Even as news was breaking regarding the newly disclosed emails of our former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton walked onto the stage at the EMILY’S List Gala.
The news reports were explosive dark clouds of suspicion descending on the presumed fulfillment of her “Madam President” campaign launched in 2013. Even as the Clinton campaign’s bright hope for the future was beginning to dim, Ms. Clinton addressed members in attendance.
I was curious. I had heard of Angie and the list she maintains. But what is this EMILY’S List organization and what are the items on her list? I wanted to know.
My Google search returned a one-line mission: “We elect pro-choice Democratic women to office.” The mission statement is followed by a more detailed description of their vision. It is pregnant with words like progressive, change, women in leadership, democratic, and the most important requirement–pro-choice.
We hear claims of the alleged “war on women,” but it appears EMILY’S List members are waging a war of their own. In addition to waging war on male leadership, they battle women seeking office that do not support their “progressive” agenda. Their most sacred agenda being the unrestricted right of a woman to kill her unborn human baby. It is a war on innocent and defenseless future leaders both women and men yet to be born.
I dare to call it what it is for two reasons:
- My common sense tells me one thing. When permitted to develop for nine months the developing life inside a woman’s womb will not result in a hydrangea, a horned lizard, a harlequin sandperch, or a highland pony. It will result in the birth of a human baby.
- My faith and the Bible support it. In Psalm 139:13 You made all the delicate, inner parts of my body and knit me together in my mother’s womb.
“EMILY” references the Anazalone Liszt Grove Research 2013 poll which claims voters in battleground states are ready to elect a woman president. Some women have, indeed, proven themselves to be strong, effective leaders with integrity capable of making decisions that bring about positive results. Of course they would be ready if a woman occupied the Oval Office.
DictionaryOne.com defines integrity as “moral soundness; honesty; freedom from corrupting influence or motive; used especially with reference to the fulfillment of contracts, the discharge of agencies, trusts, and the like.”
Not until days later did Ms. Clinton address the looming questions.
- Why did she not use the government email? Convenience. Our Secretary of State did not want the burden of carrying two electronic devices.
- Why did she not follow the rules regarding government email? She claims that she did when she emailed other government employees at their .gov email address. (What about the government related email that was sent to those outside the US government?)
- Why did she not disclose the tens of thousands of emails when they were previously requested on multiple occasions? Again, she claims that she provided all government related emails to the state department (approximately 55,000.)
- Why not allow inspection of her private server? Because it is private, because she says she has turned over all relevant emails–and because she says that is good enough.
America would surely welcome a legitimate explanation as to why our Secretary of State did not use secure government email or submit hard copies of those emails from her private account (as required by law.) Instead, she provides an Oz-like,“Pay no attention to the email server behind the Clinton walls,” attitude.
Not all progressive change is for the better. EMILY’S List members seek to elect exclusively Democratic, pro-choice women to office. Why not list integrity as a requirement of the leadership they envision as well?
We find in 1 Samuel 8 the result of demanding a particular type of leadership and having the desire to “be like other nations.”
Are you a one-issue voter? Does integrity really matter anymore? What are your prerequisites of a candidate seeking your vote?