Some say Sarah Palin should withdraw...
...but her 17-year-old unwed daughter's decision to keep her baby is in line with the pro-life movement -- and that's largely supported by evangelicals and the Republican's family values platform.
Why should she drop out of the race?
Comments (12)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Why should Palin withdraw? Palin's daughter is 17, while not an adult (legally), she is old enough to know the consequences of practicing unsafe sex. So, she is old enough to know that by doing so, she has exposed herself to the threat of an STD(s) and this pregnancy. Palin is not responsible for the action/s of her daughter. No parent can be held accountable for the actions of a child at this age. Parent's rear children as best they can, hoping that the child will follow in the pathway that is shown (hopefully a positive one). However, that is not always the case.
I am thankful that Palin's daughter is going to carry the pregnancy to term and according to the reports that I have heard, will marry the DNA donor.
However, I feel that there is some hypocrisy to what Palin spouts and the actions of her family. It seems that the party (GOP) of family values does not follow those to the epitome of same.
Shalom
Posted on September 2, 2008 2:03 PM
The interesting part of this particular issue is that the religious right-wing doesn't seem to mind this evidence of the failure of "abstinence-only" sex education. Nor do they care much about the obvious shotgun nature of the impending nuptials.
Add to this the other difficulties surrounding her, of a non-religious nature that will doubtless be chewed over on other blogs, and it's looking more and more like the Republicans are just phoning this presidential campaign in. Let her stay, I say. Seeing her debate Joe Biden ought to be grandly entertaining.
Posted on September 2, 2008 3:04 PM
Darryl: “I feel that there is some hypocrisy to what Palin spouts and the actions of her family. It seems that the party (GOP) of family values does not follow those to the epitome of same.”
First of all, Mr. Holier-than-thou, just who do you know that EVER approaches the “epitome” level - certainly not Obama’s unwed mom, or the promiscuous, profligate Clinton, and the Rebublican transgressors as well. As the Scripture says, “ALL we like sheep have gone astray” and “There is none righteous, no NOT ONE.” But as the wise old bumper sticker says, “Christians are not perfect, just forgiven.” That pretty well sums up the conservative Christian position – sinners saved by grace! - striving to do the best they can.
It’s not that Christians or their children never falter or sin (in this wanton, sex-driven culture), but that they try to do the right thing to move a sinful situation toward a righteous and loving resolution. This, the Palins are trying valiantly to do. THAT does not make them look bad in the eyes of self-consciously imperfect Christians; rather it endears them – along with millions of other ordinary American moms and dads – Christian and non-. That’s why all the lefty bloggers and feminist hypocrites will fail utterly to dislodge or dissuade this woman from her appointed destiny as Vice President.
And wouldn’t you just think that all those hardcore feminists who’ve been harping all these decades for women to rise to the top, and be both mom and achiever, would be hailing this eminently successful woman as the champion of feminism. But NOoooooooo! They care for one thing, and one thing only: to put a radical, rainbow neo-Marxist in the White House, in order to move this country toward the socialist paradise exemplified by their tavarishes in clamp-down Cuba, repressive China, and screwed-up Venezuela. That they, and their Democrat cronies, would send out the attack dogs to destroy this woman AND her beloved family is the TRUE hypocrisy and shame – and reveals what the left is really all about: “the end justifies the means:” morality being a convenient tool of proletarian ascendancy, rather than a heartfelt commitment to divine truth.
As for the Alaskan lady: OF COURSE she’s imperfect! But she’s the fly in the DNC ointment, and possibly the hemlock they’ll have to swallow (figuratively speaking, of course) – Lord willing.
Posted on September 2, 2008 9:35 PM
...but her 17-year-old unwed daughter's decision to keep her baby is in line with the pro-life movement -- and that's largely supported by evangelicals and the Republican's family values platform.
Why should she drop out of the race?
to bring this up at all in a blog is just plain ignorant. Couldn't you have come up with a better subject matter!
Posted on September 2, 2008 10:19 PM
Abstinence??? What would be the point of being a teenager if you couldn't have sex???
Posted on September 3, 2008 12:09 AM
As can be seen, the main point of my previous post goes over the head of many.
Shalom
Posted on September 3, 2008 11:31 AM
Nu-uh, Darryl
Posted on September 3, 2008 12:44 PM
Nancy, it may be true that "some say Palin should withdraw" (though I'm skeptical, and I note that you didn't provide a link for that), but I'll bet the ones saying it don't really want her to pull out. My guess is that Democrats are pretty happy with her on the McCain ticket.
And then there's the media. They're thrilled with Palin. Someone new to skewer!
Darryl, I liked (and got) your post, but you should know by now that Nikos is part of the reality of Nancy's blog. Shalom back atcha.
Posted on September 3, 2008 4:42 PM
Darryl: “Palin is not responsible for the action/s of her daughter. No parent can be held accountable for the actions of a child at this age.”
I apologize, Darryl; I DID get your point about how Sarah Palin and her husband are not responsible for the pregnancy of their “adult” daughter (not yet 18). And I’m glad you’re glad she’s taking the pregnancy to term. But I profoundly disagree with your position that the parents of daughters Bristol’s age are not at responsible for the outcomes of their children’s decisions – especially the father. They are – to a point.
I do realize, of course, that the older a child gets the more responsible they are for their own actions; but at 17, the parents are very much in the mix – or should be. Although I do not think this situation disqualifies Mrs. Palin from seeking public office, it is not one of the better aspects of her otherwise great resume.
I believe that parents should and must (especially in our corrupt society) have a VERY hands-on relationship with their children. We did, and are now reaping the fantastic benefits of the close supervision and guidance of our children. It was our human, AND Christian duty to have done so. We were not oppressive and micro-managing; just caring, disciplined, and involved.
But, if we’re looking for perfection in all aspects of our candidates’ lives, of whatever party, we are not only unrealistic, but hypocritical. Although I regret that these young people face an uphill grind in their relationship and family future, I think they have a lot going for them, given what other young people face in the same dilemma today – in terms of family support and love. It’s all part of the reality of a sinful, fallen world. (case in point, this comment: “Abstinence??? What would be the point of being a teenager if you couldn't have sex???” Hopefully this was tongue-in-cheek – otherwise, God help this person)
Again, I’m sorry if I misjudged you, Darryl, by focusing on only one aspect of your comments, and for calling you “holier-than-thou” – please forgive me! Blogging doesn’t always bring out my kinder, gentler side. I think you had one of the better takes on the whole thing.
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:19 AM
Ah the bitter sweet fruit you all have to eat. Now that Palin has pretty much proven to be nothing more than a waste of space on the ticket, I wonder to what ends you conservative hicks will back this woman. She's qualified because, and i quote, "Alaska is in close maritime to Russia." By that standard I should be the president of Mexico since I live in Texas.
McCain just went for the stupid wildcard play, and now that spark is dying faster than a moose with a bullet to the brain. Palin is hemorrhaging time and money and can barely hold a conversation with any of the people that interview her. She knows nothing about the Bush doctrine but does excel in matters when "putin rears his head."
Experience? Barack Obama just showed he has the drive and the intelligence and had McCain on the ropes during the debate. McCain never once looked at Obama and had to snicker when he was caught in a lie. It's sad just how far the "Grand" old party has fallen. So to you conservative right wing nuts, enjoy your failed campaign. I would say you tried, but really- you provided a new definition to the word "failure." Go ahead and cling to your guns and bibles, because you sure as hell aren't getting a hold on the white house ;)
Posted on September 27, 2008 4:57 AM
Sam i dont really care what you have to say you democrat. You liberals are all the same. Think about some of the things you hold to. Hang on to your abortion clinics and gay rights advocates, because when the rapture comes all the democrats will be left behind.
Posted on September 29, 2008 10:35 PM
Sarah Palin should withdraw, She is not ready
to become a president.
Her religous belife should be kept private. It is to much religon in american politics! Please be christian, muslim or jew. Don't force your belife on others!
Posted on October 13, 2008 5:37 AM