doniger thinks it is a bad thing to LIVE your faith. I guess that separates the believers from the hypocrites now doesn't it.
And lastly, liberals and so-called femisists don't understand Christians. We don't kill people when they fall short. We lift them up. We care more about people than wolves. We don't equate killing the enemy with killing an unborn baby. Just a few things that Ms. Doniger doesn't understand. But then, when you live in a bubble in the maxist, elitist university system, why would you?

It was the founding fathers and the Constitution which explicitly gave the right to have guns... and the Declaration declares that one of the inalienable rights from God is the right to life-- indeed, it's one of the rights for which "governments are instituted among men"... ("...to secure these rights" it clearly states).

And they never foresaw the day when activist courts would give one class or group of citizens the right (implicitly stated as privacy)to take that life for which government exists to secure.

The woman's rights end where the unborn citizen's rights begin. It's that simple.

HuH! Are you nuts?

That professor 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 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?

Then they talk about this thing in the head; what's this they call it? [member of audience whispers, "intellect"] That's it, honey. What's that got to do with women's rights or negroes' rights? If my cup won't hold but a pint, and yours holds a quart, wouldn't you be mean not to let me have my little half measure full?

Then that little man in black there, he says women can't have as much rights as men, 'cause Christ wasn't a woman! Where did your Christ come from? Where did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! Man had nothing to do with Him.

If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down all alone, these women together ought to be able to turn it back , and get it right side up again! And now they is asking to do it, the men better let them.

Obliged to you for hearing me, and now old Sojourner ain't got nothing more to say.

- Sojourner Truth

Wendy Doniger proves Rush Limbaugh's Undeniable Truth of Life Rule #24 written in the mid-eighties which states that "feminism was established primarily to allow unattractive ugly women easier access to the mainstream of society".

Wow the hypocrisy is delicious. If Sarah had waited until the press outed the story (probably right as the story of her daughter was the mother story began to fade) this woman would be doing her same rant on the opposite side. She has not run on any of the issues or governed on any of the issues this lady so indignantly brings up. She lives her life base on her beliefs and people know and respect it. Another day and another unfounded vicious assault on Palin, the agony on the left is that she is so graceful and articulate in handling it, never playing the victim. Her quit wit undresses her opponents for all to see the emptiness of their attacks.

Sweet mother of mystery! The magnitude of this moonbat meltdown is truly staggering. It makes Chernobyl look like a measly detonator.

Why is it that,all these 'women' who castigate Sarah Palin are either hideous or,obese,or BOTH?!?!Their jealousy is telling and is quite pathetic.These 'women' whose accomplishments are puddle deep compared to Sarahs'is catty in nature,unfair in facts,and are as childish as the crybabies the far left radicals ALWAYS ARE!!Grow up,move on,and give your time to charity to cleanse your burdened souls that are overflowing with guilt,and pettiness.

When I see and hear Gov. Palin, I think, "American...All-American." When I read this column I think, "Communism," or perhaps "Socialism," or at least "Foreign."

I suggest the author would be much happier in another country.

Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty) is a moron.... oh yeah, she's got a bunch gobble-de-gook in her CV, most of which would only qualify her for working as clean up mopper at a slaughter house out in the real world.... only in the cocooned world of academia could an idiot savant like her get a "job".

So, whatever this blowhard has to say about Sarah Palin carries about as much weight as some hollyweird "actor" that maybe graduated from a high school.

Wendy,

Obviously you are a bitter woman clinging to your false idols, incense and hate of the Creator of the universe. Nowhere is abortion mentioned in the Constitution (do some reading). However, it is mentioned in the Bible as a SIN (do some reading).

As for global warming, I aplaud your FAITH in the FALSE religion of global warming. There is MUCH less proof of actual man-made warming than Jesus living His life here on Earth.

A liberal line I use all the time: Just because you say it does not make it so. DO SOME READING especially in the Bible for some real facts.

God still loves you.

We are all flawed my dear. So that we might learn mercy. Show mercy, not sacrifice... is a difficult lesson to learn for all of us.

Dear Professor Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty),
With all do respect, I am one of the millions of American women you seem to know so much about and are intent on speaking for. However, you do not speak for me and I suggest that you do some research into the amount of women who would stand opposite you on your opinions in this forum. I am one of those college educated women who have worked so hard to break through the glass ceiling. I too am also the mother of 4 children and take great pride in them. I am one of those women who have dealt with difficult situations, such as, having a daughter get pregnant in less than perfect circumstances. Are you accusing me of not teaching my children about sex education? Are you accusing me of not taking care of my responsibilities to my children because I worked and got a Master’s Degree while my children were growing up? I can tell you that while I strongly support abstinence, I also armed my children with all of the necessary weapons to keep them from falling into promiscuity or from getting and spreading serious life threatening/ending diseases or from underage pregnancies. I also taught them empathy for others (especially others viewpoints) and gave them the best moral compass that I could provide not for religions sake but because I loved them. Are you suggesting that I am not a woman? Or maybe you are suggesting that I am just not a true feminist woman because I believe that Gov. Palin would make an excellent Vice President? Throwing your religious teaching credentials in my face and telling me that I am less than or not a woman is insulting. I must say though that my young adult daughters are getting a lesson in how feminism and religion can be distorted by people who should know better. Using a so-named On Faith Forum as a political weapon to attempt to reprimand regular everyday mothers, daughters, sisters and grandmothers to be careful not to choose one of those “dangerous women” (you know those unconscionable pro-lifers) for a political office is not only awful it is condescending. Oh, and before you proclaim me a pro-life, rightwing religious fanatic and dismiss my views you may want to come visit cities and towns (and suggest that the Washington Post send reporters) outside of your own deafening and often one thinking academic cocoon. Like it or not I am one of those women like Gov. Palin and no matter how much you wish me away, say I do not exist or ridicule me, I’ll be voting my mind in this election.

Wow, a liberal professor that doesn't fact check!
Ten minutes of your time would have dispelled the "i got it from that e-mail that was forwarded to like a thousand people, so it must be true" so called facts in your article. The FACT that you do not believe a woman is a woman because she doesn't hold the same political beliefs as you is repugnant!
I truly do pray for any student that has to listen to your screed that they are able to see through the fog of liberalism and find the truth.

Note to you: Might consider changing the spelling of your name to "Windy".

Oh, my.
You've been spanked like a red headed stepchild.
Oh, the humanity....

You wrote: "Sarah Palin's views make me fear that the Republican party has finally lost its mind." The only rational response to the moral blindness of your position on abortion is to point out that it is better to have had a mind and lost it, than not to have had one, or, as seems the situation in your case, to have a mind and fail to use it.

With prayers that you might become aware of your own moral blind spot on this issue go my wishes for God's blessings.

Bringing one's views "out in public" as you say, is not the same as forcing one's views on other people. It's called freedom of speech, not to mention freedom of religion. And as VP Sarah Palin has no bearing on religion being set as law. Period. That would be congress, and the president. Nice try, tho.

Your supposed open-mindedness doesn't seem to be very solid when dealing with someone who's religious views don't mirror your all-religions-are-equal-and-valid-except-Christianity academic worldview.

This open-mindedness that you pride yourself on, is a fantasy. It's just a way for your to feel superior to those who have a set faith.

What an elitist hack you are.

What, you weren't getting enough love from Hindus alone so you had to spew this nonsense? Well, you got your wish. Now everyone in America to the right of Che is laughing at the senile old fool who posted it.

Your "logic" (I use the term loosely) has been eviscerated so thoroughly by others that I hardly need go into it. But tell me, if the Constitution "loves Mothers", why would it support abortion? That's one of the silliest assertions by leftist tools like you that I've ever read. Please: before you write anything again, make sure you can pass a Breathalyzer test. Have a 12-year old sanity-check your work. Do it for the children.

Wendy Doniger: Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is an intellectual.

The Barron

Wendy is a professor with irrational far left disjointed logic. She might reflect as a theologian on the scripture that says,"professing to be wise, they became fools."

It's not often you see someone so fully beclown herself in the national press.

Makes me wonder about the standards there at at the University of Chicago, which of course, makes me wonder whether or not our little Barry O. is actually qualified, since he is a "professor" there.

Hey Wendy,

Nice liptstick!

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

You Stay Classy, Girl.

Congratulations. You have managed to fit almost every Sarah Palin smear into one article without verifying any of them. Try visiting factcheck.org before you write your next article. BTW: will you be issuing a retraction any time soon? Didn't think so.

And how conveniient of Senator Biden to put his faith and personal views on conception/abortion aside in order to promote his political career. That certainly is an admirable trait.

After scanning the hundreds of comments, I'm sure you will be able to apply a label to those who commented and go on about your merry way, safe in the knowledge that we are all neocon extremists. Shame on you for your own intolerence.

Wow...how cool is it to have a stead stream of liberal a$$hats spew this sort of stuff?
Besides being just exactly what we need to help defeat "The One," it's very revealing of the true nature of feminism.

Ladies...it's not about you. It's about the leftist ideology. If you don't agree with "them" then you're not really even a woman. How's that for your freedom to choose?

As for the author of this vomit...I do have to admit, she's doing God's work...though perhaps not as she intended.

I am so sick of women like you assuming that you speak for women like me. I think you gals are about to become extinct. And, perhaps if you were so fortunate as to actually have a relationship with God, He might consider whispering truths in your ear also. My beloved and wise mother is fond of saying, "The bigger they are the harder they fall." I believe I see some Ivory Towers beginning to crumble.

GO GOVENOR PALIN !!!!

This country needs more women like you at the helm.

McCAIN-PALIN 08

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

Oh...my...

Did she actually say this? Palin's greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she's a...woman?!

I'm crying I'm laughing so hard. Must...remember...to...breathe...

Doniger's post is unintentionally hilarious. She has the unmitigated call to suggest that Palin doesn't "speak for women" (I know a few women would tell Doniger she doesn't know enough women... only they'd say it in less flattering terms) but Doniger of course can pretend to speak for Palin, distorting her views in ways that, in only 2 weeks, have become ridiculous cliche's... the debunked book-banning, the conflation of Palin's personal philosophy on abortion with her consitutional views on federalism - which Doniger gets completely wrong - the complete mischaracterization of Palin's position on global warming - with the perverse touch of suggesting Palin somehow thinks that God is responsible - Doniger's theological appears to be stunted at the rather juvenile level of "whatever man does not caused, God intends." She's a religious historian for heavens' sake. You'd think she'd have actually read some theology. Funny how she also doesn't recognize the links between ethical philosophy and religious moral theology - you know, homicide, rape, and that lot, which are all clearly prohibited by religious moral conviction. Oh, and there's the predicatable veneration of Joe Biden's political expedience on abortion... but nothing about how Obama and other religious folk from the left desire to restructure the economy and individual's earnings for the sake of "charity" (in the religious sense).

It's all marvelously deranged stuff, the kind of rhetorical bile that turns the average voter off faster than a Clapper. Barack Obama has got to be furious that so many of his loyal supporters have taken his call for a new kind of politics the wrong way.

They've become even more vicious and dishonest.

Gov. Palin is pro-choice. Doubt me? Do you really think she would disagree with anything on this page?

http://hubpages.com/hub/For-Women-Only----A-Pictorial-Journey-About-Choice

Wow - I know where NOT to send my kids to college.

As for sex, the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people, hard on the heels of her concealing her own pregnancy (her faith in abstinence applying, apparently, only to non-Palins), is nicely balanced by her hypocrisy in gushing with loving support of her teenage daughter after using a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska"

Geeez Wendy, the only reason she let it out about Bristol being pregnant is that a bunch of NUT Jobs started a stupid rumor about Trig being Bristols child. She increased funding for teenage mothers 175%, I wish you guys would get your DNC talking points up to date! Yes she believes in abstinence, no she is not opposed to teenager learing about condom's! I am sure I can safely say she does not support teaching kids about sex before they can read though.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. The Republican party's cynical calculation that because she has a womb and makes lots and lots of babies (and drives them to school! wow!) she speaks for the women of America, and will capture their hearts and their votes, has driven thousands of real women to take to their computers in outrage. She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women. "

Her greatest achievment is that she is more like my wife, my mother and many of the women I work with then you probably are. Is there a communist cap on how many children she can have? She is the average American woman and most of them identify themselves more to her than you. I hear the women in the break rooms and on the office floors all talking about how she is like them! Get out of your college and visit fly over country, you will be more alien than Sarah!

@ Wendy
You say: "But I object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Then why do you write . . . if not to take your theology out in public and inflict your private religious views on other people? Just askin'

Wow! Talk about an angry feminist. If this lady had her way all women would have their wombs cauterized to avoid implantation of dreaded parasites (babies). What a freak. I'm sure she has all kinds of compassion for convicted murderers and rapists on death row.

I, too, object strongly when anyone (and especially anyone with political power) tries to take their theology out in public, to inflict those private religious (or sexual) views on other people. Case in point: the Saddleback Forum, where Obama stated:

"when I find myself taking the wrong step, I think a lot of times it’s because I’m trying to protect myself instead of trying to do god’s work." HE SAID TRYING TO DO GOD'S WORK!! MY GAWD!

and not only that, he said

"As a starting point, it means I believe in — that Jesus Christ died for my sins, and that I am redeemed through him. That is a source of strength and sustenance on a daily basis. Yes, I know that I don’t walk alone. And I know that if I can get myself out of the way, that I can maybe carry out in some small way what he intends. And it means that those sins that I have on a fairly regular basis, hopefully will be washed away."

How can he insult those who don't believe in such nonsense!!!! HE SAID "JESUS CHRIST DIED FOR HIS SINS!" Talk about imposing beliefs on others. He sounds like a red-neck Southern Baptist Bible thumper!!!

Surely you agree with me, Ms. Doniger. Right?
Right? I didn't hear you...what was that?
H-e-l-l-o.

Without even reviewing any other comments, I have no doubt that Wendy is insane. No other explanation can describe why she would deny that a human being is created at conception unless she believes in some magic that turns you into a human being at birth or other time-based event.

Wendy,

Have to disagree with you about "life beginning at conception" being a question of theology. It's just not. The question of when "personhood" begins might perhaps be a question for theology, though here again we know when things like heart beats, brainwaves and c-fibers begin functioning as a matter of science.

Your forshortening the question to "When does life begin?" is a fudge. The real question (pointed out recently by pastor Rick Warren) is when do human rights attach to an unborn baby? Anyone, like Obama, who says birth is as much a zealot for their cause as any Christian pro-lifer.

We'll pricematch Lenscrafters!!!

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

Hmmmm, double X chromosome set: Check
Female reproductive organs: Check
Determination: She is a woman.

What is it with collectivist/lefties that simple disagreement is not allowed, one has to be airbrushed out of existance, a la Uncle Joe Stalin? Is it the logic that if you invalidate the Others very identity, you don't have to engage in their argument? Sounds like cowards and hacks to me.

This is truly dispicable as most of these charges against Palin have already been shown to be false (see factcheck.org). Willfully distorting an opponents words (e.g., Palin said she hopes that soldiers are doing God's work, not that God wants them to be there) is a tactic, if there was any justice, that should come back to haunt Obama supporters.

What's perhaps the worst thing about this essay, is the evident bile coming through the disconnected series of wild accusations. It's so far from a principled argument, it does discredit to this forum as well as the writer.

We're running a really good deal on glasses this week, Wendy.

Thank you, leftist "divinity" woman(?). This quote is the butt of innumerable comic references throughout the internet. "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman." A further flood of votes is headed for McCain/Palin as once again the public sees the unhinged, unadulterated hatred seething through the leftist mind. Keep up the good work.

I just wonder if her degree might have been mail order...

Sadly, this post - like Juan Cole's last week, directly equating Sarah Palin's religious beliefs to those of radical Islamists - has convinced me that it is not the Republican Party which has "finally lost its mind", but rather the nation's professoriat. Your rambling screed on this blog doesn’t do justice to the fine reputation you’ve rightly earned for your scholarship, and forces me to question your judgment on a host of other issues on which you’ve commented over the years. I will try to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that it’s not your judgment, generally, which is to blame for this entry, but rather the derangement spontaneously provoked in so many of the nation’s left-leaning intellectuals by Palin’s candidacy.

It’s hard to know where to start, so let me focus on the most bizarre of your arguments. Calm down and say it with me now – Sarah Palin is a woman. So are the many, many women who identify with her and intend to vote for her. You may find this puzzling, but the women who would have voted for McCain even without Palin on the ticket are also – gasp – women. They don’t have to represent what you (and perhaps a majority of women in America) believe to be “women’s issues” to present themselves unapologetically as members of the female sex. I find your argument to the contrary vastly more cynical than McCain’s decision to select an extremely popular female governor as his running mate. How dare he?!

Most of the specific allegations you have made about Palin are factually false. Please, look into the charges that are made about her before you run to your computer next time. This should be an embarrassment for someone of your stature. The charge about trying to ban books from the local library and firing the librarian has been debunked for some time. I suspect you didn’t hear about it because you and your colleagues didn’t want to, and get most of your information through a social network and set of information sources which collectively amount to a massive and increasingly delusional echo chamber.

Since you raise the issue of insulting women, I would like to point out that few women in American public life have been so widely and viciously ridiculed as Sarah Palin has been over the past two weeks. And for what, exactly? For the audacity to accept McCain’s decision in selecting her as his running mate and for speaking (rather minimally) about women’s issues when she is so obviously not the right kind of woman. Or a woman at all, apparently. You have further contributed to this sexist assault on a woman who – by all accounts – is a fine mother and fine public servant, even if you don’t like her politics and don’t think she’s qualified to hold the position for which she’s running. The charge that she is responsible for outing and humiliating her daughter, for example, is dishonest and shameful. In case you weren’t aware, Palin’s daughter was already outed and shamed before the campaign said anything about her by an army of bloggers and journalists – many of them quite prominent and influential – who spread the bizarre and vicious allegation that she was secretly the mother of her own baby brother. What do you propose that Palin and the campaign should have done? Say nothing at all? And what would have happened when Bristol’s pregnancy became public knowledge in the days that followed?

I realize that these points are almost certainly lost on you, so I won’t go on much longer. One point that must be made, though, concerns your stunning condescension towards and clear misunderstanding of Palin’s religious beliefs. As someone who has dedicated much of your life to the study of world religions – and, presumably, the complex and contradictory beliefs and actions of religious people – your ignorant comments about Palin’s religious beliefs are rather shocking. She didn’t say that the Iraq war was God’s will. She said that she prays that it is God’s will and that we are acting according to his plan. Here is the actual quote:

“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God,” she exhorted the congregants. “That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”

As a scholar of religion, I would think you should be able to see the difference. This careless ridicule of Palin’s religious beliefs is repeated in your snide comment about believing that God must be responsible for global warming, since man apparently isn’t. It may surprise you to discover that many scientists who study global warming remain unconvinced that the phenomenon is the result of human activity. This is not to say that pollution from human activity isn’t responsible or hasn’t played a role in global warming, but that it may not be the sole or even the most important factor. Several studies have shown that increased solar activity over the period during which global warming has been documented correlates more precisely with warming patterns than industrial activity. Others have shown that similar warming patterns are evident on other planets in the solar system and still others document a conspicuous absence of the kinds of discrepancies we would expect to see in atmospheric temperatures if the green house effect were the primary cause of global warming. Again, this is not to say that human activity isn’t partly or even largely responsible for warming trends, but simply that we have yet to definitively prove what has caused them, and that it is possible for an intelligent and informed person to say as much without throwing their hands in the air and writing it off as God’s will.

Your condescension and your lack of understanding both of Palin’s religious beliefs and how those beliefs impact her political actions reflects poorly on your judgment as a scholar of religion, to say nothing of your status as a public intellectual.

Sincerely,

J Bradford

Dear Professor Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty),
With all do respect, I am one of the millions of American women you seem to know so much about and are intent on speaking for. However, you do not speak for me and I suggest that you do some research into the amount of women who would stand opposite you on your opinions in this forum. I am one of those college educated women who have worked so hard to break through the glass ceiling. I too am also the mother of 4 children and take great pride in them. I am one of those women who have dealt with difficult situations, such as, having a daughter get pregnant in less than perfect circumstances. Are you accusing me of not teaching my children about sex education? Are you accusing me of not taking care of my responsibilities to my children because I worked and got a Master’s Degree while my children were growing up? I can tell you that while I strongly support abstinence, I also armed my children with all of the necessary weapons to keep them from falling into promiscuity or from getting and spreading serious life threatening/ending diseases or from underage pregnancies. I also taught them empathy for others (especially others viewpoints) and gave them the best moral compass that I could provide not for religions sake but because I loved them. Are you suggesting that I am not a woman? Or maybe you are suggesting that I am just not a true feminist woman because I believe that Gov. Palin would make an excellent Vice President? Throwing your religious teaching credentials in my face and telling me that I am less than or not a woman is insulting. I must say though that my young adult daughters are getting a lesson in how feminism and religion can be distorted by people who should know better. Using a so-named On Faith Forum as a political weapon to attempt to reprimand regular everyday mothers, daughters, sisters and grandmothers to be careful not to choose one of those “dangerous women” (you know those unconscionable pro-lifers) for a political office is not only awful it is condescending. Oh, and before you proclaim me a pro-life, rightwing religious fanatic and dismiss my views you may want to come visit cities and towns (and suggest that the Washington Post send reporters) outside of your own deafening and often one thinking academic cocoon. Like it or not I am one of those women like Gov. Palin and no matter how much you wish me away, say I do not exist or ridicule me, I’ll be voting my mind in this election.

Wow, that tinfoil hat is really squeezing your brain. You're getting shrill there, Wendy. Modulate, Wendy...I know you're scared, but you're perpetuating female stereotypes, and that doesn't make us women look good. Thank God (Big G) that Sarah is helping with that problem as well.

**can someone slip her some Haldol so she can ease into the McCain/Palin presidency in some semblance of peace, even if it IS medically induced**

Theologian? What phony on-line degree did she get?

My how the standards have fallen.

Why do liberal feminists think that they have a lock on how another woman gets to define herself?

I'm a woman. Not a churchgoer. Not a liberal. Not a right wing conservative. Not a gun user nor a Bible clinger. College educated, professional career. Mother. Independent spirit. Moderate.

I get to define who I am. Not you, and not liberal academia. You don't get to decide who another woman is or whether or not that is valid. You don't get to decide what her choices or belief systems are. Like Cesaer, thumbs up or thumbs down. "Acceptable" or "Not Acceptable".

The ultimate point of feminism is that each individual woman gets to have her own belief system, gets to plot her own course and live her own life. You might want to do a review about that part of it, because you come off as someone who is really saying 'if you don't walk in lockstep with me, let me throw my perjoratives at you".

Lame. Lazy thinking. Been done too many times. We're ignoring you. Are you annoyed by that? Too bad.

Dear Mrs. Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty),

Your article makes me very sad.
To think that men and women sit in your class room everyday and listen to you speak is a nightmare come to life.

You live in a fishbowl. There is a whole world out there that does not believe what you preach as just concrete truth.

Have you read the Constitution? I don't know where you can find what you are talking about. The Supreme Court had to declared abortion a matter of free speech. That is the hypocrasy. That is what you are backing up with your blind ignorance.

Do you understand how the three branches of government work and what each ones does? Your post above proves more than once that you do not.

I think mabe you should give the Bible a second look too. I think the leasons that can be learned in there were not applied in your crazy article above.

Retire and let some one else deserving take over. You have lost your way.

No, Professor, if you want to get technical about it, abortion is not in the mother-lovin' Constitution. It was found in "the penumbra of rights" that some liberal Supreme Court judges made up to legitimize it. Regardless of whether you support abortion rights or not, you have to acknowledge this. Or is that just another pesky fact that got in the way of your screed on Palin?

This is nothing but a silly rant by an agenda driven Obamabot. We waste tax payers money on someone indoctrinating our children with this nonsense? I suggest people withhold donations to U of Chicago.
Let me be clear, not everyone has a litmus test of being pro-abortion to define if someone is a women, nor do they want views like Ms. Doniger's forced upon them. Fascism is an ugly policy. The fact that her political candidate refused to take any stand on the subject shows how well this group controls him, not what he actually believes.
Thankfully my mother wasn't coerced into an abortion by "feminists", and I would put her up for comparison against any women the Left has chosen to "designate" a "women". The Constitution provides for Freedom of Religion, not freedom FROM others having different religious beliefs. Why is it that Ms. Doniger needs to slander and smear a good person just because Governor Palin doesn't have the extreme views of a few in Ms. Doniger's political party? The only people forcing "religion" into this debate are those who say "prayers" at conventions every 4 years and ridicule people with religion the rest of the time.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

And yours is in asserting any knowledge of God. Or, apparently, biology.

The loony left is going hateful as ever to destroy its enemies. Just a note - it was a left wing blog that started the outing of the Palin pregnency.

Keep up the hate though it will help elect McCain/Palin. America rejects your hate filled liberal beliefs!

My goodness. This is a college professor's writing and reasoning at work? God help her students, truly. Pathetic. Just pathetic.

I believe that morality and religion inform our views, and that most anti-abortion folks view themselves as protecting lives rather than forcing their religion on others (much like the early Abolitionists).

While pro-choice myself, I do not assume everyone who disagrees with me must have sinister motives. I would say Biden doesn't believe his Church that life begins at conception (much like me, also a Catholic). Otherwise, how could he vote for choice? Take Biden's statement and replace abortion with slavery, to understand how many Catholics view it.

Regards

It takes someone particularly evil to think that the electorate cannot read with their own eyes and hear with their won ears just what Gov Palin says she believes and intends to do(and has done in all her years in office).

Have you ever been to Alaska? I am sure you see the same sad group of people that you have always assumed southerners to be. Southerners know well your snide dismissing that paints them so inaccurately and will stand with this woman(amongst so many others) while you all take your turns. She has had anywhere from a 65-85 percent approval rating her entire time in office. Are you under the impression that the people of Alaska like conservative Christian beliefs shoved down their throat? Anything shoved down their throats. Study up on this group of highly diverse people sometime. The answer is NO, and she hasn't.

It is widely circulated and not possible for you not to have read that all the rumors you state yet again here have been proven false. No book banning, no abstinence only education, no forcing of Roe overturned(she can't anyway), wide support for environmental help although not always attributing it to the same cause as you(who cares if she funds the help),wants the oil companies to give their money to you, and knows the struggle of the working Mom so well she had to hide her own pregnancy for over 7 months so she would not be seen as unfit to govern. If that is not a woman who could fight and achieve victories for equality I don't know where we plan to find one.

There may not again in our lifetime be a woman on a ticket who actually does know the life of a working Mom. There may not be another chance to put into office a woman who would surely champion childcare, Dads of all kinds, smaller government, and life. She is on record saying she will not impose her views. Why would this country complain about a woman who would like to see life welcomed? When we become scared of just that personal belief of hers, we have stopped being women and ourselves have become monsters.

Sarah Palin will win if you all do not stop writing stuff like this. I am sure when this article gets around even more(posted all over republican leaning blogs/sites) it will be worth millions in funding and tens of thousands in votes and volunteering.

This election is Sen Obamas to lose and you are all helping him on his way.

Women should be celebrating the likes of a Sarah Palin who is not only the recipient of all the lessons and hardships of women before her but the overcomer of them. If she claims in her own personal daily life to be added in that superhuman task by prayer, why would we care at all?

I'm embarrassed for a lot of women this week who have lost all their credibility. Sad stuff.

McCain/Palin for a new feminism '08h

I'm looking for your column about John Edwards's VP qualifications in 2004. Sick wife; kid; what else?

I got this far:

"...after using a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska."

Year over year funding was increased, not cut. The "cut" was in the increase.

Please get your facts correct.

Good God almighty, are you a moron or what?

An ugly woman inside and outside.

Tool.

Abortion rights or rights to kill a baby?

Sarah Palin is a real woman. You are an ignoramus.

This is one of the most absurd pieces I've read of late. This is from an actual professor? I guess standards have gone down since I was in grad school.

Look, Wendy, if you don't support McCain/Palin, then don't vote for them. Don't try to foist your views on us. You don't speak for me, you don't speak for all women, and you certainly don't speak for the majority of Americans.

These feeble and desperate attacks on Sarah Palin tell more about you than anything else. You are in a state of panic. You can't believe that another woman could possibly disagree with you, or lead a life that you don't endorse without being a non-woman (whatever that might be).

Get over it. You'll be dealing with Palin in office for the next 8 to 16 years. Feel better now?

If Sarah Palin is not a woman, Joe Biden is not a Catholic and Wendy Doniger is not a theologian.

Doniger says that religion is no one else's business but your own, especially as regards sex, and that we ought not take our theology out in public -- views that set her squarely against Jesus of Nazareth, all his apostles, and all the prophets before them. I suppose if it comes down to a choice between all them and her, I go with all them.

It's amazing how even intelligent people can fall for the smears and half-truths on the internet.

1. Hypocrisy of outing her daughter? Don't you think it's pretty dangerous and foolish to ASSUME how another behaves purely based on their religion, or political party?

2. Palin never attempted to ban any books! Factcheck.org has debunked this. The supposed list of banned books included Harry Potter, which wasn't even published at the time of the alleged attempt.

3. Palin's record, in fact, shows that restrictions on abortions have been loosened during her term.

Anyone can read the truth at factcheck.org. It's a shame that a University Professor is so blinded by political ideology.

There are so many falsities and half truths in this piece it is difficult to know where to start. Just one example: (A) You write: "...the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people,...". One doesn't usually need to "out" a pregnancy. It usually speaks for itself.
(B) From the MinnPost.com: "The 17-year-old unmarried daughter of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is pregnant, Palin said on Monday in an announcement intended to knock down rumors by liberal bloggers that Palin faked her own pregnancy to cover up for her child," read the lead of Steve Holland's news-breaking Reuters story."

In other words Liberal mutts forced her into commenting on her daughter's pregnancy.

Wow why are ugly women so mean and spiteful? Your ugly deal with it. I suppose the rumors about her newborn son being actually her grandson were okay? Or to just not say anything and let the press go wild with rumors would be okay? I can only suppose by your looks that you do not have any children (unless you drink a lot) so you would not know that you can teach your children all you want but sometimes they still make poor choices, and then inline with what you have taught them you deal with the decisions that you make. Sometimes that is murder and sometimes you follow through and receive the blessing the a child ultimately becomes. I am constantly amazed by how narrow minded, bigoted and hateful you people are.

Ms. Doniger, you are the worst of the worse, sitting high on your perch looking down at the unenlightened souls, basking proudly in your glorious title, "Professor of the History of Religions, University of Chicago’s Divinity School, Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School". Like a Pharisee standing in the street praying long and loud to cover the corruptness inside, looking down on others not like you. Who is the hypocrite?
So brilliant you can't even do a fact check before you spew? It must suck to be you.

You forgot to say that Jesus was a community organizer and Pontius Pilate was a governor.

Wendy, you silly old biddie, you need to get out of your liberal Hyde Park bubble for a few days. If you did, you'd realize that there a lot more American women who identify with Sarah Palin than with the Wizard of Uhhs and his bitter, angry, "they raised-the-bar" wife. There are more Americans who went to state unversities than Harvard. There are millions of people for whom "community organizer" and "diversity coordinator" are not qualifications for working in the real world.

Moreover, as noted above, most of the smears you repeat - she banned books! she's an extremist! she cut funding for pregnant women!- have already been proved false.

When Obama loses, have fun consoling him at the next faculty cocktail party over a glass of white wine and some arugula.

Hmmmmm.

Isn't it ironic how the libs are so against people that believe life begins at conception?
These people follow Gods will while the Libs make laws to go against Gods will. (R v W)
Will the Libs burn in hell??
Only God knows.
"Thou Shalt not Kill"
So the libs say Life only begins when the Woman acknoledges it to be so.
Is she taking over God's place?
"Thou Shall Have no other God's before me".

Choice= Keeping the semen away from the egg.

If the universe were normal, I would say....

1. It is unreal that this woman has been hired and is paid by U. Chicago - and in the Div school no less. It's not that she's radical. It's that she is ignorant. About her PhD there ought to be an investigation. My guess is that it was an affirmative action deal. She's a woman and so they gave her the degeee so she'd be all 'empowered' and stuff.

2. I can't believe WAPO - who has the pretense of being an educated and informative and sophisticated type paper - would print this stuff. It's garbage. It's fascist and hateful baloney. And it's all 'okay' with you.

Amazing.

Michael

Incredible article. Fabulous. Particularly, the line "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman". Apparently, I missed out on that particular piece of sex education due to my repressed catholic upbringing in Ohio. I thought it was a physiological issue rather than a series of beliefs. Now I see why the mainstream media kept asking for the blood test.

To paraphrase candidate Obama, "Sweetie, are you for real. Or is this just another Rovian masterpiece of deception?" If not, keep up the good work. These kind of articles will ensure that Sarah gets elected.

? "All beliefs welcome"? How hypocritical is that? I think you mean to say "All beliefs welcome unless they don't agree with mine."

So you welcome all beliefs but yet you say that that Sara Palin and those many women that share her beliefs are not really women because they have different beliefs than you?

I would be very interested in hearing your definition of hypocrisy.

Would you be saying this foolishness if Palin were a Democrat?

No.

And Palin didn't cut funding for that transitional home for unwed mothers. She reduced the rate of INCREASE.

What is it about Chicago and Radicals??? Is it in the water or something???

Miss Doniger, Mr. Biden has elevated his political career above the sanctity of life, I say that is a very, very, sad state of affairs indeed. God help him.

Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty), The Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School. PBUY

Whomsoever that shall not admit to original sin and admit that the evils of climate change are because of the imperfection of man, he shall be judged. Amen.

I know that if Jesus Christ himself stepped dpown from His cross, he would vote for Senator Obama, because Christ would have been really rocked by just how cool he is and just how informed he is on the simple truth that man trumps science and the entire solar output.

Do you study the history of religion the way one studies a dead bug under a microscope?

It is possible that anthropocentric global warming is a construct of the godless, in order to have something to beleive. Just possible.

You are an elitist out of touch Chicago democratic hack who has never shopped in WalMart. You are so hypocritical it is disqusting!!! Why not worry about the pitiful lives the victims of gangbangers or women living in housing projects that Obama left in your city. YOU ARE THE REASON THAT OBAMA WILL LOOSE!! YOU HAVE NO CONCEPT OF THE AMERICAN WOMAN AND THIS ELECTION WILL SHOW THAT YOU SHOULD TRY REFLECTING WHILE YOU EAT YOUR ARUGULA.

Don't get upset, people. Wendy is a silly lightweight -- no one in her department respects her. The Obama campaign has to be looking on in horror at this train wreck.

"On Faith"? No, "On Drugs".

Wendy - you are so wrong on so many points about Palin and Obama. Some you got right, but most you got left. Let's look at several of your points.

Biden agrees life begins at conception, yet he has no problem with letting others have abortion. If you believe life begins at conception, then you agree that this is murder. It's a kin to saying you can kill your family members, as long as they are helpless. Joe has a problem with his moral backbone. Secondly, there is no constitutional right to abortion. Check it out.

Sarah Palin advocates for abstinence only, but the method, like others, is not without failure points. The difference between this is Obama views this as "punishment" (his words) for his children. Palin sees pregnancy as a forgivable mistake and a chance to love another child. Which is the better view pregnancy?

And in let's get your facts straight. You are regurgitating rumors that have been debunked about the books and abortion. In fact as Governor, she did advocate for teaching religion in schools, did not make abortion tougher to get, nor did she ban any books. The books in question were not even in print at the time. Get it right.

The weird thing about it is that you believe you are right as much as I do. I find that libtards like to bend the moral lines to meet their causes where as wingnuts try (operative word is try) to follow the straight and narrow.

Ms. Doniger,

May I call you Wendy? You wrote:

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

Gee Wendy, I thought that all that was required to be a woman was to have XX chromosones instead of XY chromosones. My Gosh all of my Biology classes were for naught! Did hard sciences like Biology get taken over by The Narrative?

Wendy, some people my age may remember a song by Malvina Reynolds. Here's a verse.

"And the people in the houses
All go to the university,
And they all get put in boxes,
Little boxes, all the same.
And there's doctors and there's lawyers
And business executives,
And they're all made out of ticky-tacky
And they all look just the same."

Guess you're upset that Gov. Palin doesn't fit into those little boxes that you and you're friends built. Maybe we should have a revolution at the University of Chicago and get rid of those old fashion ways that have been taught for the past 40 years?

Nice chatting with you Wendy, and see you at the Tractor pull!

So why is there no button by her column that says "Report Offensive Posts"..... Hers is the only offensive post I see here - everyone else seems to sane....
THIS is a professor from a Chicago Divinity School? I'm sorry for you folks in Chicago....

I am disgusted with Doniger's hiding behind "scholarship" to do a partisan hit piece. She says she defends people's religious beliefs. Does that include people of the Hindu faith?

Stop the smears, now. Enough. She obviously has a favorite in the election and yet pompously attacks a mother of 5 as bigoted and hypocritical. I think the author is more so than Palin ever was.

Her smears on abstinence are amazing. If she was a true religion history expert, she would understand the imperfection of all of us (except maybe her). People in America will identify with the real life joys and challenges of a family MUCH more than a bitter professor in Chicago.

Do me a favor. Next time, let the world know up front she is a feminist rather than hiding behind the coattails of "professor of religious history." And let us know that she has had hateful works against Hindus yanked from a major encyclopedia.

The Washington Post should apologize for printing this, and post a retraction for the many lies in the article that have long been disproven.

Wow! So insightful. Palin doesn't speak for all women. YOU DO!!!! And Joe Biden and Barack Obama.

I didn't know the right to abortion was in the Constitution. Thanks for telling me. I would appreciate it if you would please tell me exactly WHERE in the Constitution I can find that right so I can go read it.

Keep up the great work.

This is not a serious article, and Professor Doniger is not a serious thinker. Children produce better one-sided political rants than this.

Hopefully she was extraordinarily drunk when she wrote it.

If he does not impose his "personal" views on others, what does he impose when he works his political will? His impersonal views? His public views? Someone else's personal views? Gloria Steinem's?

It is not wise to appeal to the Great Gasbag as an authority. On anything than hairplugs, that is.

I just donated $100 in your honor to the McCain-Palin ticket.

Your view of womanhood is pathetic.

One has to wonder why Obama brings out the stupidest and vilest traits in his followers.
Obama says he his a uniter; the One. But yet people that support him are reviling themselves as the most hateful, bitter, spiteful, intolerant people.

Take Wendy Doniger's hit piece here for Obama and against Palin. Do you think Ms. Doniger has ever written such hateful things about a person (Governor Palin) before she became a follower of Obama?
Do you think Doniger has ever said this vile and intolerant remark about a woman before: "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."?
What is it about Obama that turns his supporters into snarky, ugly people. Obama is the One? Perhaps a better title for Obama is the ANTI-One. Obama is the divider of people, not the uniter.

Just because Mrs. Palin doesn't represent your minority views, don't assume she doesn't speak for a lot of woman throughout America.

She didn't "out" her daughter's pregnancy, it is obvious to anyone looking at Bristol Palin that she is pregnant. If Sarah Palin had tried to cover up her daughter's pregnancy or force her to have an abortion then there would have been a reason to say she was not being a good, supportive mother to Bristol.

Funny how you mention "the mother-lovin' Constitution" in the same post where you appear to support denying people their constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

This is straight out of Nazi Germany. Professor Doniger is arguing that women who don't have the "right" political views aren't women at all.

"after using a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska"

That lie has been discredited for well over a week now. She INCREASED funding an additional $3.9 million. Only in the economically illiterate world of Liberalville is a $3.9 million INCREASE considered a "cut"!

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

Looking at YOUR picture, Toots, I'd say that she can make that claim a helluva lot quicker than you can.

Wow.

At least you could lose the glasses.

They, along with your article, are awful.

She IS a woman and you know you want to be just like her. Give it up!

Well that was one of the most silly and ridiculous things I have read. It is riddled with factual errors and mischaracterizations, demonstrates poor reading comprehension on the part of the author, and is inherently contradictory. This is another perfect example of the insanity that unfortunately goes on within the ivory towers of so many colleges and universities.

Bush Derangement Syndrome has apparently given way to Palin Derangement Syndrome.

I'm just starting an career in academia. One of my biggest worries is not getting tenure. No matter how hard I work, no matter how much I write, no matter how well I teach, and no matter how well I know my field, I fear that it just won't be enough in the end. Thank you Dr. Doniger for alleviating that worry. If you can get tenure, anyone can get tenure!

Oh my god. This is a terrible, terrible thing to write. Don't you have a heart?

The title of the article sounded interesting,but could not get half way through it. What SKEWED point of view...what a waste of ink...Sarah Palin will be the first female VP and the first female President. Wendy Doniger=Chicago=No thanks.

Silly Liberals: Don't Fear The Palin.

Embrace your inner-Sarah.

Disgusting. Don't the liberals have any shame?

Do yourself a favor and just shut up. You are a moron and I suppose YOU have an IVY LEAGUE education. If anything will make me vote for McCain it's stupid elitist lefties like you. Oh and by the way, I am a 52 year old female who believes in thr right to CHOOSE -- not a MANDATED abortion because the baby isn't perfect

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

Has it really come to this? I assume this means you are a woman and speak for all women? This makes me want to weep. I am sorry for you.

Why is it that Liberal hypocritical women such as this hag are ugly inside and out?

I guess it is because hate is very unattractive.

Palin did not conceal her pregnancy as the Alaskan newspapers have documented well before Palin as tapped.

You knew the above facts when you wrote what you did in your post.

Palin did not out her child. The MSM Dems outed her via the method of a dispicable lie that Palin's youngest child was not really hers but her daughter's. DNA testing was demanded by many on your side.

You knew these facts when you wrote what you did in your post.

Now I know what kind of person you are.

I do want to force my sexual mores on you...you bet I do. My number one more I WILL force on you is there will be no forced sexual activity. The fact that you don't like having my mores forced on you is very strange indeed.

"All beliefs welcome"? It sure doesn't look like you're very welcoming of dissenting views. In fact, you sound incredibly close-minded.

Has nobody noticed that Ms. Doniger is "inflicting" her "private religious... views" on us? She's making a statement of theology that's as definitive as any in the Bible:

"Belief in god [sic--doesn't she know that English grammar calls for capitalizing a proper noun?], like getting pregnant, is a private matter between consenting adults"

That's a theological viewpoint. It depends utterly on God being a certain way. It is tantamount to either:

(1) God does not exist at all, or
(2) God does not consider it worthwhile or helpful for humans to interact with each other regarding what they think about God.

That, my friends, is a statement about the nature of God. It may be multiple-choice, but it only has two options. Doniger doesn't ever want you to force your Christian or other religious beliefs on someone else. In the process she's trying to force us to accept either one or the other of her own.

To focus it still further: she said she is not objecting to any candidate's religious views. But to the extent that Palin speaks about her belief in God, she is practicing something integral to Christian belief (Matthew 10:32, Acts 1:8, and much more). When she complains about Palin speaking out, Doniger most emphatically is objecting to Christian belief and practice.

What she is saying is that no one should bring their theology out in public unless their theology agrees with hers.

How ironic that she was aiming the word "hypocrisy" at someone else in this piece.

Hey, look kids. More liberal fascism.

Ms. Doniger, let me translate your title into plain English, without doubletalk:

"All Faiths Welcome, As Long As You Don't Take Them Seriously Enough To, You Know, Actually Live Them."

There. That's better.

As a woman (and a feminist), I'm embarrassed -- no, ashamed -- of this article. This professor CERTAINLY does not speak for women. Women are proud of Sarah Palin, even if we disagree with her political or religious views. We are not out to destroy her just because she doesn't conform to the leftist-academic-frigid view of womanhood.

I'm a woman. I like sex. I drink beer. I go to church most weekends that I can get the kids out of bed in time. I vote for whoever the hell I want. And anyone who tries to tell me I'm not a woman can go to Hell.

Can someone send this woman a pair of "Palin" eyeglasses-Please?

Crescat scientia; vita excolatur: Fear not, The Republican party has not lost its mind! I am certain that the Democratic Party does not need another professor to attack Sarah Palin or her religion.

Upon reading this article, my knowledge has not been increased nor my life enriched! It saddens me that this is true.

What we're dealing with here is a moron!

RE: "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

Go back to the kitchen, Wendy.

-------------------

"She does not speak for women; she has no sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working class women."

Where do you come up with this B.S., Wendy?
So Obama speaks for women?

Where do these lefturds come from?

Why does the Lefturd Street Media attack Sarah Palin with "women" who have the appeal of a chronic case of hemorriods?

Sorry there, but Sarah Palin is definately on heck of a women.

Wendy, I think you have a few loose screws. Suppose Palin had not anounced her daughter's pregnancy. Don't you think that sooner or later the media would have NOTICED?

Wendy, did it ever occur to you that Palin feels no shame about her daughters pregnancy? I think you are projecting your own shame into this situation.

Just another liberal that is jealous of a complete woman like Sarah.

You reminded why I canceled my subscription to WaPo and Newsweek 7 years ago!

Keep it up. The left wing nutroots keep coming out of their holes and are getting wacked. Anyone who paid money to sit in this womans class and hear crap like this should demand a full refund. Better yet, how about leaving the school altogether?

"It's in the mother-lovin' Constitution."

Abortion rights? I don't see it listed. Ms. Doniger, you are ignorant.

Such anger from the leftist academia for someone that doesn't agree with liberal ideology!!! I thought you were the people of tolerance. Imagine that!!

It's so refreshing to finally see a conservative feminist in the headlines as a role model for myself and my daughters. God Bless America!

You're an idiot.

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. The Republican party's cynical calculation that because she has a womb and makes lots and lots of babies (and drives them to school! wow!) she speaks for the women of America, and will capture their hearts and their votes, has driven thousands of real women to take to their computers in outrage."

The commentator's problem is that she's not aware she's a fascist. Probably because of her own misplace self-righteousness. Like so many others on the left playing identity politics, she can deny a person's self-evident gender, or even race, when that person does not, in her view, think as a woman should. It's the political positions held, not the physical characteristics, that make a woman. Nice to pretend that, instead of there being another contrasting opinion to your own, you just write off the opinion holder as "not a real woman."

That's one small step from denying a person's humanity because that person doesn't hold the same beliefs you do. History shows there's no limit to the inhumanity that can be visited upon people declared to be sub-human. we need to protect each others dignity, not tear it down for cheap political stunt.

You'd think women and minorities would get this.

"and in her attempts to ban books, including books on evolution, and to fire the librarian who stood against her. "

This has been debunked repeatedly, there should be a retraction.

And now we see how we have managed to let ourselves get to the point where a man as devoid of character, one who allows for the possibility of infanticide, cavorts with terrorists, enters into shady dealings with a criminal, professes a radical theology, etc... can be the nominee of a major party and be virtually tied in polls for the win in November. Radical ideologues teaching/propogandizing in our colleges and universities.

Obama is the worst candidate I have seen in my lifetime, in terms of baggage. Any other candidate with the things he has in his record would never have had a shot at the presidency. Our college kids and recently graduated and those who only get their information from liberal rags and MSM are the most ignorant people in the nation because they are not educated, they are brain washed by lying leftists. Sadly, there are a lot of ignorant people in this country.

For the record, the lie about Palin cutting funding for teen mothers has already been debunked. STOP LYING!

Let me get this straight. Joe Biden believes that abortion kills a human being, but he refuses to impose his beliefs on anyone else, and that makes him moral? Are you nuts? It is one thing to support abortion because you don't believe a fetus is a human life. That belief system means it is not murder. But to say that you believe abortion is murder, but you don't intent to impose your beliefs on others is moral cowardice. Apply this reasoning to some other political issue. Obama believes that income inequity is immoral. Why is it okay for him to impose this belief on others?

1) This article is full of the standard half-truths about Palin (see http://explorations.chasrmartin.com/2008/09/06/palin-rumors/)

2) It's sad but not surprising that the writer teaches at a "school of divinity".

Why are you LYING about Sarah Palin, "professor"?

Sarah Palin TRIPLED, not slashed, funding for teen mothers:

http://24ahead.com/blog/archives/007978.html

The list of books which Sarah Palin supposedly tried to ban? It's FAKE:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html

Sarah Palin is the REAL woman - you're the fraud.

Oh, good grief.

Get facts first, write article later. The order of those actions IS important.

You are crazy. The more articles like this the more popular Sarah Palin becomes.

Madam,
You are simply another of the haters that, in your case, is hiding behind your credentialed "ethos" as you hurl your invective at Mrs. Palin. Of course, Mr., Obama is doing the right thing, in your eyes; and, of course, so is Mr. Biden-never mind that he is at once hypocritically using his Catholic identity to woo voters while violating the tenets of church teaching by legislatively supporting abortion. And let's be clear here, he not only supports the court's legislation from the bench, the Roe vs. Wade finding from the 70's, but he also believes that federal tax dollars should pay for abortions; a situation that is unconscionable to us in the pro-life community as well as unconstitutional.

You are simply another establishment feminist, to use the recent words of Camille Paglia, who can't come to grips with the reality of a non-liberal feminist. And you choose to beat her over the head using your "absolute moral authority" as a professor of religious history; when she hasn't indicated that she would force, or even inculcate, her beliefs on anyone-outside of her own family where parents have the absolute right to attempt to instill their values on to their children! Of course, I expect you to disagree with that last part; from your essay I can tell that you believe in the public schools inculcating values into our children-when they should be simply educating them instead!

Well I have a news flash for you madam. The kernel of true feminism lies in the personal freedom and individuality we ALL have under the US constitution. Where it definitely DOES NOT lie is in ideological lockstep to any one political outlook, party, or single issue! So your assertion that the Democrats have a monopoly on the issues, truth, or even moral authority is poppycock; I hope that the voters provide you with a large shock in the fall by rejecting their elitist and Marxist ideology as well as Mr. Obama's charade of a candidacy...

Whoa, looks like Wendy got into Obama's stash.

That's a very sad and pathetic article you've written there. It shows a lack of serious knowledge about religion and makes one wonder exactly what you are teaching. Most likely postmodern moral relativism which is the religion of the left.

If Sarah Palin is not a woman I'd be curious to know your definition of a woman. That someone with standards, principles and morals that has set and achieved goals her entire life, has cheerfully looked upon obstacles and deterrents to women and has overcome them, has maintained a longterm and apparently happy marriage and raised 5 awesome children is not by your definition a woman is mind boggling.

I suspect jealousy and bitterness may be your motivation in writing such a hatefilled and dishonest article. I hope you somehow find comfort from the demons that drive you.

Something tells me the writer of this bitter screed needs a date. Maybe two. And her opinion is valuable why?

Good lord, you hypocritical harpie.

"Outing her daughter?" You mean the daughter that your fellow leftists had just accused of bearing Palin's five-month old?

"Her pretense that she's a woman?" Of course she doesn't speak for women! Isn't it obvious that you, Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem are the only ones allowed to do that? News flash: you're not allowed to revoke someone's gender because her (yes, her!) politics don't coincide with yours.

And your closing line is the most precious-- abortion is "in the mother-lovin' Constitution." Go read the mother-lovin' Constitution, Doniger. You may be surprised at what you find (and, I'll wager, even more surprised at what you don't find).

Hip-check the hippie! Hip-check the hippie! Hip-check the hippie!

Wait... that would be the closest Wendy Doniger has come to sex since she was covered in mud at Woodstock and some stoned guy mistook her for a woman.

"Her greatest pretense is that she is a woman."

Unbelievable, Dr. Doniger. Younger women are fleeing in droves from the very word "feminism" because of people like you who think that being a women first and foremost means having particular political views. And those are, of course, your particular political views.

I find it ironic that you say that you are concerned that Sarah Palin will force her views on others. By flinging such an insult, what is your intent? Surely it couldn't be to at least shame other women into sharing yours?

As an atheist, libertarian, Ivy educated woman of color who supports the candidacy of Sarah Palin, I'd like to know what evidence you can point to supporting the notion that this woman wants to impose her views on anyone by the power of government. I've seen evidence that she moved PAST her own views to uphold the law, but absolutely NONE that she's tried to use her power as a government official to impose those views on ANYONE. She even sends her kids to public school (unlike her detractors/opponents). Where's the evidence for your attacks? Or is this just more hysteria, smearing a woman whose views don't match your own....?

The only people I see (in print and in person) who are demanding that everyone believe as they do "or else" are people like you on the left. The vile hatred coming from YOUR side horrifies me. Sarah Palin makes me smile because she's a regular person, a woman who does NOT preach or try to influence--she just IS; she just DOES. I admire that--and I'll vote for her proudly here in New York. You'd be surprised how many women here will do likewise (not that they/we would speak out in public about that--don't want to be attacked)

What a load of clap-trap. This from someone who masquerades as a professor at a major university. It is poorly researched, or more correctly not researched: Palin did NOT cut spending on teen mothers, she did reduce the spending increase; but then to liberal wingnuts slowing the rate of growth is a cut. It is nothing more than a liberal hit-piece. But we've come to expect that from American academia, there isn't enough intellectual honesty in the academy to put in your eye.

Bah. Just more of the usual leftwing garbage.

jeez...whatta clown.

Can you point to ONE instance where she has forced her beliefs on others? The supposed book burning didn't happen. She hasn't outlawed abortion in Alaska and she hasn't mandated abstinence only education programs in Alaska.

In other words, she's JUST LIKE BIDEN in that she doesn't force her religious viewpoints on others.

Your mention of her bringing her family on stage at the RNC is hypocritical since Obama has paraded his family around at every opportunity, including having them do a press interview. Had Palin NOT had her family on stage, I'm sure that you would have made that an issue of her "hiding" her family and her pregnant daughter.

As for Palin and gun control- you make a good joke. Firearms in Chicago are outlawed, yet there were two times as many deaths in Chicago this year as there were US casualties in the warzone in Iraq. Yet you openly worry about how many people will be killed in Alaska with guns, despite the fact that their gun deaths have gone dramatically DOWN since 1993 when the state passed it's own version of the Second Amendment.

To paraphrase your article's tag line: your greatist hypocricy is that you think you're an intellectual when you're anything BUT.

The Washington Post printed this? I think even the nutjobs at Daily Kos or Huffington Post might have had second thoughts.

I know the media is in the tank for Obama, but this is just plain weird.

I don't even know where to begin. Your entire article is factually inaccurate, filled with errors and false assumptions. Palin "outed" her daughter because of the rumors that baby Trig was Bristol's secret child. She didn't cut spending for the transitional home, she cut increased spending 3 fold (instead of the 4 fold others wanted). You also insinuate that Palin has tried to force her views on others, which is not the case at all. For example, when presented with legislation that gave benefits to gay couples, she signed it even though such relationships conflict with her personal beliefs. Don't pretend that you have no problem with people's personal beliefs when it is quite clear that you do. You object to politicians' beliefs that conflict with what you think they should do, regardless of whether they try to force their beliefs on others or not. This year's ticket is a distinct turn away from President Bush's policies of forcing his and the religious rights' belief on others.

Ms. Doniger,

Are you aware of a provision in the U.S. Constitution called the First Amendment? I Guarantees expression of Religious Beliefs in the Public Square, even while in Public Office (How many Days of Prayer did the Founding Fathers call for as President?) . If you disagree with people having that right, why not consider emmigraion to a Country were such a right of expresion is not guaranteed?

Also, Ms. Dongier, I would like you acquaint you with a little known book called a "Dictionary"
Most define the word as "the female human being" with no distctions being made as to political or religious beliefs. Your desire to define a "woman" as someone holding your own beliefs says much about your worldview and your tolerance for people who not hold to it.

Your right to kill babies is in "It's in the mother-lovin' Constitution."

Where?

Mmm, what to say. Well, first you repeat the old canard that faith cannot drive politics.

But if you went back and removed every law significantly influenced by faith, a short list of those laws and similar measures you would have to remove include: the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Civil Rights Act of 1866; the Fifteenth, Fourteenth and Thirteenth Amendments; the First Amendment (Patrick Henry famously said that it was the Christianity of Americans that led them to respect freedom of religion); and finally, the Declaration of Independence. Basing laws on faith is as American as apple pie. The real line that separates church and state is we don’t tell you what to believe or what to say, but merely what you do. Freedom of thought, but not action.

> As for sex, the hypocrisy of her outing her pregnant daughter in front of millions of people...

As though she had a choice in the matter, especially given what the howling monkeys at Daily Kos were saying about her daughter. It was either break the story herself or be accused of a cover up.

> her faith in abstinence applying, apparently, only to non-Palins

Um, are you telling us she DIDN’T tell her daughter to refrain from sex? Or was this a botched attempt to “whack” her for wanting abstinence only education? Except there is one problem: she didn’t. She merely said that education should stress that abstinence is the only sure-fire method of birth control, but alternatives should be discussed. She also said no “explicit” sexual education; hard to know what that means, although what leaps to mind is condoms on bananas. In other words she agrees with 99% of Americans.

> after using a line-item veto to cut funding for

Another canard. Why not tell the exact truth, which was she reduced the amount of the increase of funding. And really, even if it was a cut, are all cuts bad? Are you really going to say it is impossible for them to have spent TOO MUCH on it, and thus any time there is a cut in funding it is a bad thing? What if they are spending $100,000,000,000 on it, and she reduces it to a mere $100,000,000. Are you still going to say she doesn’t care about teenage mothers? Isn’t there some point when we say the government is spending enough?

This is precisely how budgets get out of control, when partisans pretend that any cut, or in this case reduction of the increase, proves she doesn’t care about the issue, blindly, without reference to how much was given or how much was needed. You create a political climate where politicians feel like they will be hectored if they say no to any increase, or merely to a higher increase than they would like. It is hackery at its worst.

> Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman.

(Channeling Austin Powers.) “She’s a MAN, baby!”

Really, that has to be the most ridiculous line in this piece. I had no idea that gender was a political, rather than biological function. So if Barack Obama believes in all the things you would like him to believe, he is actually a woman? And if his wife agreed, would that make them a lesbian marriage? Does that mean that if you ban gay marriage you can only marry someone who disagrees with you politically? If it sounds like I am mocking you, well, I am.

> The Republican party's cynical calculation that because she has a womb and makes lots and lots of babies (and drives them to school! wow!) she speaks for the women of America

When have they ever said she speaks for all women? No one woman does, not even Barack Obama. If you sat the Republicans down and asked them, I bet what they would say is they reject the entire concept that one’s gender is tied up in one’s politics.

> And as for religion, I'd love to know precisely how the Good Lord conveyed to her so clearly his intention to destroy the environment (global warming, she thinks, is not the work of human hands, so it must be the work of You Know Who),

Well, it seems you yourself have engaged in a little bit of faith-based reasoning here. Most Americans are figuring out that the evidence is less than clear on the subject, and the fact that our earth has actually cooled in the last couple years belies the notion that there is even such a thing as global warming. The fact that they have changed the subject to “climate change” is evidence that they know they are losing this battle. As if the climate never changed. Anyone else find it ironic that the people who fear “climate change” simultaneously worship Barack Obama who runs on change, without telling us very much about what he would change us to, as though all change was good. To hear them tell it, change in the environment is automatically bad; change in the country is automatically good. And neither of those positions are actually logical.

Anyway, most Americans consider it quite a leap of faith to say that even though scientists can’t tell me what the temperature will be next Tuesday, then can tell me it will be on September 11, 2020.

> the lives of untold thousands of soldiers and innocent bystanders

We could flip that around very easily. Life with Saddam was more hazardous to the health of innocent Iraqis, than life under freedom. So apparently you think God really wanted the Iraqi people to die more frequently, and to live without freedom. Who was that guy who said “Injustice anywhere threatens freedom everywhere”? Must have been some religious nut neoconservative.

> And [Obama] was right to remark (of the religious implications of abortion), "I don't presume to be able to answer these kinds of theological questions."

Indeed, he doesn’t even presume to tell a doctor that a fully born infant deserves a chance at life. I guess that would be above his pay grade, suggesting he isn’t ready for a promotion.

> Of course, it would be hard for Palin to follow this excellent policy, since it's evident that almost her only qualification in the minds of McCain & co.is her family.

Another canard. Anyone who watched her debut speech knows she has a lot more to recommend hers than that.

> But [Biden] has gone out of his way to insist that he would not impose his personal views on others, and has indeed voted against curtailing abortion rights and against criminalizing abortion. That is the right answer.

But that is not the answer Barack Obama gave. Biden voted for the federal version of the Born Alive Act; Obama strangled the Illinois version in its crib.

And besides its back to that canard that faith should not guide the law, which is where we started.

> It's in the Constitution.

Really? Where does it say that? Because I can assure you that freedom of religion is not the same as freedom of action. Just try practicing a little public human sacrifice, say in Times Square, and see what happens to you.

Gosh, this has to be one of the worst pieces I have read in a while.

I hate to drop this bomb on this idiot, but if you have a vagina you are a real woman. That includes even this moron. Just because a person does not agree with your political views, especially abortion on demand, that does not excommunicate them from their biology. Being a woman is a biological fact. However, being an individual trapped in their own political dogma frothing at the mouth about any woman who does not agree with them is simply deranged. It is amazing how one attractive, intelligent woman with conservative views has set the feminist crones spinning. I sit back and enjoy the show. Although abortion is the holy grail of the feminist crones, the majority of American women don't vote on a singal issue, such as myself. I believe in abortion in certain instances but it is not my singular issue and does not decide my vot. The feminists are revealing their blood lust for the murder of unborn children anywhere anytime for any reason. Keep it up feminist, we women of the heartland are watching and we are not approving.

This obnoxious, partisan hack is a professor at University of Chicago?

I'm guessing Chicago's excellent academic reputation is due more to its economics department. Whoever hired and tenured this "pretense of a woman" should be ashamed.

I really don't understand the utter panic -- approaching meltdown -- on the Left. Yes, Obama now trails in the national polls, but he still has a SIGNIFICANT advantage in the electoral college. But this week we've seen the RNC chair in South Carolina say Palin's only qualification is not having an abortion. The Governor of New York calls McCain and Palin racists for using the racially charged term... "community organizer". Obama goes off on his "lipstick" tirade (and yes, everyone in the audience knew exactly what he meant... the media's just covering up for him). And now this crap.

Why the utter disarray? It looks like Democrats just don't have the temperament to lead. Maybe academia is best for liberals.

after using a line-item veto to cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers in Alaska.

You know, I'm sure, that her veto reduced the proposed increase, and what she allowed increased the previous years budget three-fold.

Don't let that get in your way, though.

I guess to Professor "Wendy" living in a pluralistic society means that some group of people's ideals need to be preserved in law while others don't. I can't believe that we actually have Theologians in the U.S such as this "thing" working hard to push religious value and thought out of the public square completely.

This entire site is corruption. It is a calculated attempt to find cherry-picked "Representatives" of the "World's Religions" whose ideologies are directly aligned with the editorial positions of this magazine.

Using the credibility of the magazine to shoe-horn theological garbage such as this and then rubber stamping it "Mainstream", insulting and disgusting.

Why don't you get real religious thinkers and scholars to write on this "Experiment". Try Professor Peter Kreeft from Boston College or perhaps Father Richard John Neuhaus.

The screed begins, "Belief in god...."

Actually, He is "God." Not "god."

Sarah Palin hasn't just gotten in your head. She has set up camp, had cable TV installed, and is pouring the foundation for a house.

You are in for a very long 16 years.

The paragraph beginning "And as for religion" is a pack of lies. I think the real pretense going on here is your pretense of being a professor.

Setting aside all the lies in the article (straight out of the Obama talking points, naturally): can you point out one single instance in Sarah Palin's public life when she's forced her personal, religious views on anyone?

We're waiting..

Please post the passage in the Constitution specifically declaring abortion a right.

Until you do, it's a perfectly fallable decision made by a court in the 70s, and the claimant now decries her own case and one of the Justices now refutes his vote.

It never should have been made a Federal case.

Professor Doniger,

It is quite obvious that you need to focus more on teaching...'South Asian Languages and Civilizations'...because your ultra liberal view of life and religion does not sell to the majority of American's who identify themselves as conservative or leaning conservative.

I would be closer to the truth with the statement that you could not hold Sarah's "jockstrap"...when trying to compare her womb to yours...as you are more than likely just plain jealous...that she has had lot's of sex with a real man - her husband...and you, by looking at your picture...have never had sex with...a man.

Maybe you and and the rest of the faculty at the University of Chicago and Northwestern can comfort one another...over at William Ayer's and Bernadine Dohrn's house with a few cold ones after November 4th. I heard Barry & Michelle will be stopping by.

Then...you and your cohorts...can then start planning on how to be more subversive in 2009 and beyond...

Have a nice life...and try not to be such a sore loser!

Uh oh, it looks like this kook has contracted a severe case of Palin Derangement Syndrome... The prognosis is not good for those of you afflicted by this "disease"... They say it will get bad right around January 20, 2009 and may not begin to get better 'til at least January 20, 2013... Take 3 Advil and call me in 4 years... You're a kook lady!!!

Would anyone else pay good money to watch the Hockey Mom hip-check this smelly old hippie professor into the boards?

From which cesspool did the Washington Post find this fundamentalist, earth worshipping, America hating, leftist freak and dimwitted dingbat? Given the fact that Obama supports killing children who survive abortions, do Obama and this thing called Doniger have a preferred method of killing children who survive abortions? Decapitation or other forms of dismemberment? Electrocution? Firing squad? Lethal injection? Strangulation? Blunt force trauma? Suffocation? Starvation or dehydration? Also, if Obama and this thing called Doniger were to waterboard said children prior to the killing of said children, would Obama and Doniger consider that to be "torture"?

This is the classic argument that people who think they are better than you because of the name on their diploma try to use: the argumentum ad baculum. It could also be the argument with no evidence, the argument where the conclusion does not follow from the premises because there is not one premise in this article that can back up the claims of Ms. Doniger. Nice try though appealing to fear, Karl Rove would be proud.

As an atheist who supports the McCain-Palin ticket, I can only hope the left keeps pushing out this kind of material. They are so utterly out of touch with reality, and the real character of the country in which they live, and have drifted so far from the foundational values of real liberalism, that they will definitely get what they deserve if they keep up with this kind of thing.

I would feel sorry for them if they hadn't over the last 150 years trashed my civilization with their idiocy.

Liberals are dropping their masks and revealing the monsters they truly are.

As I read on another blog, regarding the "disgust" which journalists at the RNC convention exhibited when they saw Piper Palin combing her brother's hair:

"I don't know who these people are. But I do know this: They shouldn't be running our country."

Beware! Wendy Doniger is a Ward Churchill-level fraud. She's anti-religion, which is why she's a Divinity professor at a liberal university. She's well-known for her elitist, hateful views of Hinduism in particular.

Please, oh please, provide one example of where Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, with at least an 80% job approval rating in her state, has forced her beliefs on th