The insane Schlafly klan

Phyllis Schlafly is remembered as the one who leads the Eagle Forum and fought to defeat the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s and 80s. For that, she is condemned by progressive women as being of the same character as Benedict Arnold. Indeed, Phyllis’s whole career is one of staggering hypocrisy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phyllis_Schlafly#Criticism

The feminist activist Gloria Steinem and the author Pia de Solenni, among others, have noted what they consider irony in Schlafly’s role as an advocate for the full-time mother and wife, while being herself a lawyer, editor of a monthly newsletter, regular speaker at anti-liberal rallies, and political activist.[30][31][32] In her review of Schlafly’s Feminist Fantasies, de Solenni writes that “Schlafly’s discussion reveals a paradox. She was able to have it all: family and career. And she did it by fighting those who said they were trying to get it all for her… Happiness resulted from being a wife and mother and working with her husband to reach their goals.”

Now her son, Andrew Schlafly, is continuing in his mother’s footsteps, and is making an absolute fool of himself as the head of an biased web encyclopedia known as Conservapedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservapedia

Here’s an example of Andrew’s foolishness:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservapedia#Lenski_dialog

On June 9, 2008, New Scientist published an article describing Richard Lenski‘s 20-year E. coli experiment, which observed the bacteria evolve the ability to metabolize citrate — a rare and complex mutation.[65] Schlafly contacted Lenski to request the data. Lenski explained that the relevant data were in the paper and that Schlafly fundamentally misunderstood it. Schlafly wrote again and requested the raw data. Lenski replied again that the relevant data were already in the paper, that the “raw data” were living bacterial samples, which he would willingly share with qualified researchers at properly equipped biology labs, and that he felt insulted by letters and comments on Conservapedia, which he saw as brusque and offensive, including claims of outright deceit.[66] The exchange, recorded on a Conservapedia page called “Lenski dialog”,[67] was widely reported on news aggregate sites and weblogs. Carl Zimmer wrote that it was readily apparent that “Schlafly had not bothered to read [Lenski’s paper] closely”,[68] and PZ Myers criticized Schlafly for demanding data despite not having a plan to use it nor the expertise to analyze it.[69] Consequently, editors who began to ask too many questions about the issue and about specific links “not allowed in Conservapedia”, were censored and permanently blocked. [70]

Andrew founded Conservapedia because he claimed that Wikipedia was biased to the left, but in fact, being a right-wing extremist, he naturally sees anything even slightly to the left of him as unacceptable, and Conservapedia is a manifestation of his own bigotry.

If people like the Schlaflys ran America, we wouldn’t have a free country at all, but a theocratic empire in republican clothing, and where women are allowed to have careers, but only under men’s terms, not their own. They must be discredited and buried forever!

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “The insane Schlafly klan

  1. Learn how the 19th amendment was passed…

    A Real-Life Soap Opera About the Suffragettes

    Ms. Schlafly and Ms. Steinem are proof that women can and do diverge on important issues.

    Even on the question of whether women should vote!

    Most people are totally in the dark about HOW the suffragettes won votes for women, and what life was REALLY like for women before they did.

    Suffragettes were opposed by many women who were what was known as ‘anti.’

    The most influential ‘anti’ lived in the White House. First Lady Edith Wilson was a Washington widow who married President Wilson in 1915, after the death of his pro-suffrage wife.

    The First Lady’s role in Wilson’s decision to jail and torture Alice Paul and hundreds of other suffragettes will never be fully known, but she was outraged that these women picketed her husband’s White House.

    I’d like to share a women’s history learning opportunity…

    “The Privilege of Voting” is a new free e-mail series that follows eight great women from 1912 – 1920 to reveal ALL that happened to set the stage for women to win the vote.

    It’s a real-life soap opera about the suffragettes! And it’s ALL true!

    Powerful suffragettes Alice Paul and Emmeline Pankhurst are featured, along with TWO gorgeous presidential mistresses, First Lady Edith Wilson, Edith Wharton, Isadora Duncan and Alice Roosevelt.

    There are tons of heartache on the rocky road to the ballot box, but in the end, women WIN!

    Thanks to the success of the suffragettes, women have voices and choices!

    Exciting, sequential episodes with lots of historical photos are great to read on coffeebreaks, or anytime.

    Subscribe free at

    http://www.CoffeebreakReaders.com/subscribe.html

  2. Pingback: Even worse than Conservapedia! « Dale Husband's Intellectual Rants

  3. Pingback: Rape Apologists! | Dale Husband's Intellectual Rants

  4. Pingback: Even Republicans are waking up! | Intellectual Rants

  5. http://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/the-final-repudiation-of-phyllis-schlafly

    {{{Firmly grounded in an “Ozzie and Harriet” mythology, Schlafly was clueless about the realities of modern life. In 1981, she told a U.S. Senate committee that women who are sexually harassed have only themselves to blame. Lecherous bosses, said Schlafly, “hardly ever ask sexual favors of women from whom the certain answer is ‘No.’ Virtuous women are seldom accosted by unwelcome sexual propositions or familiarities, obscene talk or profane language.”

    She opposed equal pay for women, fought efforts to make child care more affordable and plentiful and opposed programs to give young people sex education in public schools. (Sex ed., she once opined, is “a principal cause of teenage pregnancy.”)

    Schlafly’s views belong to an America of the past. They’re anchored in the America she idealized – the fake 1950 vision of a white, Christian nation where schoolkids prayed on command and God gave us nuclear weapons to scare off the Reds.

    Hers was an America where wives graciously submitted to their husbands. Schlafly often began speeches by thanking her wealthy husband for allowing her to be out that night. The irony is that she made a career out of traveling the country telling women that they didn’t need careers.}}}

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s