The Politics of Palin

After having not posted for a long time (and, frankly, deciding I would never post again), I feel compelled to make a comment on Sarah Palin, John McCain’s selection to be his running mate in the current presidential election.

I know very little about her. From the news we know she was governor of Alaska, long ago was a Miss Alaska runner up, she has 5 strangely named children and not much else.

From blogs I have read, I find she is evil and wicked and vile because she is in government. It seems some of the far-right hyper-patriarchal types are upset that a woman is on the ticket. Her place, they claim, is not in the White House, but in her house. She has some small children, including a special needs child, and needs to be at home watching over them.

Th verses most often used to drive the point home are Isaiah 3:12 and 1 Corinthians 14, sometimes citing John Knox’s work The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women where he speaks of the curse of women rulers in England.

While I have seen the Isaiah passasge used, I have never seen it exegeted in context with a proper application based on that exegesis. Just warnings about women rulers. Would this warning apply to Deborah and Esther? If not, why not? Would this mean the administrations of Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meier were evil? And since it is God who raises up leaders and brings them down, and He has done so throughout history, how does that apply to a woman running for office? Until these questions can be answered biblically, I’m afraid I’m going to have to reject the Palin detractors using Isaiah.

The passages from Corinthians are even weaker. The context clearly has to do with authority within the church. The church does not have the authority to dicate requirments for office to the government. We are electing leaders of our government, not the church. These passages that apply to the church cannot be extened to the goverment without damaging the meaning and altering God’s Word.

As for the John Knox argument, it was based upon the fact that the English Monarch was also considered the head of the Church of England. In that case it would not be proper to have a woman as the head of the church.

And finally, along with the weak arguments, I have another issue with these pundits. They need to keep their noses out of somone else’s household. If they can demonstate that Mr. Palin objects to the candidacy of his wife, then I might listen. But it’s his house and his wife and he has the authority and responsibility to run that house according to God’s Word. If he is in error, the missives should be directed to him. The hyper-patriarchs especially should be aware of that.

I’ve had my rant. I’ll disappear into my hole again.