Former Alaska Governor (R)
Tier 4 - Personhood Never
- As a Candidate whom Many Pro-lifers Would Like to Support: her actual abortion record and rhetoric is shocking to the conscience in that Sarah Palin:
- happily appointed in 2009 a Planned Parenthood board member to the state supreme court saying she would be great for Alaska
- endorsed in 2016 the pro-abortion Donald Trump (see prolifeprofiles.com/trump)
- indicates that chemical abortifacients that kill the youngest children should be legal
- distinguishes between her "personal" and public pro-life views (personally pro-life means officially pro-choice)
- rather than fighting for protection, Sarah indicates support even for public funding to kill some unborn children
- whitewashes other candidates misleading millions to believe that pro-choice politicians are pro-life
- allows her name to be used in ads promoting even tax-funded embryonic stem cell "research"
- harms personhood by holding that "equal protection" should not apply to unborn children
- has never announced support for any state's personhood amendment nor the Federal Human Personhood Amendment
- opposes personhood by claiming that the majority can decide to legalize the killing of children.
In her vice-presidential acceptance speech Sarah said, "there is a time for politics and a time for leadership."1 During the above, which time was it for her? Sources below document Sarah Palin's tragic record and political rhetoric.
- Thinks the Morning After Pill should be Legal: Palin says that personally she would not take the Morning After Pill (an abortifacient chemical that kills the tiniest children) but that it should not be illegal. "I don't think that it should necessarily be illegal."2 This demonstrates the ARTL adage that: To be personally pro-life means to be officially pro-choice.3
- Palin Appointed Planned Parenthood Board Member to Supreme Court: As documented by the Anchorage Daily News, LifeNews, and reported by many other sources, in 2009 Sarah Palin appointed former Planned Parenthood board member4 5 6 7 Morgan Christen to Alaska's Supreme Court. Of the unrepentant pro-abortion Christen, Palin wrote, "I have every confidence that Judge Christen has the experience, intellect, wisdom and character to be an outstanding Supreme Court justice."8 9. See below SarahPAC scrubs site, about the media report that the Palin campaign removed it's glowing description of Christen Morgan within 24 hours of the publication of this Palin profile. And then read about Barack Obama's promotion of Palin's pro-abortion Judge Christen to the 9th Circuit, and of the excuses Sarah Palin later made, and of the whitewashing efforts of many in the pro-life industry, including Life News, who have long defended Republicans who appoint pro-abortion judges.
- Claims a Child's Right to Life comes from the Government: Palin undermines the God-given right to life of the unborn by wrongly indicating that a child's right to live comes from government by the people rather than from the Creator. The Anchorage Daily News asked Palin: "to what extent should abortion be prohibited in Alaska?" Sarah should have answered correctly that Alaska should never allow a single innocent child to be put to death. Instead of providing leadership and teaching that the child's right to life comes from God, Palin passed the buck. She answered in writing, "it would not be up to the governor... It would be up to the people of Alaska to discuss and decide..."10 11 The News did not ask Palin "how" but "should" abortion be prohibited. To see how wrong and destructive Palin's answer is, imagine an anti-slavery activist, or an opposition leader in NAZI Germany, when asked if blacks should be free, or if Jews should be protected by law, who answered, "It would be up to the people to decide." Government implodes when political leaders do not stress that rights are inherent and inalienable. And during a populace appeal for power, a Christian leader who disregards the Creator as the source of human rights demonstrates political cowardice and further erodes the hope of the innocent.
- Imposes Her Own Opinion, But Only When She's Wrong: When Palin says that the people or their legislature should decide whether or not to de-criminalize killing children, some may attribute that error to a false understanding of the separation of powers or a false sense of humility. However the Alaskan people did speak when 68% of them passed a defense of marriage amendment against homosexual marriage.12 13And consistent with that statewide vote the Alaska legislature passed a law effectively opposing efforts to legitimize homosexual unions. Again Sarah Palin had the opportunity to demonstrate courage and leadership by siding with the alliance of the people, the legislature, the truth, and with Judeao-Christian morality, but instead she sided with their state's activist supreme court and, "vetoed the law, and in effect granted marriage benefits to state employees and their partners."14 15 Thus Palin imposes her own opinion in support of tax-funded spousal benefits for homosexual unions, but defers to "the people" as to whether to protect children by love and by law from being dismembered.
- Has Not Endorsed State Personhood Efforts: Inconsistent with her recognition of the inestimable worth of her own son Trig,16 17 18 Sarah Palin has not endorsed any state19 20 personhood amendment.
- Has Not Endorsed the Federal Personhood Amendment: Unlike Ronald Reagan, who in 1981 offered to sign a federal human life amendment, Sarah Palin has not endorsed today's version of that effort, American Life League's Federal Human Personhood Amendment.21 Reagan publicly regretted his previous pro-abortion actions.22 Sarah Palin should exhibit the former president's willingness to acknowledge error. As with all leaders profiled on this site, Sarah Palin can raise her ProlifeProfiles ranking from Tier 4 by simply asking ProlifeProfiles.com. If Palin lets ProlifeProfiles know which Tier describes her actual commitment to the innocent, we will take her at her word.
- Rubber stamp for Pro-abortion Lawyers: Palin wants to be viewed as a leader, but in appointing a former Planned Parenthood board member to her state's supreme court, she comes across not as a leader (which often requires a fighter), but as a rubber stamp for pro-abortion lawyers. Any pro-lifer who defends such a wicked action is transferring their loyalty away from God and to a politician. If we are talking about an adult, it is simply not true to say, "she had no choice" or "she was just following orders." Palin could have just said no. Regardless of any process, a good governing official would refuse to appoint someone who hates Jews or wants to kill children, whether in Germany or America. Alaska's former Gov. Frank Murkowski once rejected all the nominees sent to him. True, Murkowski eventually caved; but then, he was not a pro-abortion governor being told to nominate a pro-lifer. ("Pro-choicers" show commitment.) Too bad we don't love our own candidates enough to warn them of their dire consequences of their sin.
- Uses Liberal, Socialist Terminology: Palin's Facebook page uses liberal, pro-choice, socialist terminology even in a very politically sensitive context (trying to defend her pro-life credentials after appointing a Planned Parenthood board member to the Supreme Court). America is told that Palin believes in a culture of life "from cradle to grave." This is poor, even harmful, communication and shows a lack of political savvy. On the economic spectrum from freedom (capitalism) through socialism, to communism, Palin commits an economic faux pas by using a term that describes a socialist government23 which gives entitlements including socialized health care, "from cradle to grave." And since the baby doesn't get to the cradle until nine months after conception, using the phrase "cradle to grave" in regard to abortion seems to betray a pretend ownership of pro-life values.
- Uses Pro-choice Terminology: Palin uses pro-choice terminology referring to the abortifacient Morning After Pill as "contraception." Also called Plan B, the Morning After Pill is a chemical weapon of mass destruction that targets only children. The abortion industry re-defined "conception" to mean implantation to make it easier to sell chemicals to kill a child in the womb. The abortion and pharmaceutical industries lie to a woman by calling the drug a contraceptive, implying that it only prevents conception. Such drugs though are abortifacients, designed to cause a miscarriage of the baby boy or girl. See also WorldNetDaily.com, Jill Stanek's Personhood initiatives proliferate, which efforts "force the other side to admit" that the IUD and other abortifacients "kill currently unclassified humans," something, "the other side has gone to great lengths to hide..."
- Supports some Tax-Funded Abortion: Sarah Palin will pay to kill some children with tax dollars. The Anchorage Daily News asked her, "do you support or oppose the use of public funds for abortion?"24 Sarah should have answered correctly that it is always wrong to intentionally kill an innocent child, therefore, she should have unequivocally opposed forcing tax payers to kill some "unwanted" children. Instead Palin crafted, in ten written words,"I oppose the use of public funds for elective abortions."25 26By this Palin goes further than even the many "pro-choice" people who think the government should never pay for abortion, by indicating that some babies should not be protected by law but instead killed with tax dollars.
- Thinks some Kids must be Killed: Palin promotes the egregious error that some abortions are medically necessary when she refers to non-elective child killing by writing, "I oppose the use of public funds for elective abortions."27 Abortion is always wrong because it's a baby; it's never right to intentionally kill a baby. Laws for "the life of the mother" are not meant to save the mother but to kill the baby. No doctor needed a law to try to save the mother and the child, regardless if either patient might die. Rape, incest, and life "exceptions" opened the floodgates of abortion and are only designed to gain support for child killing. The doctor's goal should never be to kill the mother to save the baby, nor to kill the child to save the mother. Early, as in an ectopic pregnancy, the baby tragically dies as we save the mom; in late-term emergencies, medical protocol is to save the mother by performing a caesarean section but never stopping midway to intentionally kill the baby, which is the crime that all life "exceptions" permit. The goal must always be, if possible, to save both, and Palin is wrong to imply that the law could ever justly authorize the intentional killing of any child.
- Whitewashed Pro-choice Politician: Palin's pro-life public image enabled her to whitewash pro-choice John McCain.28 A few years before his presidential candidacy, as Vision Forum has reminded Christians, National RTL titled their revealing report, "John McCain Threatens the Pro-Life Cause." In a reverse contribution, the opposite of a million donations from special interests to political parties, the Republican National Committee has actually donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to National RTL. With their ultimate loyalty to a political party,29 NRTL was forced to report that McCain, "Voted consistently against federal funding of abortion."30 But NRTL arrived at this false claim by ignoring Palin's running mate's votes31 that fund surgical abortion, fund chemical abortion, fund killing the tiniest children for research, and that give hundreds of millions to Planned Parenthood.
- Allowed Herself to be Used to Promote Embryonic Research: As soon as she became a vice-presidential running mate, Sarah Palin was used to promote the tax-funded embryonic stem cell research32 that McCain promotes,33 which is the fatal dissecting and harvesting of the bodies of the tiniest boys and girls for grisly research.34
- Creation Should Not be State Policy: Palin undermines society's understanding of the God-given right to life by advocating that God's hand in creation, "should not be part of state policy or a local curriculum..."35 But then, where do rights come from? Thus Palin would keep from children the fundamental truth that even a deist like Thomas Jefferson36 acknowledged in our Declaration of Independence that people, "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights [and] that among these are Life..."37 When Sarah further states that evolution, "should be taught as an accepted principle," she confuses young Americans who intuitively realize that a fish can eat another fish without moral consequence38 but then wonder about the fundamental difference between mankind and animals, which of course is that men are made in the image of the triune God.39
- Respects Opinions to Kill Children: Palin says she personally opposes abortion for a rape victim but she respects "people's opinion on this,"40 that is, on killing a child, and apparently even for aborting someone for the crime of the child's father, in violation of Deuteronomy 24:16, "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall the children be put to death for their fathers" (see also Ezek. 18:20). Does Palin respect the views of racists too, or only of those who kill children? "There is a time for politics and a time for leadership."41 Which time is it now Sarah?
- States can Kill Children in Palin's America: As though abortion were a zoning issue, Sarah Palin says that states have the right42 to decide whether to permit the intentional killing of unborn children. She thereby effectively rejects that a fetus is a person, and she rejects the "due process" clause in the 5th amendment43 and like Ron Paul, Palin rejects the "equal protection" of the 14th amendment44. These amendments obligate our federal and state governments to not permit the intentional violation of the right to life of any innocent persons, including, of course, Blacks, Jews, and children. By her erroneous application of states' rights, which suffices only to pass the buck, Palin would require the federal government to violate the U.S. Constitution and tolerate child killing in various states, rejecting the 5th Amendment and the 14th which states in part: "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
- Queen Esther vs. Sarah Palin: Contrast Sarah Palin to Esther. Mordecai said, "Who knows whether you have come to the kingdom for such a time as this?" Tragically, if the innocent were hoping that Sarah Palin would stand up for them like Esther did for the Jews, they have been betrayed. Esther risked her very life (4:16) by pleading for the innocent that they be protected in every province. In contrast, Palin dropped her position that child killing should be outlawed without exception and, instead, now claims as on ABC News with Charlie Gibson,45 "I think that states should be able to decide that issue," that is, whether to kill unborn children (as though it were a zoning issue). She thereby violates the greatest precedent and God's enduring g command, Do not murder, and rejects both the 5th and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution that require the federal government to ensure the states provide equal protection under the law and defend the right to life of every innocent person. We know Esther. Esther is a friend of the innocent. And tragically, Sarah Palin is no Esther. Contrast them:
Esther 1:1 Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus (this was the Ahasuerus who reigned over one hundred and twenty-seven provinces, from India to Ethiopia),
Palin 1:1: Now it came to pass in the days of Milhous (this was the Richard Nixon who reigned over fifty states, from Alaska to Florida),
Esther 3:8-9 Haman said to King Ahasuerus, "… If it pleases the king, let a decree be written that [the Jews] be destroyed..."
Palin 3:8-9: The Court said to America, "Since it pleases us, let a decree be written that the unborn can be destroyed."
Esther 8:5 "If it pleases the king… let it be written to revoke the letters devised… to annihilate the Jews who are in all the king's provinces."
Palin 8:5 "If it pleases the voters… let it be written that each state can decide whether to annihilate the unborn."
- SarahPAC Scrubs Site: As reported by the media,46 within 24 hours of the publication of this profile, Sarah Palin's political action committee removed their own glowing news report of the governor's appointment of a former Planned Parenthood board member to the Alaska Supreme Court. SarahPAC took down this information; ProlifeProfiles put it back up. Welcome to the end of child killing in our lifetime.47 So you can still see:
- the broken link
- an archived .pdf image of Palin's PAC page
- an archived .html copy of the Google cache of that page.
As Sarah herself might say, "If you throw a rock into a pack of dogs, the one that yelps, got hit." SarahPAC removed their report of Palin's appointment showing that they realize that this is incriminating. Sarah Palin should have released a humble apology, but instead she tries a cover-up. While National RTL and the pro-life industry continue to allow the Body of Christ to be deceived into thinking that Sarah is 100% pro-life. But she cannot hide her record from God, nor from the public. Please pray that Sarah will apologize to the children of Alaska, specifically those who have been dismembered since March 4, 2009, for appointing an "outstanding" unrepentant child killer.
- Excuses Regarding Palin's Planned Parenthood Appointee: Excuses come from the conservative Internet rumor mill, which is in denial, from Sarah herself, and from the pro-life industry which has long defended Republicans who appoint pro-abortion judges. (Sadly in fact, two of Barack Obama's most radical nominations were bipartisan promotions of pro-abortion judges previously appointed by Republicans: George H. W. Bush's Sonja Sotomayor48 who Obama nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court and Sarah Palin's Morgan Christen who he nominated to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.49)
- Rumor Mill Excuses: Those who want to deceive themselves and others have circulated undocumented claims that Christen was never a Planned Parenthood board member, but that has been admitted even by Conservatives4Palin50 and finally even by LifeNews.51 And Palin has never denied what Alaska's leading newspaper, the Anchorage Daily News, has reported, that Morgan Christen "was on the board of Planned Parenthood" 52. So it is true that Sarah Palin did appoint a former Planned Parenthood board member to the Alaska Supreme Court.
- Sarah's Own Excuses: In her Facebook statement53 (see it above), Palin makes excuses for appointing this former Planned Parenthood board member to the state's highest court by pretending that she had no choice. But under no circumstance would Palin ever have appointed a known racist. In that case it would have benefited her political career to put up a fight. But Morgan Christen is not a known racist, but a known supporter of killing unborn children. Should an abolitionist appoint a slave trader to the Supreme Court? Sarah Palin says, as no adult ever should, and especially no leader: I had no choice. Everyone has a choice. The Alaska Judicial Council presented Palin with two nominees to choose from who were differentiated primarily as Eric Smith, the liberal environmentalist,54 and Christen, the liberal child killer. Ironically, like liberals who value the environment more than children, Sarah Palin was willing to sacrifice children to her desire to control environmental policy. As analyzed by Conservatives4Palin.com, "Governor Palin selected Christen over Smith, because Smith has a history of environmental activism..."55. According to the Washington Times, Smith wanted the "beluga whale listed as an endangered species [which] the governor opposes..."56 The Council that presented only these two nominees is appointed equally by the Alaska Bar Association and the governor, with the state's Chief Justice as the tie breaker. The Chief Justice has rarely had to break ties, including during Christen's appointment57. Yet Palin and her "pro-life" Republican predecessor appointed half of the council, and still, there was no fight over appointees, showing that there has been no true effort by Palin or Frank Murkowski to get pro-life justices appointed. What else could Sarah have done? Everything. 1) Palin could have refused to appoint Christen and refused to praise her experience, wisdom, and character. 2) Palin could have resigned instead; after all she did resign shortly afterward to begin her long campaign for the presidency. 3) Palin could have asked the Council for more nominees as Murkowki previously had tried.[Anchorage Daily News reports Gov. Murkowski asked for more nominees] 4) She could have not given up with three weeks still remaining before the "deadline" for her to act. 5) Since three days earlier Palin had just appointed a new member of the Judicial Council, Kathleen Tompkins-Miller,58, she could have requested that the re-constituted board send the governor a new list of nominees. 6) She could have done what we expect leaders to do, and be creative and fight for the innocent.
- Excuses from "Conservatives": Sarah Palin took her judicial philosophy from George W. Bush, who kept his first campaign promise59 which was that he would ignore abortion when nominating judges. For the pro-life industry could be relied upon to make excuses for both Bush and Palin's pro-abortion judicial appointments. For example, from GOP12.com, "Conservatives rally to Palin's defense on pro-abortion pick." (Meanwhile, according to National Review, conservatives including the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins, the Free Congress Foundation, and the Coalition for a Fair Judiciary condemned the exact same behavior as Palin's,60 when committed by Missouri's Republican Governor Matt Blunt for not putting up a fight against liberal referred judges in his state.) So as illustrated by Stephen Ertelt's Life News, which has long been an apologist for Republicans who appoint pro-abortion judges.61, Republican "pro-lifers" are defended even for their outright pro-abortion judicial nominations. With Sarah's political ambition, none of this is lost on her. As she wrote in Going Rogue, she does not use "abortion... as a political litmus test. I... had never asked anyone, including the Democrats I appointed, what their position on abortion was..."62 And Palin later added, "I had just appointed a well-qualified woman [Morgan Christen] to serve on the highest court in the state, and now I got a call at midnight from the pastor of a large ministry in the Lower 48. I had never met this man but he told me that he had been at a conference when he received a message that threw the conferees for a loop. The problem? I had appointed a judge who [sic] this pastor didn't think was pro-life enough. ... 'How could you have done that? ... I can't tell you how disappointed we are.' ... 'Sir, with all due respect, let me tell you what the circumstances are.' "63 Palin then proceeded to justify her appointment of a pro-abortion attorney, which appointment is completely consistent with her pledge to ignore abortion when nominating judges. Sadly, not only is the pro-life industry making no effort to stop this growing "pro-life" laissez faire attitude toward judicial appointments, it actually defends such betrayals, while at the same time being reduced to pretty much just a single argument: the nomination of judges is the reason why we have to elect these imperfect candidates.
- 1. 2008 convention speech transcript
- 2. CBS Evening News "Palin and McCain Interview" transcript
- 3. The Alaska Standard, Dan Fagan: pro-life in her personal life, not in her political life
- 4. Anchorage Daily News, "Palin bucks pressure in Supreme Court appointment"
- 5. LifeNews.com May 19, 2011: Obama Nominates Palin Appointee Ex-Planned Parenthood Board Member
- 6. The Alaska Standard, "Palin appoints former Planned Parenthood board member"
- 7. Hot Air, Ed Morrissey, "Heartache: Palin appoints former Planned Parenthood board member"
- 8. Anchorage Daily News report
- 9. Mother Jones: SarahPAC Scrubs Site
- 10. NewsBank.com article (subscription service)
- 11. OnTheIssues.org article
- 12. Alaska state constitution
- 13. Wikipedia "Alaska Ballot Measure 2"
- 14. WorldNetDaily article
- 15. CNN election report
- 16. YouTube clip
- 17. ABC News article
- 18. AP photo article
- 19. Personhood.net article
- 20. PersonhoodUSA.com map of states
- 21. American Life League "Federal Human Personhood Amendment"
- 22. LifeNews.com article
- 23. NewsWithViews.com article
- 24. OnTheIssues.org article
- 25. NewsBank.com (May require subscription)
- 26. OnTheIssues.org article
- 27. NewsBank.com (May require subscription)
- 28. ProlifeProfiles John McCain
- 29. ProlifeProfiles Nat'l RTL
- 30. NRL PAC article
- 31. ProlifeProfiles John McCain
- 32. The Washington Post article
- 33. McCain.Senate.gov press release
- 34. ReligiousTolerance.org article
- 35. PoliticusUSA.com article
- 36. KGOV.com article
- 37. The Declaration of Independence
- 38. USA Today Republican Party quote
- 39. Genesis 1:26
- 40. CBS Evening News "Palin and McCain Interview"transcript
- 41. Palin's 2008 convention speech
- 42. ABC News: Gibson interviews Palin, Sept. 12, 2008
- 43. U.S. Constitution 5th Amendment
- 44. U.S. Constitution 14th Amendment
- 45. ABC News: Gibson interviews Palin, Sept. 12, 2008
- 46. Mother Jones magazine SarahPAC Scrubs Site
- 47. ARTL three-fold strategy (see Tactics, #2)
- 48. Bush Defends Sotomayor, July 10, 2009
- 49. LA Times: Obama judicial nominee Christen confirmed
- 50. Conservatives4Palin.com: "Christen... on the board of Planned Parenthood"
- 51. LifeNews.com May 19, 2011: Obama Nominates Palin Appointee Ex-Planned Parenthood Board Member
- 52. Anchorage Daily News, March 4, 2009 article
- 53. Facebook statement
- 55. Conservatives4Palin.com analysis indicates that Palin cared more about the environment than about children
- 56. Washington Times: Palin has no choice
- 57. Anchorage Daily News article proves: pro-life governors' council members don't seek pro-life judges
- 58. Alaska Judicial Council: Historical List of Members
- 59. ProlifeProfiles.com/Bush#BushCampaignPromise
- 60. National Review Online: Conservatives Declare War on (other) Governor
- 61. American View radio interview documents: LifeNews Fabricates Claim that Judges are Pro-life
- 62. Sarah Palin, Going Rogue, 2009, pp. 215-216
- 63. Ibid. pp. 349-350
Sarah Palin claims to be personally pro-life but her words and actions prove that she is officially pro-choice and stands against the God-given right to life of the unborn. Even if Roe v. Wade were reversed, Palin says she would still leave the decision to kill children to others. That's not leadership. Like the liberation of Germany in 1945, the road to protecting America's children might pass through fields of sacrifice. Whether or not she would see this as possibly costing her entire political future, Pro-life Profiles hopes that Mrs. Palin will take a new stand and make a true commitment to protect unborn children. (Tier 1 has a spot reserved for her.)