Sep 1st, 2008 at 12:12 pm
The Courage of Their Convictions
Palin family sticks with anti-abortion, anti-contraception, anti-single motherhood principles and arranges shotgun wedding for Sarah and Todd Palin’s 17 year-old daughter.
68 Responses to “The Courage of Their Convictions”
Register
RSSLogin
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Books By Matthew Yglesias
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bailout
Basketball
Budget
Bush Legacy
Cars
climate
Congress
Conservatism
Culture
DC
Economics
Economy
education
Energy
Environment
Finance
Health care
Health Care
History
Housing
Inequality
Iran
iraq
Israel
mccain
Media
National Review
National Security
NBA
obama
Pakistan
Palin
planning
Public Opinion
Race
Regulation
SCOTUS
Sports
Stimulus
taxes
Torture
transit
Transition
transportation
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Contact Matthew Yglesias
Use this form to contact blog author Matthew Yglesias.
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
September 1st, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Wow.
This is why we liberals teach our children about rubbers.
I have no idea how this will play, obviously, but McCain isn’t just gambling - he’s gambling exclusively on the fundies turning out.
Wonderful.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Putting the political “optics” aside, the most preferred option in my view would be to give the baby up for adoption, but on the merits this is certainly better than abortion.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:25 pm
They’re blaming it all on evil liberal blogs.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Guess Palin is anti-abstinence as well. Weird ideology.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:29 pm
I read a number of progressive political blogs and I haven’t even seen a hint of this rumor. You would think that an “independent” news organization would cite at least one example when they choose to print an accusation like this.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Do even Fundamentalists think teenagers should be having babies and getting married? They usually seem to think no one should even hear the word “sex” until they are at least 25– and then only when some older relative has “The Talk” the night before the wedding.
I agree with the poster who said adoption was the preferred option in cases like this.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Buzz79, it’s not a rumor; it’s a fact. Check out the link in Matthew’s text. It’s from ‘independent’ Reuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2944356420080901?sp=true
September 1st, 2008 at 12:37 pm
An important question for Palin is now: do you intend to avoid getting pregnant if you are elected to office?
Also: if you get pregnant, will you disclose this fact to the public as soon as you find out?
Also: what pre-natal care did you engage in while carrying Trig?
I’m somewhat disturbed that Palin would return to work three days after giving birth and one day before she discloed that her child had Downs Syndrome.
We need to see the proof that she was told ahead of time that her child had Downs. It is an important part of her stump speech and a major part of her appeal. It needs proof.
Also: she “chose” to have her child. That is great. Why not ask her why she wants to remove that “moral choice” from other mothers? Forced childbearing has no moral power.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Sorry for the confusion. I was referring to the rumor that liberal blogs had supposedly been spreading. The one about Gov. Palin’s newest child actually being her grandson.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Buzz79,
Apparently, the rumor of Sarah Palin prentending to give birth to her daughter’s child has been swirling around Alaska for some time now. The weird circumstances of the birth have been chronicled by someone on the Daily Kos website.
I was on Kos last night, and most of the commenters were upset at people for posting the story. However, almost everyone is upset that her water broke in Dallas, she did not go to the hospital in Dallas, took an 8-12 hour flight where none of the stewardesses or crew thought she was pregnant, bypassed the hospital in Anchorage, and drove for one hour to her hometown to give birth. It just seems so weird, shows such a lack of good judgment, and a total disregard for the safety of her child.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Mother of 4 month old with Downs Syndrome.
Mother of several other children.
Governor of Alaska.
Mother of pregnant 17-year old.
+
running to be Vice-President of the United States of America
I don’t think it’s being sexist to ask whether she has a bit too much on her plate right now.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Back in the 80s and 90s it seemed like “teen pregnancy” was such a big issue, with many efforts aimed at reducing it. The teen birth rate has gone down in the last ten years, but has recently had a bit of an uptick in the last couple years. While the Palin girl may find a wonderful life in this marriage, and the Palin family has enough resources to support this child — it cannot be said enough how much of a life-changer this is for any pregnant teen. I’m sure there are many factors that can contribute to this, but the role of parents is a probably a major one that makes me wonder what’s going on. Just because Jamie Lynn Spears had a baby and Juno was a hit movie doesn’t make teen pregnancy acceptable.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:51 pm
“but on the merits this is certainly better than abortion.”
Why?
September 1st, 2008 at 12:53 pm
“An important question for Palin is now: do you intend to avoid getting pregnant if you are elected to office?”
Oh, absolutely. Frankly, I think that any woman elected or appointed into the order of succession should be required to have her tubes tied, so she doesn’t put the country in danger by going out and getting knocked up. I’m looking at you, Pelosi.
Seriously, do you think McCain should be asked if he plans to divorce and remarry or adopt more Bangladeshi children or something?
September 1st, 2008 at 12:54 pm
I haven’t seen either Juno or Juneau, but it certainly sounds like the Palins are trying to blur the differences between them.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Exactly. The irony is that faking the pregnancy to ‘protect’ her daughter (or whatever the rationale allegedly was) would have been more responsible wrt the health of the infant than her gallivanting all the way across the continent in her last trimester, especially at her age. I’m all for minimizing interventions in pregnancy & birth and happen to think that a reasonably healthy pregnant woman should be able to function quite well (albeit a bit more slowly & carefully than usual), but not seeking medical advice when amniotic fluid starts leaking weeks before the due date is worse than foolish. Even all but the fringiest homebirthing lay midwives will transfer to a hospital if 16-24 hours passes after the water breaking if no baby is in sight– the danger of infection becomes pretty serious and can absolutely snowball– never mind allowing a laboring woman on multiple cross-continental flights. That’s just stupid.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Heckuva way to knock down that rumor. The seventeen-year-old couldn’t have been pregnant then because she’s pregnant now. And did McCain know about this? I don’t know what the Republican base is going to make of all this.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:59 pm
All the articles go out of their way to stress that it was Bristol’s decision; e.g., CNN says “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.’”
But why is the fact that it was Bristol’s choice a “key point to keep in mind”? If they’re something wrong with forcing the decision on her daughter, why is ok to force it on the entire country? Like, why is it “key” that Bristol made her own choice, but it’s not “key” that rape and incest victims get to make their own choice?
September 1st, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Now I can clearly see the MO of the McCain campaign.
Overload the electorate with so much news, the good, the bad, and the ugly, that the election is over before the people have even a remote understanding of what the hell is going on.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:01 pm
I guess the vetting process needs an update in terminology, instead of looking for skeletons in the closet, we should be looking for fetus in the uterus.
BTW, Bristol does not look five months pregnant. If she were 3 months pregnant, Trig could still be hers. But she doesn’t even look three months pregnant. My thin wife gained about 30 pounds before we could even get a positive test.
But all of this is speculation. We need facts. Using your daughter’s out of wedlock pregnancy to disprove that your four month old child is yours and not your daughter’s is a very strange way to prove such a fact.
What would be better is pictures of Bristol during the timeframe of Feb-May 2008.
Also: when were we going to find out if Trig hadn’t become an issue? In two months, Bristol will be seven months pregnant, and appears to be the primary caregiver for Trig. Until today, we cold assume that Bristol could do that job for a few years. Now she will be married, to some unknown guy, caring for her own child. During the transition to the new administration, Bristol’s child will be born.
Is this country first? Family First? Keep in mind that the Alaska legislature is only in session four months per year, so it isn’t as demanding as the VP slot.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:03 pm
In all seriousness, can we please not go after a seventeen year-old girl? She’s pregnant, I assume that’s not how either she or her family hoped things would go, and they’re dealing with it. Leave it alone.
If they start bringing it up, fine.
An important question for Palin is now: do you intend to avoid getting pregnant if you are elected to office?
None of your business.
Also: if you get pregnant, will you disclose this fact to the public as soon as you find out?
None of their business.
Also: what pre-natal care did you engage in while carrying Trig?
Please, please spare me. Jeebus.
I’m somewhat disturbed that Palin would return to work three days after giving birth and one day before she discloed that her child had Downs Syndrome.
Go after a woman with a special needs child on grounds related to that child. That’ll seem sympathetic.
We need to see the proof that she was told ahead of time that her child had Downs. It is an important part of her stump speech and a major part of her appeal. It needs proof.
The point is to win the election, so let’s not do that.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Wonder if she’s going to return to high school, or be home-schooled.
And if the latter, who’s going to do it?
September 1st, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Scarborough reacts to Palin!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTbsbeY5k5k
A great video in which the Pundits are being truthful before her actual nomination!
Let’s see how they spin it this week.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Warren Terra: “…Juno or Juneau…”
Zing!
Very clever, sir.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:20 pm
“Wonder if she’s going to return to high school, or be home-schooled.
And if the latter, who’s going to do it?”
John McCain, cause he’ll be getting schooled this fall!
September 1st, 2008 at 1:21 pm
I’m looking at you, Pelosi.
You are aware, I hope, that women are not capable of having children throughout their lives. There’s actually this thing that happens, which makes it impossible for women to have children any more. Usually this happens before you turn 68.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Maybe now she’ll reconsider the adequateness of those abstinence-only programs?
September 1st, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Also, more crap about them is going to come out, including myspace pages. This is not a family ready for prime time.
Wasilla Police Department
On February 8, 2008, at 1737 hours, Wasilla Police responded to two vehicle collision at Seward Meridian Parkway and Fireweed Drive . Investigation revealed that Bristol Palin, age 17 of Wasilla, was driving a 4-door sedan and attempted to turn into a business when she struck a 2-door sedan driven by Joshua Moffet, age 19, of Wasilla. Palin was issued a citation for Failing to Use Due Care to Avoid a Collision. Moffet was issued a citation for an expired registration and no proof of insurance.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:34 pm
My previous comment got eaten.
Anyway, I would say this is a good time for someone to start digging up wingnut quotes about Jamie Lynn Spears being pregnant.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:36 pm
In high school, my best friend had sisters 11 months apart.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:38 pm
The emphasis on it being Bristol’s choice to keep the baby is not an implicit pro-choice argument but a way of walking back the parenting disaster. Even though the kid got knocked up, we still raised her to be a theocon, goes the reasoning.
In first-year property law, you learn about the “Fertile Octogenarian” presumption.
The whole thing is too confusing to know what to believe — the flight to and from Dallas doesn’t make much sense, nor does the video of Palin hiking or crossing her legs look like a pregnant woman — but if the story is that her daugter’s pregnant, AND she flew 12 or so hours in labor with a premature special needs baby, Palin’s a wreck, and I’m not sure it’s any better than the covering story. (Assuming you trust the math, and the current story does knock down the rumors — still not sure how nobody noticed labor or how she didn’t show. But I find it hard to believe the McCain camp wouldn’t put it all out now –talk about exploiting a hurricaine for political gain!)
More to the point, I’m reasonably certain she would not have been picked had anyone known the daughter was pregnant. Or maybe McCain’s just that much of a “maverick.” But doesn’t this show that he’s 72, and he’s willing to put the life of this country in the hands of someone he didn’t even vet. Does he care about governing or just beating Obama? Or is it that he doesn’t care what happens after he’s gone. (Setting aside the family stuff, Palin is just a disaster — for the love of all that is holy, she attacks school vouchers from the RIGHT.)
What’s in the drinking water up there, anyway? Is it the North Slope or Park Slope?
September 1st, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Palin is not, apparently, against contraception. If fact I believe she’s a member of a a group of pro-life women who are also pro-contraception.
Don’t know if that applies to teenagers, though.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:55 pm
John, I was kidding. Stay cool.
September 1st, 2008 at 2:18 pm
I have been in Juneau. It is a strange little place, about 3 miles wide and 2 blocks deep, often fogbound and with no road connection to the interior or the rest of the state. Back during the Yukon gold rush, it was the gateway to the gold-fields, and thrived as a boomtown and the sea terminus of the Skagway railroad that runs about 40-50 miles through the mountains to the upcountry. Now it’s just an odd little small town, where during the winter months, parents are concerned about wolves and bears when their children are waiting for the schoolbus — or so a native told me.
I don’t know Anchorage (except for a few long lay-overs in the airport en route to Japan) but it seems obvious to me that Alaska is truly a different country with different problems than almost anywhere else in the USA. Even of Ms. Palin were an accomplished and deeply experienced governor of this state, that would prepare here in no way to understand the problems of major American cities (e. g., Chicago) which is where the future of this country, if we are to have one, will be determined. That she is probably a troglodyte in terms of science can cut both ways, as there is a long American tradition of hating and resenting expertise — unless it’s in a NASCAR pit I suppose —how else explain GWB?
But as for dealing with the rest of the world — a better than even chance, given McCain’s history and age — that’s truly scary. The point I think is not attack Palin directly, but to hop on McCain for choosing her. Time to bring back the 3 AM ad, mutatis mutandis?
September 1st, 2008 at 2:22 pm
This is no longer funny. I am genuinely scared by the rashness of the McCain campaign.
September 1st, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Well more proof that in Alaska winters there are two choices - getting drunk or f**** or both probably in this case. Looks like she is one heck of a mother. If Chelsea had gotten prego at 17, tell me what the right-wing would have said? Was she 17 when she got knocked up? Has she ever heard of a condom? Did her mother teach her anything about risks?
September 1st, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Bristol Palin and her family have done the right thing (marrying the father, and having the child) and they should be applauded for it. No doubt things will be much harder for Bristol Palin than they would have been if she had chosen abortion. She will suffer for her choice, her schooling will be interrupted, her life chances will be reduced and her future will be dimmed. She chose to sacrifice her own future happiness for the life of her child, and that is a decision we should all celebrate.
It’s pretty disturbing that anyone has to ask ‘why’ it’s better for someone to bring life into the world than to choose to kill their baby. Truly some of the pro-choicers remind me of the Carpocratians, who celebrated every sexual perversion except normal, healthy marriage and procreation.
September 1st, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Healthy response to Bristol’s predicament: abortion, tell Levi nice knowing you.
Wingnut Palin family response: you WILL have this child, and you WILL be getting married.
Questions. What do Levi’s parents think about all this? How long do you think the Levi-Bristol union will last? Is this really the only skeleton in this family’s closet?
September 1st, 2008 at 3:01 pm
If Bristol Palin ever heard of condoms it wasn’t from her mother. Sarah Palin is a firm believer in abstinence only sex ed and has said bluntly that sex ed programs that teach explicit details of human reproduction or discuss contraception should not be funded. Bet she never thought that stance would come back to bite her in quite so personal a way.
As for McCain knowing about the teen pregnancy in the Palin household, anyone who believes that one is probably in the market for a bridge to nowhere. The Palins are looking more and more like a Jerry Springer episode.
September 1st, 2008 at 3:06 pm
dday on digby’s quotes Max Blumenthal that the secretive Council for National Policy is who picked Palin.
September 1st, 2008 at 3:06 pm
tomemos 12:51pm
Clearly we have a philosophical difference.
September 1st, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Wow, people like Jeebus actually do hate life, and nature, and nature’s God. In Jeebus’ world things like abortion, rainbow parties, whacking off to porn, and f—ing other men through a hole in the wall at a nightclub are presumably ‘Healthy’. But deciding to give up one’s hopes and dreams for the sake of the growing life within you, to submit oneself to the constraints of marriage and parenthood, to give up one’s freedom for the sake of one’s values, are ‘abnormal’ and ‘unhealthy’. The natural bond between mother and child, the natural desire of a woman to bear children, the natural tendency of the human spirit to seek its ultimate joy in lifelong monogamy, and the natural union of opposites in heterosexual relationship, are just anothern lifestyle choice, no better or worse than the choice of a man who decides to fulfil his desires by whacking off to porn.
We have heard all these propositions before, and we know What proposes them.
September 1st, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Sounds like many of you haven’t had or don’t have teenage children. Once a kid is about 15 or 16, it’s very difficult to impose your choices on them, and usually counterproductive.
Also, I have learned from the woes of many good friends who I believe were pretty good parents, that you don’t judge parents by what their kids do or don’t do. And that includes parents of all political persuasions.
So give it a rest, and leave Obama’s, Palin’s and McCain’s kids alone. None of your business.
September 1st, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Methinks the Hector protests too much.
Funny, for a dress-up Crusader who forgets that Richard Coeur de Lion liked the company of manly men, and that Jesus, if you believe the Bible, also enjoyed hanging out with fishermen.
September 1st, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Hector,
All zygote-Americans salute your brave stand; I predict that gay women will come to you praying for liberation from their bonds of sin, and that gay men will stand lovingly by, awaiting your heterosexual tutelage. Under your sterling influence, the women of the world, frustrated by the burden of feminism, will turn inward, to dwell spiritually within their ovaries.
Incidentally, why all the specific imagery of “rainbow parties, whacking off to porn, and f__ing other men through a hole in the wall at a nightclub.” You seem like someone who focuses narrowly upon specifics. You sure have an eagle eye - or, dare I say, a bloodhound’s nose - for sin.
As much as I admire your wide, proudly heterosexual/monogomous stand/ce, I need to bring up one tiny point.
There is no reasonable definition under which first-trimester fetuses, let along zygotes, can be called babies. That doesn’t mean anybody revels in a first trimester abortion, but you people live in a fantasy world. Fetuses *develop* over time. Humanity - personality, mind, identity - is something which emerges gradually. Those of you who turn third-months fetuses into fetishes don’t really believe they’re people, I think - it’s all about controlling women, full stop. And late-term abortions are almost never optional, anyway - they’re driven by medical need.
You live in a fantasy world - one populated, I note, with all sorts of people having very colorful sex.
September 1st, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Does anyone have any actual evidence that she’s opposed to contraception? I have yet to see any and there are articles from Alaskan papers that quote her saying that contraception in an important way for women to have control over their lives.
I don’t like her and disagree with most of her policy stances, but let’s be sure about her stances before attacking them.
September 1st, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Anchorage Daily News has this quote from 2006:
Palin said last month that no woman should have to choose between her career, education and her child. She is pro-contraception and said she’s a member of a pro-woman but anti-abortion group called Feminists for Life.
“I believe in the strength and the power of women, and the potential of every human life,” she said.
—-
MSNBC has this quote from 2006:
By way, as has been pointed out, Palin backed abstinence-only education during her 2006 gubernatorial race. In an Eagle Forum Alaska questionnaire, Palin gave this response to the following question:
Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?
Palin: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.
—–
September 1st, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Come on, Matt! This is unworthy of you — all you had to do was link to the article without bracketing it with the snide remarks.
September 1st, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Achilles,
The ‘it’s all about controlling women’ BS is something that I’ve seldom heard till I started reading this blog. It’s hard for me to credit that anyone would seriously believe it, but apparently some of you pro-choicers are actually silly enough to believe it. So be it. If abortion is all about controlling women, then do you mind explaining why the Zoroastrian law of ancient Persia (one of the first religions that I know of to prohibit abortion, along with the Jews) prescribed death for the woman, the doctor, and _the husband_ of any woman who procured an abortion? Seems to me that executing the husband would hardly serve the goal of controlling women.
(Yes, I know Blackmun thought that Persian law permitted abortion; he was wrong, as he was about much else.)
You make the mistake of thinking that a thing is defined by its properties, instead of by its essential nature. This is the error of Aristotelianism, as opposed to Platonism. You fail to grasp the difference between ‘essence’ and ‘accidents’. The ESSENCE of a human being is to be distinguished from the ‘accidents’, i.e. the observable properties like thinking, moving, breathing, feeling, etc. A being can be human in its essence while not yet perceptibly human in its accidents.
September 1st, 2008 at 4:10 pm
How’d she get knocked up when she was at home with mono?
September 1st, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Hector,
In this world of material things, there is no such thing as an “essence.” It would be nice if there were, but there is no material basis for a belief in any such thing. It’s not even rooted, you’ll note, in Biblical thought - there’s a reason you go to Plato for your source (Plato was a disaster for Christianity, but that’s another topic).
I’m not in a position to do it well, but more than a few smart thinkers have made a connection between Plato’s belief in Essence and his deep-rooted authoritarianism. To make one crude and initial connection, Heidegger’s obsession with essences leads directly to his authoritarianism, as is most plain in “The Question Concerning Technology” and “Introduction to Metaphysics”; he follows out the path marked by Plato there. Not that you are a Heideggarian, but fixating upon essence never leads anywhere good.
Essences are psychological categories — if I was more awake, I’d argue that they emerge from something like the Kantian categories - certainly not from the real world. See the entirety of quantum mechanics, which defies any attempt to find essences; see also the arbitrariness of the term “species,” which Darwin already recognized in the Origin of Species.
All of which is to say: the Platonic idea of essence is both intellectualy wrong and morally problematic - although certainly it explains why one might be pro-choice. Your half-assed theology will survive no serious intellectual scrutiny, and is the root of the kind of authoritarianism which presupposes, a priori, that the role of women must, because of their essence *as* women, demand monogomous motherhood of them.
Here’s the political problem with essences: once you start looking for them, you will inevitably find the essences you seek. The idea of essence isn’t one that lends itself to free inquiry, but only ever to the imposition of preexisting belief.
September 1st, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Re: Bristol Palin and her family have done the right thing (marrying the father, and having the child) and they should be applauded for it.
Without knowing the individuals it’s very presumptuous of me to pontificate about them, but as a general rule, getting married at 17 is a very bad idea, and most such marriages end up in divorce court. Even with a now-nationally famous mother able to open doors for them, the couple will have a terribly hard time of it. If I had a 17 year old come home pregnant I woul be glad that she did not want an abortion, but I would certainly counsel them to give the child up for adoption, to stay away from bad boys, finish school and get her life fully on track before contemplating marriage and children.
September 1st, 2008 at 6:48 pm
When someone is confronting a situation fraught with real-world complexity and moral conflict and the deepest emotional drives of which humans are capable, it’s very unlikely that a doctrine about essences is going to help them very much. If you want the Bible, Hector, check out Exodus 22-25, and be sure to read the entire thing. Then apply elementary logic (modus tollens will do) and ponder the question: when does a fetus become a human life? Certainly there is little enough in the Bible about it, although the fore-mentioned passages suggest an answer. However, for all the different ways of thinking about it, there is no one that is definite and authoritative (I know the Pope is both, but what is the source of his authority outside the self-referential body of Church law?). That, it seems to me is the core of the problem. Personally, I think that before there is even a nervous system that there is not humanity.
But that is beside my point here. Although I am male, I have had to deal with the real question of abortion more than once, and found it deeply disturbing. Far more so, I would think, for any normal woman. And every woman will respond according to who she is and what her circumstances are, and there are certainly no “one size fits all” rules in such a case. Therefore, in my agnosticism about the key question, I strongly believe that the government should butt out. The problem is difficult enough without adding in the law and the back-alley abortionist (believe me, I remember pre-Roe v. Wade: doctors would always provide abortions for those who could pay — and those who couldn’t often wound up butchered and dying of infection).
Finally, as a matter of legal logic, if abortion is murder (again reference Exodus) shouldn’t the perpetrators i. e. the doctor and the woman, face the penalty for murder? If you don’t find that appropriate, your whole position loses its essence, if I may say so politely. Bluntly, it collapses completely.
September 1st, 2008 at 7:16 pm
To be clear, Palin is anti-contraception even in marriage!
Hector, reproduction is a beautiful thing, when grown-ups choose to do so. Monogamous pairing is a wonderful part of adult life.
Abstinence-only is about forcing children to be ignorant so they only have the tools to make bad choices at a time when their gross physical development is “mature,” but their mental development isn’t, and their brains are addled by hormones to boot.
Forcing children into shotgun weddings is the reason fundamentalists have such a high divorce rate. Fact.
The children of these broken teenage “marriages” are the ones who suffer. Lower birth weight, malnutrition, less parental attention, more abuse as two people with nothing in common and no life experience or financial means act out their childishness. Fact.
“Family values” are about forcing people to reproduce whether they want to or not. For instance, “family values” homos must marry some poor unsuspecting straight person or lose jobs/families (see sad old Charlie Crist).
And the zealots pretend they are doing the work of the Prince of Peace. BS indeed!
September 1st, 2008 at 8:38 pm
The Governor of Alaska has been on the VP scene now, for what, 4 days? Too much drama by far. The USA doesn’t need this kind of soap opera right now. Palin is tacky — enough!
September 1st, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Mr Iglesias,
You happen to be wrong in your post. Ms Palin has never, to my knowledge, been against contraception and has, in fact been quoted several times making this very point. She is opposed to abortion and has certainly “walked her talk” in this.
There is a little thing called “research”, perhaps you should engage in it before leading your flock of sheeple into more delusion regarding a fine woman.
September 1st, 2008 at 8:49 pm
No, Sarah Palin is not anti-contraception. Read stuff, know things.
But so what if she were? Girls will do what girls will do.
Too much drama? Weren’t you the same crowd who kept chanting about White House intern blowing the BJ in chief being a private sexual matter and we should all stay out of everyone’s “bedroom?”
September 1st, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Will the host please explain the cum stains on his blouse?
September 1st, 2008 at 8:55 pm
It sounds like Palin has taken contradictory positions on lots of issues. That’s probably why McCain warmed to her.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:58 am
Are we to believe that McCain really vetted this candidate?
This seem to me to be a sloppy way to go about picking someone
who will be a “heartbeat away.” One question: did McCain really know about Palin’s problems before choosing her. His campaign says he did, but much of the evidence indicates that he didn’t.
Either way, not a very good call for the 72-year-old nominee.
September 8th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
[via WS] “The problem with that statement….is that it’s not entirely true, according to the Anchorage Daily News: In 2002, when she was running for lieutenant governor, Palin said last month[in 2002] that no woman should have to choose between her career, education & her child. She is PRO-CONTRACEPTION & said she’s a member of a pro-woman but anti-abortion group called Feminists for Life. “I believe in the strength & the power of women, & the potential of every human life,” she said. http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/governor06/story/8049298p-7942233c.html
March 1st, 2009 at 8:06 am
viagra
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
March 2nd, 2009 at 7:19 am
levitraExcellent site. It was pleasant to me.
March 17th, 2009 at 2:57 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
tramadol
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:22 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:01 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 14th, 2009 at 10:29 am
thanks !! very helpful post!
viagra
April 16th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
Good afternoon. Be careful that victories do not carry the seed of future defeats.
I am from Benin and now teach English, give please true I wrote the following sentence: “Find cheap airline tickets, plane tickets, cruises, hotels and all information travel - all passengers regardless of age must have their own airline ticket.”
Thank you very much :(. Placido.