First of all, when politicans sign pledges to do something or not do something, it is all a meaningless game. Remember the pledge taken by the "Republican freshmen" who said they would willingly term limit themselves? Remember how many then didn't hold to their own pledge?
When this pledge nonsense first happened, I read the offending passage and saw it didn't make an excuse for slavery or justify slavery or whatever, as was being stated by critics. What was said was stupid because it brought into play the marriage rate during the time of slavery.
That ignores if marriage of slaves was allowed or recognized. It ignored any data showing how many families were broken up because of selling of a spouse. It was just a plain stupid way to try to make a point.
Look, this bears repeating...
A politician can't make a person take drugs; or not.
A politician can't make a person commit a crime; or not.
A politician can't make a woman get an abortion; or not.
A politician can't make a man have unprotected sex with a woman; or not.
A politician can't make a woman have unprotected sex with a man; or not.
A politician can't make a man leave his children; or not.
In the final take, a pledge can't make a politician uphold an idea; or not.
There might be stupid pledges, but the motives for asking a person to take them are usually well-intended. It's when people who make pledges fail to honor their commitments and aren't held accountable for that failure that pledges become trivialized. The fact that there are Bachmanns and Santorums willing to make such promises -- evidently without reading them closely -- says a lot about their (lack of) integrity and competency.
Posted by: Wm_Tucker | July 12, 2011 at 03:03 PM