GOP Debate Sponsor Said Black Children Worse Off Under Obama Than During Slavery
The seemingly endless series of Republican presidential debates has been a rain of soundbite manna from media heaven, and the latest stream of buzzworthy clips emanates from Saturday’s “Thanksgiving Family Forum,” sponsored by The Family Leader. Curiously missing from the Sunday show buzz over the debate, though, is the fact that in July, the debate’s sponsors authored a pledge that asserted, among other things, that “a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President.”
In case you missed it, Republican presidential candidates Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and Rick Santorum (R-Google) each signed The Family Leader’s so-called “Marriage Vow” (which actually seeks to destroy tens of thousands of legal marriages) in July, and among all of the anti-gay, anti-porn stuff was a paragraph that insisted that black children born into slavery had a better shot at two-parent glory than those born under President Obama’s watch:
Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household* than was an African American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President.
The pledge was such a pinata of crazy that only Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum would agree to sign it, and when outrage sprang up over the slavery reference, the group removed it with a “sorry your feelings were hurt” non-apology:
“After careful deliberation and wise insight and input from valued colleagues we deeply respect, we agree that the statement referencing children born into slavery can be misconstrued, and such misconstruction can detract from the core message of the Marriage Vow: that ALL of us must work to strengthen and support families and marriages between one woman and one man,” the group’s officials said in a statement. “We sincerely apologize for any negative feelings this has caused, and have removed the language from the vow.”
RELATED: Slavery Reference Removed From Marriage Pledge As Michele Bachmann Camp Fumbles Response
The contents of that retraction are important. As I wrote at the time, aside from the obvious offense of making a favorable comparison of any aspect of slavery to anything, the group deliberately sought to draw that comparison between the slave era and the presidency of Barack Obama, using a study that said nothing of the kind, and which was published four years before President Obama even took office. The study they cited contained no data from either era.
However, their “apology” makes clear that the problem with the passage is with those who read it and “misconstrued” it, not with the passage itself. As far as anyone knows, The Family Leader still believes that a child born into slavery in 1860 was better off (under the narrow category of being raised by a “mother and father in a two-parent household”) than one born free during the presidency of Barack Obama.
Therefore, every candidate who attended that debate (Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman skipped it) ought to be asked, in every interview, if they agree with The Family Leader on that point, and when the political media report on this event, they ought to mention this pledge while they’re describing the organization simply as a “Christian group.”
This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.
