BACHMANN: Black Families Better In Slavery?

Were black families better off during slavery? According to Republican presidential candidates Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum and a fringe conservative group supposedly supporting the institutions of marriage and family, yes they were!

“THE FAMILY LEADER,” a group run by failed GOP gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats, asked Republican presidential candidates to sign a pledge of support for traditional marriage, entitled “The Marriage Vow…” Vander Plaats promised support to those candidates who signed it, so Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum jumped at the chance.  However, in their haste to snag the support of their fellow conservatives, they failed to actually read the document they were signing, and have now found themselves in a boatload of a mess.

You see, the document contained a horrifically controversial paragraph that both Bachmann and Santorum now say they missed, which is odd since it was on the very first page and was the very first bullet point:

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.

So the belief that black families were better off during slavery than they are now, is what Bachmann and Santorum affixed their signatures of support to — except nothing could be dumber, or further from the truth! During slavery, blacks were not considered citizens or even legitimate human beings.  So the Marriage Vow’s concept of “family” didn’t exist among enslaved blacks, because the concept of marriage was not even allowed among enslaved blacks.  Black men were often considered the “prized bull” of slavery, with fathers, brothers and sons frequently separated from their families and sold off — never to be seen or heard from again.  So for any conservative group to concoct a document that even suggests the black family was stronger during slavery than it is today, and for any GOP political candidate to agree by signing the document in support of such language, is perhaps one of the most asinine moves in a century.  Who uses the tragedy of slavery to promote the concept of family???

In light of a huge public backlash regarding the document and their signed support of it, Bachmann and Santorum are now on the hotseat and scrambling for words to explain their stupidity.  “Look, when I first read it I was taken aback, but I can’t argue that I wasn’t, but I understand why they are saying that,” Santorum said.

But Bachmann’s staff tried a different spin by denouncing the slavery claim, saying she only endorsed the “candidate vow,” portion of the document, which did not include the offensive language.  Yeah…right!  “She signed the ‘candidate vow,’ ” campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart said. “In no uncertain terms, Congresswoman Bachmann believes that slavery was horrible and economic enslavement is also horrible.”

Since this story went national, the Family Leader issued the following statement to announce that they have removed the slavery language from the full document:

“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. We sincerely apologize for any negative feelings this has caused, and have removed the language from the vow.”