CNN reports on the pregnancy of Sarah Palin's seventeen-year-old daughter, Bristol. According to the article, this represents no threat or problem, John McCain even knew about it beforehand. In fact, the whole Palin family is fine with it, the only important thing being that the "A" word is not even mentioned. Keeping the baby is all that counts.
Sarah and Todd Palin issued a statement saying they are "proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents."
How about admitting it's a difficult moment for the family? What is all this nonsense about being proud? What about all the screaming and tears that goes on behind closed doors in situations like this? Or are these people robots? I haven't met too many parents who are OK with their teenage daughter having premarital sex, especially if those parents are on the right religiously and politically.
And what is it with all this emphasis on her "keeping the baby." In a family where the mother is a pro-life politician experiencing global attention, was there any other possibility? Did young Bristol consider abortion and go to mom for advice? I seriously doubt it. So why keep repeating the "keeping the baby" bit.
The McCain aide insisted a key point to keep in mind is that Bristol decided to keep the baby, a decision "supported by her parents."
I think they're shameless political spin doctors, whoever is responsible for the repetition. Serious pro-life folks have no option and no need to keep repeating it.
I'm pro-choice. The best argument for pro-choice that I've heard, and heard many times from the feminists is that they do not want the government controlling their uteruses. Amen to that.
What's your opinion. Please leave a comment.
In many cultures, daughters are married off at 12 or 15. When I was in Zimbabwe an acquaintance tried to get me interested in his 14 year old daughter. Sent me off to go sit on a rock fishing with her in the Limpopo with a picnic basket. She's a stunner and pleasant company, but way too young for me.
ReplyDeleteYou haven't met anybody more right wing and religious in your life than that father, he was a Selous Scout in the Rhodesian Wars.
No offense intended, but, for being general liberal, it seems un-liberal of you to chastise a 17yo girl for being pregnant or cast about aspersions as to what ehr family might be thinking. I'd find that rude if I were the Palin family. Her Body-Her Choice.
As for me, you know my beliefs. Abortion if needed up to and including the 10,000th trimester.
Nice, McCain. What kind of soldier uses a pregnant 17-year-old girl as a political shield? You knew what this was going to do, how it would divert attention away from your policies. You are throwing her under the bus.
ReplyDeleteVery nice for the scumbag above to hide behind anonymity!
ReplyDeleteThis is a pretty common thing. I know several people who were born to teen mothers, and many more born unplanned. How unthinkable could it be that it happens to this family of 7?
I think the repetition of the "She's keeping the baby" is probably because of the REALLY nasty rumors circulating about Palin's youngest son.
The daughter is lucky to have such a supportive family.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteHow about admitting it's a difficult moment for the family?
How about the privacy for the family and for us to admit it is not of our darn business. I don't want to or need to know what went on behind their closed doors. In today's TV reality age, I find it incredibly presumptuous that people think they have a right to know anything about the dynamics involved in the family. No offense, I think this is a western civilization issue, not just you.
Part of the emphasis on keeping the baby has to do with not giving it up or abandoning to the father's family. In the current times, too many people give up on taking responsibility for their action. Doesn't it show some moral courage for a teen to accept the consequences, with her family's support, of her actions?
I find it ironic, that many pro-choice folks don't want the government controlling their bodies but are anti-gun willing to let only the government have the right to defend their bodies.
they say they're proud of their daughter's decision to do something which their own political priorities and agenda would deny all women the power to decide for themselves about.
ReplyDeletethat is the issue here. what their daughter does matters sweet fuck-all to America; the fact that they, had they their druthers, would make it impossible for other people's daughters to make that choice freely, is what matters.
(and no, i don't believe for a second that their minor daughter had any real, free choice of her own in this matter. but that's her own misfortune, nothing i'm going to give a shit about.)
Nomen,
ReplyDeleteSorry to disagree but there are plenty of instances where a personal philosophy isn't translated into a political one. Abortion is one of those. I personally don't like it, but wouldn't ban it. Why can't Palin's family be the same?
Do you have any evidence that she would move to ban abortion?
Since none of us are aware of Bristol's thoughts on the subject, it's mighty interesting so many people are telling us what she thought or not.
Again, it's not any of our businesses whether or not she had a choice; until or unless the Palin's announce that information. I don't want anyone in my business or my family's; why can't we respect their privacy.
This is an amazing juxtaposition for the liberal side of the country. How many times do we hear that the teens have the right to live their lives, to make their own decisions, that sex should be only between the people involved. Now everyone wants to be up in the Palin's business.
Why is it acceptable for teens to get abortions but not keep the babies? Hypocrisy on the part of most liberals.
Because I do have respect for the Palin family, respect for their privacy, I'm not judging the teenager in any way nor am I saying we have a right to know what goes on behind their closed doors. What I am objecting to is what seems to me to be a phony spinning of the situation for political gain. Of course I have no way of knowing, but it sounds like this is a perfect example of the failure of abstinence only sex education. Does not wanting 16-year-old girls to have unprotected sex, concealing the fact from their parents, throw into question my liberal credentials? Does wanting the federal government to stay out of women's uteruses contradict my ideas about too many guns? I don't know. I may be full of contradictions. Aren't most people?
ReplyDeletedo i have any evidence she would ban abortion? she has publicly stated she is pro-life, and that "the legislature should do all it can to protect human life". i can read the dog whistle as well as her constituents, thanks.
ReplyDelete( http://ontheissues.org/2008/Sarah_Palin_Abortion.htm )
Mike,
ReplyDeleteSorry to disagree but your original post mentions that you do want to know what happened in the privacy of their home.
How about admitting it's a difficult moment for the family?
How do you know it's a phony spin on the situation? There is a difference between being proud of the behavior that caused the situation and the behavior in response to the situation.
It's not about now wanting teens to have unprotected sex, it's about the democrat's response to the situation. Why is it okay for the liberal's to advocate teens or younger to have abortion without telling their parents, but when kids do what kids have always done it's a case of some kid not telling their parents. Did you or I tell our parents when we started having sex? I sure didn't. Why should this be different.
From what I can find out, Alaska doesn't teach abstinence only.
What kind of a name is 'Bristol' anyway?
ReplyDeleterabbit, rumor has it Sarah Palin and her husband named (some? most?) of their kids after the locations they were conceived. ergo, there may be a town called Bristol, Alaska.
ReplyDeletenomen - there's even a city in the west of England called Bristol. It has a football team (soccer to you) called Bristol City which gives rise to an - erm - indelicate piece of rhyming slang. Which is one reason why no-one here would dream of calling their daughter 'Bristol'. The other reason is it's a stupid name...
ReplyDeleteWhite Rabbit,
ReplyDeleteI'll share one of my guilty pleasures, Mostly Cajun's name game.
Scroll down and find the posts marked Name Game. It's a weekly series he does highlighting the "unique" and "unusual" names kids are given. After reviewing some of them, Bristol is a nearly normal and acceptable name.
By the way, I saw a story that suggests it was Bristol Bay Alaska that gave the young lady her name. Very close to what Nomen said
Bob S - I thik I prefer Ron Knee and Never Mind the Bollix as guilty pleasures (links on WR blog)
ReplyDeleteI did posting a while ago about a child in New Zealand who actually really was called 'Talulah (sic) Does The Hula in Hawaii' until some Family Court Judge put a stop to it. I'm generally against officialdom telling people what to do, but for that I make an exception.