Will Palin's Pregnant daughter hurt her...

rellascout · September 1, 2008, 02:08 PM

conservative credentials? Did McCain know about this when he picked her? How will this play with social conservatives?

ST. PAUL, Sept. 1 -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin announced today that her 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is pregnant and plans to have the baby and marry the father.

"Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned," Palin, the presumptive Republican vice-presidential nominee, said in a statement issued by Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign. "We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support."

JWT · September 1, 2008, 02:12 PM

I suppose some 'do gooders' will make a big deal out of it. Shouldn't have any impact one way or another (not that it won't). Palins' statement says all that needs to be said. It's about her daughter, not her.

SecDef · September 1, 2008, 02:15 PM

No, it's about her. It's about her abstinence only belief system and refusal to accept condoms in her family.

longeyes · September 1, 2008, 02:16 PM

Only with those on the Left who think that human fertility is an affront to the animal kingdom and animal rights.

astromanluca · September 1, 2008, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by longeyes

Only with those on the Left who think that human fertility is an affront to the animal kingdom and animal rights.

What does that mean?

I think it will only hurt her among the staunchest of social conservatives who now think she's a bad parent because her 17-year-old daughter acted like a 17-year-old daughter.

Forwardassist · September 1, 2008, 02:19 PM

Actually I don't believe it will hurt her. Yes, the left wing blogs will run with it, trying to damage her integrity but it might backfire on them. You see in today's day and age we all know a family were a young daughter got pregnant. I know three young single mothers, who in the late teens got careless. Now they are older and much wiser. Also the mother has been very supportive of her daughter, which will appeal to most mothers. And she is keeping the baby which is a positive for social conservatives. It might even be a positive for them since it will show that her family is really no different that anyone else, and that will appeal to many voters.

ringworm · September 1, 2008, 02:20 PM

AK has a 14 to 1 male to female ratio.
she is an attractive girl from a well to do family.
im sure that she has been hounded by guys since she hit puberty.
too bad she didnt use birth control.
But to think that somehow a fit and attractive 17 year old young woman isnt going to engage in sex is ridiculous.

cpaspr · September 1, 2008, 02:24 PM

Quote:

SecDef -
No, it's about her. It's about her abstinence only belief system and refusal to accept condoms in her family.

No parent has 100% control over their children. Nor should they. "Refusal to accept condoms in her family."? That doesn't make any sense. Her daughter had sex and got pregnant. It happens. The girl is going to keep the baby, and marry the father. Good. Her parents love and support her, in spite of her apparently having sex before they felt she was ready. Good again.

It is about the daughter, not about Sarah Palin. Will the DNC and the MSM try to make it about Sarah? Probably. Should they. No. But what they should do and what they do do, are often very far apart.

rellascout · September 1, 2008, 02:34 PM

Until your kids are 18 their actions reflect back on to you. If they are arrested they call you. You are still legally responsible for them. You cannot talk family values all day long and then say I am not responsible for the actions of my kids?? You cannot have it both ways. For many it goes way beyond that.

I personally would not have an issue with it except that she takes the following positions.

In 2002, while running for lieutenant governor, Palin called herself as "pro-life as any candidate can be." She opposes abortion for rape and incest victims, supporting it only in cases where the mother's life is in danger. Palin does support contraception, and is a prominent member of Feminists for Life (which takes no position on that issue but a more restrictive one on exceptions).

Palin is a strong supporter of abstinence-only education to prevent unplanned pregnancies among teenagers.

When you are so vocal on a particular issue and you cannot instill those values in your children it seems like you have an issue.

astromanluca · September 1, 2008, 02:37 PM

I think it reflects more on abstinence-only education (and her misguided support for it) than it does her parenting skills.

longeyes · September 1, 2008, 02:38 PM

The Playbook:

Sarah Palin is a lightweight.

Sarah Palin is a freak.

Sarah Palin is trailer trash.

Sarah Palin is...

***

To Astromanluca: There's an element in the Left that is death-oriented.

rellascout · September 1, 2008, 02:39 PM

Quote:

I think it reflects more on abstinence-only education (and her misguided support for it) than it does her parenting skills.

I agree abstinence-only does not work but how can you say it is not about her parenting skills?

Abstinence-only is one of the guiding principles of her parenting skills. She certainly attempted to use this philosophy in her own family unsuccessfully.

rellascout · September 1, 2008, 02:40 PM

No playbook just objective rational examination.

WhyteP38 · September 1, 2008, 02:45 PM

Yes, it's much more responsible for a parent to take his daughters to a church for 7 years (Natasha Obama) to 10 years (Malia Ann Obama) where they can be indoctrinated by an anti-American racist spouting bizarre conspiracy theories.

rellascout · September 1, 2008, 02:47 PM

This isn't about Obama is it. It is about Palin. Can we stay on topic?

astromanluca · September 1, 2008, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by longeyes

To Astromanluca: There's an element in the Left that is death-oriented.

I'm still confused, but I think you might be talking about abortion. Do you actually think that liberals want to push abortions on people? That reeks of insane paranoia to me. There might be a few crazies out there who actually think abortions are really awesome and should be performed all the time, but a huge number of pro-choice people still think that abortions should only be considered as a last resort and would rather see fewer abortions, not more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rellascout

Abstinence only is one of the guiding principles of her parenting skills.

I'm not sure I quite get this; did you mean "Abstinence-only is one of the guiding principles" or did you mean "abstinence is only one of the guiding principles."

What I'm saying is that I think it's a poor reflection on anyone's judgment if they support abstinence-only sex education. That is, sex ed that says "the only way to prevent problems is to not have sex" and leaves it at that, never mentioning contraceptives. I do think abstinence should be given special attention as the only 100% safe method, but to do so while excluding everything else is irresponsible and, as we can see, ineffective.

WhyteP38 · September 1, 2008, 02:49 PM

Quote:

This isn't about Obama is it. It is about Palin. Can we stay on topic?

It's about who is best suited to be president. That's the only reason the issue of Palin's daughter is relevant. If not for her potential to become president, we wouldn't have this thread. My comments were exactly on topic.

rellascout · September 1, 2008, 02:50 PM

No they are not. They are defection from the real point.

The real point is that Palin's own daughter is living proof of the failure of abstinence-only education.

That her rejection of contraception is a major issue that could have reaching effects into the lives of Americans as a whole if she were to be elected VP.

SecDef · September 1, 2008, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Only with those on the Left who think that human fertility is an affront to the animal kingdom and animal rights.

And humans become fertile around the age of 12. Are you saying that we should embrace that and support more preteen pregnancies?

Only those on the Right think ignoring human fertility is the answer to anything.

astromanluca · September 1, 2008, 02:54 PM

Boy howdy, we've got some broad brushes going in this thread!

WhyteP38 · September 1, 2008, 02:54 PM

Quote:

No they are not. They are defection from the real point. Which is that Palin's own daughter is living proof of the failure of abstinence-only education.

The topic is "Will Palin's Pregnant daughter hurt her... conservative credentials? Did McCain know about this when he picked her? How will this play with social conservatives?" Her conservative credentials matter now only because of her selection as McCain's VP. Nothing in the original post mentioned anything about abstinence-only education.

rellascout · September 1, 2008, 02:55 PM

Sure is does. It is policy matter unlike where Obama goes to church. A huge part of Palin's policy declarations have been about abstinence-only no contraception sex education inside and outside the home.

Denny Hansen · September 1, 2008, 03:06 PM

Oh my God! A pregnant, unwed teenager? How scandalous. This would probably not be so sensational if any teenager had ever gotten pregnant before in the history of the world, but her being the first one…

Attack the candidates on the issues. Let’s leave their kids, on both sides, out of it, OK?

September 1, 2008, 02:08 PM	#1
rellascout Junior member Join Date: September 2, 2004 Posts: 2,435	Will Palin's Pregnant daughter hurt her... conservative credentials? Did McCain know about this when he picked her? How will this play with social conservatives? ST. PAUL, Sept. 1 -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin announced today that her 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is pregnant and plans to have the baby and marry the father. "Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned," Palin, the presumptive Republican vice-presidential nominee, said in a statement issued by Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign. "We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support."

September 1, 2008, 02:12 PM	#2
JWT Senior Member Join Date: March 16, 2007 Location: Southern Arizona Posts: 3,888	I suppose some 'do gooders' will make a big deal out of it. Shouldn't have any impact one way or another (not that it won't). Palins' statement says all that needs to be said. It's about her daughter, not her.

September 1, 2008, 02:15 PM	#3
SecDef Senior Member Join Date: January 3, 2007 Posts: 1,545	No, it's about her. It's about her abstinence only belief system and refusal to accept condoms in her family.

September 1, 2008, 02:16 PM	#4
longeyes Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2000 Location: True West Posts: 1,350	Only with those on the Left who think that human fertility is an affront to the animal kingdom and animal rights.

September 1, 2008, 02:19 PM	#6
Forwardassist Senior Member Join Date: February 9, 2008 Location: New England. Posts: 403	Actually I don't believe it will hurt her. Yes, the left wing blogs will run with it, trying to damage her integrity but it might backfire on them. You see in today's day and age we all know a family were a young daughter got pregnant. I know three young single mothers, who in the late teens got careless. Now they are older and much wiser. Also the mother has been very supportive of her daughter, which will appeal to most mothers. And she is keeping the baby which is a positive for social conservatives. It might even be a positive for them since it will show that her family is really no different that anyone else, and that will appeal to many voters.

September 1, 2008, 02:20 PM	#7
ringworm Senior Member Join Date: August 25, 2008 Posts: 257	AK has a 14 to 1 male to female ratio. she is an attractive girl from a well to do family. im sure that she has been hounded by guys since she hit puberty. too bad she didnt use birth control. But to think that somehow a fit and attractive 17 year old young woman isnt going to engage in sex is ridiculous.

September 1, 2008, 02:34 PM	#9
rellascout Junior member Join Date: September 2, 2004 Posts: 2,435	Until your kids are 18 their actions reflect back on to you. If they are arrested they call you. You are still legally responsible for them. You cannot talk family values all day long and then say I am not responsible for the actions of my kids?? You cannot have it both ways. For many it goes way beyond that. I personally would not have an issue with it except that she takes the following positions. In 2002, while running for lieutenant governor, Palin called herself as "pro-life as any candidate can be." She opposes abortion for rape and incest victims, supporting it only in cases where the mother's life is in danger. Palin does support contraception, and is a prominent member of Feminists for Life (which takes no position on that issue but a more restrictive one on exceptions). Palin is a strong supporter of abstinence-only education to prevent unplanned pregnancies among teenagers. When you are so vocal on a particular issue and you cannot instill those values in your children it seems like you have an issue.

September 1, 2008, 02:37 PM	#10
astromanluca Senior Member Join Date: August 27, 2008 Posts: 127	I think it reflects more on abstinence-only education (and her misguided support for it) than it does her parenting skills.

September 1, 2008, 02:38 PM	#11
longeyes Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2000 Location: True West Posts: 1,350	The Playbook: Sarah Palin is a lightweight. Sarah Palin is a freak. Sarah Palin is trailer trash. Sarah Palin is... *** To Astromanluca: There's an element in the Left that is death-oriented.

September 1, 2008, 02:40 PM	#13
rellascout Junior member Join Date: September 2, 2004 Posts: 2,435	No playbook just objective rational examination.

September 1, 2008, 02:45 PM	#14
WhyteP38 Senior Member Join Date: September 22, 2005 Location: Behind a keyboard. Posts: 1,565	Yes, it's much more responsible for a parent to take his daughters to a church for 7 years (Natasha Obama) to 10 years (Malia Ann Obama) where they can be indoctrinated by an anti-American racist spouting bizarre conspiracy theories.

September 1, 2008, 02:47 PM	#15
rellascout Junior member Join Date: September 2, 2004 Posts: 2,435	This isn't about Obama is it. It is about Palin. Can we stay on topic?

September 1, 2008, 02:50 PM	#18
rellascout Junior member Join Date: September 2, 2004 Posts: 2,435	No they are not. They are defection from the real point. The real point is that Palin's own daughter is living proof of the failure of abstinence-only education. That her rejection of contraception is a major issue that could have reaching effects into the lives of Americans as a whole if she were to be elected VP.

September 1, 2008, 02:54 PM	#20
astromanluca Senior Member Join Date: August 27, 2008 Posts: 127	Boy howdy, we've got some broad brushes going in this thread!

September 1, 2008, 02:55 PM	#22
rellascout Junior member Join Date: September 2, 2004 Posts: 2,435	Sure is does. It is policy matter unlike where Obama goes to church. A huge part of Palin's policy declarations have been about abstinence-only no contraception sex education inside and outside the home.

September 1, 2008, 03:06 PM	#23
Denny Hansen Staff Emeritus Join Date: June 29, 2001 Location: Prescott Valley, AZ Posts: 2,422	Oh my God! A pregnant, unwed teenager? How scandalous. This would probably not be so sensational if any teenager had ever gotten pregnant before in the history of the world, but her being the first one… Attack the candidates on the issues. Let’s leave their kids, on both sides, out of it, OK?