To be named the “Worst Person in the World” is quite a feat. After all, the world is a very big place — and I’m not just saying this as a proud, current inhabitant — I know this to be true from years of science and astronomy classes. Add to this fact, then, that there are a great many people in the world — almost 7 billion — then the realization of being named “Worst Person in the World” is just staggering.
Jill Stanek — a white, pro-life woman — has been called just that by Keith Olbermann, who is a political commentator on MSNBC. Jill is just one in a string of many white, pro-life women who are coming under attack in ways that are both alarming and increasing in frequency.
When late-term abortionist Dr. Tiller was recently murdered, much of the media — including Olbermann — quickly affiliated all pro-life groups together with the perpetrator of that heinous crime. This, even though countless bishops, pro-life leaders and others condemned Tiller’s murder as an act that did not reflect the ultimate belief of pro-lifers that every life is precious from womb to tomb, even Tiller’s. Olbermann’s incendiary attack on Jill Stanek, labeling her the “Worst Person in the World,” quickly resulted in threats upon Stanek and her church, as she revealed in an interview that aired on Catholic radio.
But the case of Stanek is really only one in a long line of public and private attacks being made upon white, pro-life women. Consider when Sarah Palin came on the scene. By all accounts, Palin should have been embraced by the feminist movement that has so venomously attacked the men who created the “glass ceiling”.
What then, did Palin have, or not have, that the feminist movement chose not to welcome this woman governor as a viable candidate for the vice-presidency? Say what you will, but to claim, after the Biden cat has been let out of the bag many, many times, that Palin was not qualified to be second-in-command is just absurd.
So what was it about Palin that brought the absolute vicious — yet clearly acceptable — attacks upon her as a person and as a candidate? It would seem that her choice to carry to term a baby with Down Syndrome along with her staunch pro-life stand made her public enemy number one.
Enter Carrie Prejean. I admit that I haven’t watched a beauty contest in decades but I can remember well the pageantry of the events and the way in which I would, as a young girl, admire the contestants. I can’t say I paid all that much attention to their bathing suits as much as the way in which they carried themselves and the way in which they answered their questions during the question and answer portion of the event. Even if their answers were “pat” and could easily become fodder, the answers were nonetheless given and received with an air of respect. After all, one of these women would wear a crown and travel the country representing, to some degree, “American” values of home and hearth, hard work and kindness.
For a couple of hours we were all transformed by the fairy tale world of the beauty pageants. And even though I knew, at 8 years old, that the pretty lady couldn’t really end world hunger (if that had been her answer to the question, “Once you are crowned, what would be the most important thing you would like to accomplish?”), I also instinctively understood that ending world hunger was a good thing. The contestants said things that were “American,” even if they were pie-in-the-sky American.
But times have certainly changed. Carrie Prejean quickly became the next white, pro-life woman with a target on her back simply by sharing her personal opinion on marriage.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that we are seeing the emergence of a newly-marginalized group in America. It does not matter from where she hails or how many years she’s been upon the earth; it is open season on every member of this targeted minority: the white woman who supports life and traditional marriage and who dares to speak her mind.
