um… while I agree with her values, I don’t think they are what we need to be claiming as secular values. I think secular values means things like protection of those who can’t protect themselves: the poor, children, etc. It should be preservation of individual rights and freedoms, protection of families, economic stability, ethical foreign policy. I thought the point was to take back the term “values voter” by pointing out that these are secular values not religious values. Instead it sounds like these are anti-religion values and says “our values are different from your values” which really seems a cut me own throat strategy.
Plus could they not get a woman who could hold her head and face still for 2 seconds?
