In a statement, Governor Palin said: “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. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows that she has our unconditional love and support….
The family’s statement [went on to say] “Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family. We ask the media, respect our daughter and Levi’s privacy as has always been the tradition of children of candidates.”
At a rally at a ballpark Saturday evening in Washington, Pa., Bristol did not join the rest of her family on stage.
“Then we have our daughter Bristol, she’s on the bus with the newborn, and then we have our daughter Willow, who is here, and our youngest daughter Piper,’’ Ms. Palin said as she introduced her family. “On that bus we have our son Trig, who is a beautiful baby boy we welcomed into the world just in April. It’s his naptime, so he is with his big sister on the bus. But we thank them for being here. “
Update: The official press release is here.
Another update: There is more from the LA Times here as well.
Well, we’d know what would be happening if this were one of Obama’s daughters, don’t we?
During the primaries, when he was asked what he would do if one of his daughters became pregnant, Sen Obama indicated that he would not want them “burdened”; that they should be entitled to have an abortion. Yes, a child is an enormous responsibility, but it is good that Gov Palin, her husband, her daughter, and her daughter’s boyfriend recognize that a baby is more than just a “burden” – it is a life.
This is the kind of statement that more teenagers in trouble should be able to hear from their parents:
[blockquote]“Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, [b]which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family.”[/b] [/blockquote]
And this is the sort of classy statement the public should hear more often:
[blockquote]”We ask the media, respect our daughter and Levi’s privacy as has always been the tradition of children of candidates.â€[/blockquote]
Though, of course, it would have been better if they hadn’t been forced to ‘out’ their daughter in advance of what would have otherwise been a media feeding-frenzy.
After the last eight years of bungled Republican presidency, any sane person would be justified in wanting to avoid voting Republican. But statements like this one from Palin (plus a whole lot more) suggest that a McCain/Palin ticket could be a welcome far cry from Bush/Cheney. This could be real medicine for America, and I, for one, am now looking forward to seeing what other picks McCain makes for his cabinet. Keep on surprising us like this, Mr. Senator, and you might do a world of good for your party and for our nation.
The Democratic pro-choice (except for the unborn) ideology doesn’t say what Obama might do in his own family, though it appears that Obama would be more morally ambivalent on this particular issue, as he showed with Rick Warren.
What this episode shows most about is John McCain. It takes some political courage to chose Palin, as the right person, despite some issues within her family life. Issues, mind you, that she apparently is dealing with responsibly, and morally. Possibly that is why McCain’s life experiences with choosing between difficult paths is appearing more and more appealing. I simply don’t see that with Obama’s moral ditherings that he has exhibited lately, or in his career (like the near record number of “Present” votes in various legislatures), and there is nothing a good speech can do to right that impression.
Well, this one hit me out of the blue while cruising for Gustov news.
As the McCain spokesman is quoted in many stories says, “Life happens”. I think Mrs. Palin and her husband are dealing with this as best anyone can. This stuff happens to families every day. Thanks to “Progressive” educators its promoted in schools, media, and entertainment. Parents get to deal with the aftermath. I might fault the Palins for poor supervision of their daughter, but I wasn’t there.
Let’s see how the Dems, who push this stuff as desirable handle the news.
Jeff
While some see issues of moral failing, like any of us could claim not to be a moral failure, those with a reasonable understanding of the Gospel should see this as a lesson in Grace and redemption. We all fall. The important thing is to find the path of redemption in it.
#1 – um what would happen? Seems like there would be a criminal charge involved. It seems that you’re changing an uncomfortable subject.
Personally, this should be an irrelevant issue. Bless her daughter. Let Palin be a proud grandmother. I hope the daughter wants to marry the father, and that they aren’t coerced for the sake of assuaging the conservative base.
Still, there are generally relevant questions this raises, that have to do with policy. Does Palin believe in sex education and abstinence before marriage?
Palin’s daughter shouldn’t matter. It may, however, matter to some conservatives (which is why, I suspect, liberals are bringing this up – the idea that some conservatives might think she should have control over her daughters – especially since they are under the age of 18). Palin’s liberality regarding sexuality may matter to conservatives as well.
Perhaps there is a lot to like about Palin, even though the boldness of her selection strikes some (and not just Democrats) as unwise and imprudent.
[blockquote]#1 – um what would happen? Seems like there would be a criminal charge involved. It seems that you’re changing an uncomfortable subject. [/blockquote]
When you’re raised with the meme that children are a burden and that prenatal destruction of same is morally neutral, it’s obvious what mom and dad would be recommending, if the daughter hadn’t already charged off to do it without notifying them.
This is classy (#3)? No i think not. This is a set of ethics that apparently extends as far the the tv camera and not much further. Add this with the issues around her sister’s husband’s job and you have a sort of low end soap opera. Spare us four years of this, please.
#7 John,
So far all the conservatives on this blog have been respectful. Of course, we’re all Christians. You don’t want to read what liberals are saying in the comboxes of the news sites; news sites, not blogs. No conservatives have said a word for or against, that I’ve seen. The news is still young, we’ll see how this plays out in the next few days.
Jeffrey A. Roberts
#9
1. We aren’t electing the daughter, and I seriously doubt if Palin was encouraging her daughter’s lack of abstinence.
2. Don’t you understand the difference between “ethics” (your semantics) and morality, and in particular Christian morality? Ethically for many, the daughter did nothing wrong. For a Christian, sex outside of marriage has moral implications of the highest order that this family is dealing with forthrightly. Perhaps you could be more precise with your implication that the Palins are perpetrating some sort of moral sin? Or is it just an ethical lapse as interpreted by you by a 17 year old, as your original semantics overtly state, which might not be an ethical wrong held in common by all your esteemed readers?
I am glad that she will have the baby and loving support of her family. The rest is none of our business.
She is, after all, within months of an age that young women routinely married and began families prior to the end of the 1950’s. Yes, it was quite routine. Until we decided “normal” was years of self-exploring fornication, with endless heartbreaks, psychotherapy, VD, maybe an abortion or two, followed by a panic trip to the sperm bank at 40.
And I’ll be voting for the other side, lest I be too easily dismissed by the liberals on the page.
First thoughts: And this is any of our business because…? Her daughter is not running for public office.
ICXC
John
#13 It is called destroying your enemies before they get in line at the trough before you. If you ever have a chance to drive through Crystal City and Arlington, just south of DC, you can easily see how much power the Executive Branch wields in just being able to spend money this way or that. And Money is Power, which is what this election is all about.
Put on that balance, what are the private lives of the VP nominee’s family? For that matter, the press couldn’t wait to publicize GWB’s daughters’ underage drinking or Al Gore III’s DWI speeding in NC. (Sort of makes you wonder how Chelsea escaped with her reputation intact.)
[i] And the American electorate ate this gossip up.[/i]
Sen. Obama has made a statement that this subject is off-limits. He won’t be commenting. Nice to find something about which to agree with him! 🙂
In fact, Sen. Obama called Gov. Palin upon the announcement and, she said, congratulated her in a sincerely warm manner. Her own first speech acknowledged Senators Clinton and Obama for their groundbreaking candidacies and the debt she owes to their candidacies. Which is to say that while we know the campaigns will get ugly along the way, the players have some class and, arguably, have set parameters within which the hardball can be played.
#15;
Ya beat me to it. Deleting my post on the subject now.
[url=http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/01/1321281.aspx]here[/url] is a link to Obama’s statement.
Jeff
I remember the speculation when the spotlight was placed on Dick Cheney regarding his lesbian daughter. There were those who were just certain that conservatives would abandon the Republican ticket or at least lose respect for Cheney once they found out. It didn’t happen then, and I don’t see it happening now, either. Conservatives are far more open-minded and less judgmental than liberals typically give them credit for.
I think it also illustrates (along with the birth of her Down syndrome child) the strength and consistency of the pro-life, pro-family views that Palin holds.
I think this could boomerang on the left. Palin is no hypocrite (if she helped her daughter have an abortion, it would be a different matter) and I think most blue-collar, working-class voters in swing states will be very sympathetic to her situation. Obama’s statement is welcome but the lefty-bloggers need to be very careful here.
For those who don’t wade in the fever swamps of the port side of the blogosphere, the meme up to today was that Trig, Sarah Palin’s youngest son, born in April, was actually Bristol’s.
The vitriol being spewed against Palin and her family has shocked even me, a cynical old watcher of politics.
Ok, I never thought that I would be the one bringing up this subject, but since it has not been broached… Let me say too that folks may bring up other candidates’ personal family choices in terms of comparible situations – I don’t think it is relevent. The decision is why should I vote for Sarah Palin as VP, and I frankly am finding her priorities to be deeply flawed.
[i] Comment edited by elf. [/i]
[i] Comment deleted by elf. [/i]
Y’know, folks, rumormongers really get me uptight. This is nobody’s business! It is a family matter, for pete’s sake! Someone is out to torpedo the Republican ticket, and it’s sickening that they’d stoop this low to do it. I’m a registered Democrat, but after seeing this, I will vote for the McCain/Palin ticket, I’m that disgusted!
[blockquote]I don’t see much here about the “moral failings†of this conservative Republican’s CHOICE to have sex outside marriage. [/blockquote]
Is Bristol a Republican?? I know mom is, but dad isn’t. Got a link?
#21 – No. I’d like to find a candidate who will help us have a minimum wage so that mothers don’t have to work if they don’t want to. I’d like to find a candidate who will make sure that good child care is available for those mothers who are put in a position that they have to work to support their families. Most mothers don’t want to “dump” their babies to work. They don’t have a choice because they can’t make ends meet on one salary, or they are the sole supporters of their family.
And child care is so expensive these days that it can eat up almost as much paycheck as the mortgage does – particularly if you have more than one child. Right now child care is so expensive that unless you have a really good job it is about 50/50 on whether you economically come out ahead having mother stay home or go to work. And I feel much compassion for mothers who not only have no choice about staying home with their children, but who also are having trouble feeding those children because finding good, affordable child care is so difficult.
And BTW, I’m a work-out-of-my-house-mom, so my money is where my mouth is.
Elves, why was my comment deleted? It was accurate and contained no objectionable material. Is political talk now verboten in political threads?
Hopper, your last convolution of Palin’s family with the prospective office of the vice presidency shows that you are more than willing to put the politics of personal destruction into this election’s forefront. My original point about Chelsea is that we all have our problems, and hers escaped notice completely. While your comments don’t beatify Chelsea, putting her up on some sort of pedestal without any sort of justification is hard to swallow as a comparison. But whether Chelsea is the next thing to saintly or just the opposite is neither here nor there. What you have done is make such subjective issues pertinent to this campaign, which only diminishes its quality, as Sen Obama recently noted.
Elves – same question as 26? Why was that content objectionable?
Why not delete this entire thread? It more than borders on the realm of gossip, as Bristol’s actions are no one’s business but God’s, hers and her parents. If I am not mistaken, gossip is one of those sins which gets you put on the outside of the city.
The world may revel in muckraking and dragging political innocents into the meatgrinder of partisan politics, but shouldn’t Christians have higher standards?
[blockquote]#21 – No. I’d like to find a candidate who will help us have a minimum wage so that mothers don’t have to work if they don’t want to. I’d like to find a candidate who will make sure that good child care is available for those mothers who are put in a position that they have to work to support their families. Most mothers don’t want to “dump†their babies to work. They don’t have a choice because they can’t make ends meet on one salary, or they are the sole supporters of their family. [/blockquote]
Rule #1 of economics: What you subsidize, you get more of; what you tax, you get less of. Obama is going to do exactly what I said, thus paving the way for more of what you claim to be against.
Liberals always seem to get exercised when flesh and blood conservatives don’t behave like the straw men liberals imagine them to be.
Heh. I think the fallout from this will be fantastically amusing, politically [although I’m certainly troubled for the Palin family, personally.]
After all . . . this proves how “liberated” and “progressive” this family is — you know, going ahead and doing what progressives admire and a woman “choosing to do with my body what I want to do.” See how liberated the daughter is — fulfilling all the “family values” of the left.
And on the other hand, it will be positively a pleasure to see all the liberals huffing and puffing earnestly about just how awful it all is. Like the Muppets’ The Eagle or doing their best imitations of what they believe Puritans do in regard to moral failings.
So far, it’s all going exactly how I thought it would.
In the meantime, conservatives can merely say exactly what they would say about anyone else.
1) It’s bad to have sexual relationships outside of marriage. It’s wrong — and it’s bad for children — and it’s bad for families. And Christians in particular shouldn’t do it if they claim to be in submission to Christ and the gospel.
2) Nevertheless, people do it. And when people sin, they should repent and make amends, as best as they are able, and learn.
3) They should certainly not attempt to reduce the consequences of their behavior by exterminating “the product of conception” that occurred due to their sin.
4) The Christian family should love those who fall and support them and forgive them.
5) Families — and churches — need to teach abstinence before marriage, even if sometimes people still have sex outside of marriage and get pregnant.
And schools — for all of their talk about contraception — have obviously failed in their efforts to reduce the rampaging youth pregnancies.
6) The Palin family as a whole will endure consequences as a result of the sin of one — and rightly so, their own reputation will suffer, as when any family member is caught in error, publicly, of whatever kind.
7) Thankfully, we have no reason to believe as conservatives that Sarah Palin has been lying in her policy statements or beliefs over the years. And people who will vote for Palin will presumably do so because they agree with her political beliefs about how government should be run and what it should engage in.
I like the idea that the family is off limits, but… why did Palin choose to bring the family with her to Dayton? Why did she begin her first speech with an introduction of her family? And why was it appropriate for her to talk about Track’s imminent deployment to Iraq?
Face it: her family is a big part of Sarah Palin’s emotional appeal. The McCain-Palin campaign was counting on the visceral appeal of the wholesome All-American family image to win over voters. You want people to credit her for Track’s military service and Trig’s Down Syndrome (neither of which Sarah had any control over), you can’t expect to avoid some negative backlash over Bristol. It’s not fair to Bristol… but mom could have told McCain “no”. Instead she chose to wade into a national campaign with her family in full view of the camera. I was inclined to like her a lot before this. Now I’m not so sure.
#33 the sons’ deployments were important for the electorate to know about as McCain and Palin are running to be the CinC and alternate CinC, respectively. It is sort of like revealing to a prospective employer that one of his current employees is a relative of yours, and that particular employee is going to be in your supervisory chain if you get the job. I actually think this is neither a negative nor a positive for either of them, but many people think otherwise, e.g. the political action group that stuck up the TV ad about the Mom saying that McCain “can’t have my baby”. Well, both Palin and McCain are putting their families on that line, whether they get elected or not.
But this fact about the Palins and McCains is of another sort than, as Ann Althouse puts matters, the current interest in who-is-pregnant-by-whom-with-what.
I’m not surprised that some liberals are busy smearing conservatives – its kind of the way the blogosphere works. Obama is considered by many to be a corrupt Marxist Muslim, in spite of the evidence. It’s too bad, but its politics. And there are people who are wrong on the internet.
Fortunately, Obama has said that such comments about Palin’s family are off-limits, as is right.
Liberals do not endorse sex before marriage – although many liberals might not understand why God has a problem with it. Liberals would certainly agree that Christians should definitely not have sex outside of marriage if they think God will judge them for it. Liberals would certainly not tell people, like Conservative Christians, to have sex against their will. For others, non-Christians, it may just be a fun time. Liberals have nothing against non-Christians having sex if they want to, and it is mutual and doesn’t violate another person, or harm them in some way.
I think that’s fair, #33, although to say “no” to McCain over this would implicitly acknowledge the visciousness of the Left in its thirst for power, no? And trust me, the things I’ve read elsewhere today about this from liberals would have anyone banned in mere seconds here.
Isn’t it amazing how quickly opinions changed and how adverse reactions occured when certain people learned that Bristol Palin was pregnant at age 17, and how “horrified” they were? Typical of them, isn’t it?
Folks, none of this is any of our business……get over it, forget about it, and let’s move on to the election!
#36 Keep in mind that the one take-away-from-this-thread is that Palin and McCain have made careers out of screwing up things for Republicans’ “thirst for power”. Put asides the fact that McCain-Feingold caused more campaign financing issues that it solved, or that Palin supported the earmarked bridge until relatively recently. They both are willing to mess up the hierarchy’s banquet of pork and perquisites. So, I would not say that the Democratic or Republican parties were wearing haloes in their abnegation of their thirst for power.
RE: “Liberals do not endorse sex before marriage . . . ”
Yes, they do.
RE: “Liberals would certainly agree that Christians should definitely not have sex outside of marriage if they think God will judge them for it.”
No — they want Christians to become less rigid and recognize how irrelevant Scripture is, and how it has nothing to do with “God” anyway, but is merely a book of fantasies written about God by humans. It’s a positive mantra — amongst liberals who claim to be Christians on this very blog in fact.
RE: “Liberals have nothing against non-Christians having sex if they want to,” . . .
Right — in fact, it’s a sacrament.
It’s refreshing, though, to see liberals on this thread suddenly becoming the pious Eagles that they claim conservatives are.
Do some research … Sarah Palin supports contraception. Her daughter behaved like a typical teen, and her mother is dealing with it in a fully-formed Christian way. The question that has not been addressed is … why the need to make a public announcement? Because there has been a truly vile smear campaign launched concerning the the Palin baby and who the “real” mother is. The criticism regarding her daughter is just a continuation the first smear attempt. There is a great deal of evidence that this was a coordinated smear campaign mounted out of the Daily Kos and directed to the mother with the daughter to be the next target. It has been very eye-opening to see how females who are candidates for the highest national offices are treated compared to their male counterparts. Many women I know are continuing to pay close attention to this issue.
Sarah, thank you for putting right John Wilkins’ nonsense on stilts.
#42 in case you missed the reference to Sen Obama’s summary of this cited in #16, apparently the Democratic nominee disagrees with you, directly, about politics being a gutter sport:
[blockquote]“And so I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories,†he said. “You know my mother had me when she was 18, and how a family deals with issues and, you know, teenage children, that shouldn’t be the topic of our politics and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that’s off limits.â€[/blockquote]
In this, you see Barack Obama at his best, just as John McCain fired that shock jock who kept dwelling on Obama’s middle name. Politics doesn’t need to dwell at the National Enquirer level of discourse.
Is it possible to be a pious conservative who actually doesn’t like Sarah Palin because in my relatively conservative mind, she has serious family priority problems? I’m not a screaming liberal by any stretch of the imagination. I’d like to say without irony that I think she has family priority problems that are serious enough to make me not want to vote for her. I generally am ok with McCain, but his choice for VP has made me wonder about his reputation for making rash and impulsive decisions.
I’m still unclear as to why my previous post explaining why I thought her decisions were problematic was so offensive as to be edited. It was not meant nor written as a personal smear, merely an explanation why I think she has priority problems for this election.
Jeffersonian,
One correction to your earlier posts:
Obama did not say he did not want his daughters ‘burdened’ with a pregnancy, he said he did not want them [b]PUNISHED[/b] with a baby!
actual quote:
[i]”I’ve got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”[/i]
(The speech excerpt is all over [html=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNzmly28Bmg]YouTube[/url] if anyone wants to verify it independently)
sigh. I still have trouble with those url links. sorry, the url IS correct though.
#47 I didn’t single you out. My first post, #4, was a rejoinder to #1’s accusation that Obama would have done the opposite of Palin. If I’m being hypocritical, you need to show something better than a vague accusation that “many participants … aren’t trying very hard. It’s rather hypocritical to single me out. ” There is a logical fallacy in that statement which is like the converse of [i]argumentum ad populum[/i].
[blockquote]In this, you see Barack Obama at his best, just as John McCain fired that shock jock who kept dwelling on Obama’s middle name. Politics doesn’t need to dwell at the National Enquirer level of discourse. [/blockquote]
So, how is Obama’s animadversion working over at dKos?
I wasn’t aware that the kos kids were under anybody’s control. They are in this for themselves.
And I also seem to be commenting about a comment from a different thread. I’m signing off now. Today is NOT my day to be commenting. 🙂
Here you go, Jim…you need to put the [url= at the front of your links.
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNzmly28Bmg]YouTube[/url]
# Gretta … why so coy? Such creative and careful phrasing … “relatively conservative” and “generally ok with McCain.” Perhaps some of your discomfort with Palin is that she so very direct.
You appear to leap to “rash and impulsive” conclusions …. there is an article in the Washington Post (that mouthpiece for conservatives) on the decision-making process that McCain went through. It is not hard to find.
[blockquote]I wasn’t aware that the kos kids were under anybody’s control. They are in this for themselves. [/blockquote]
[i]”…and I hope that [b]anybody who is supporting me[/b] understands that’s off limits.â€[/i]
Kos and his pals most certainly fit in that group, so much so that they purged virtually every Hillary supporter from the site. So, having been so admonished by their leader, what are the results?
BTW, I stand corrected on the Obama “punished” quote.
Ayn Rand, for all of her faults, wasn’t too far off in her estimation of the Left.
#52 Tom, did I say that they were under anyone’s control? They themselves have described what they intend to do and why.
Somedays, and this weekend is among them, the kos kids remind me of the French Jacobins, the cutting edge of the French Revolution.
Cutting edge, until they had guillotined everyone else of political import, and then the executioners came for them.
No, I have no problem with directness – at least that way you know where people stand. My problem is that I don’t easily fit into “conservative” or “liberal” camps. Thus, I have things I like and dislike about both sides. It isn’t coy – it is that I’m not comfortable with either designation. However, I am staunchly pro-life and pro-family, and I frankly see Ms. Palin’s decisions in regard to choosing to run for this election to not be as pro-family as other folks around here. I think that being pro-life and pro-family include making decisions that take the best interests of one’s family into account, and I don’t believe that she is making a choice that is best in her current family situation. I would explain further, but given that the last time I explained myself my post got edited, I’m simply going to leave it at that.
I’m not sure what the shock and horror might be from, Tom, the Democratic Party has fostered this for at least four decades. As one wag put it, amidst even more colorful expressions, these are the DNC’s chickens coming home to roost.
#60 Gretta, I have read some of your other comments on other subjects related to pro-life. Based on your comments, although you may describe yourself as staunchly pro-life but, the sense of them was that you will be supporting the Democratic party’s platform this election. Obviously, abortion is not your primary concern, so your definitions are always interesting.
Hopper, we are talking about worldviews, which everyone has. It is perfectly proper to try to get your worldview enacted into legislation. Secularists try to do it all the time. Religion is no different.
#55, please put smiley faces on such comments as “there is an article in the Washington Post (that mouthpiece for conservatives)”. There may be some readers who aren’t familiar with the Post and won’t get the joke…
Hopper says:
“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”
But let’s see – he also says:
“If we’re trying to keep politics from being a gutter sport … a good many participants of this blog—and I’m speaking well beyond this thread—aren’t trying very hard. It’s rather hypocritical to single me out.”
and this:
“Little by little it’s becoming more and more obvious that Palin and her family are most definitely NOT the best examples to put before the country.”
and
“Why it’s downright political … throwing religious and moral conviction to the wind. Still, I doubt many will see this … as they are too blinded by the politics of it all.”
and
“I do think Palin’s daughter made a mistake. If she was old enough to have sex—outside of marriage—she should have used birth control … or … she should have refrained from having sex.”
and
If one reads this website/blog … the comments about liberals—and in particular liberal Christians—often cross the line into what can only be called vicious. They are, quite frankly, less than Christian.”
I don’t this is fair, by the way, on Hopper’s part, and if there are such comments the elves and i are always glad to hear about them–ed.
and this from another thread:
“A party that thought of Goldwater as too conservative … is now composed of people who think of Goldwater as an uberliberal. How ridiculous … no wonder I’m no longer registered Republican. Maybe we should just call them Neandercons rather than Neocons.”
It seems that stone throwing is something Hopper is quite good at – that sitting on a high horse and calling people hypocrites.
62- glad you think my defs are interesting! My husband thinks so too. 😉
I’m frankly not sure who I’m going to support. I find the current political categories problematic because I don’t fit easily into either of the major parties’ platforms. I am pro-life, but I am not a single issue voter. I have small children, and have fairly definite views about education, childcare and issues that affect kids and their health and welfare. These beliefs span the range of conservative-liberal. I also feel strongly about how christian charity should be reflected in government policy in regard to poor and underprivileged people. But I also believe in fiscal responsibility and would be more of a strict constructionist in regards to constitutional matters. The totality of these beliefs do not fit comfortably with either party. And I know that my northeastern colleagues think I’m hopelessly conservative, while my southern colleagues think I’m liberal. So, maybe I’m simply messy, inconsistent, or just hopelessly in the middle – thus interesting.
But on Ms. Palin, my liberal colleagues would be shocked at my traditional views regarding her decision to run, because they are about as non-PC as they get!
#19 said:
[blockquote]The vitriol being spewed against Palin and her family has shocked even me, a cynical old watcher of politics. [/blockquote]
I really hope you don’t think the vitriol is limited to liberal leaning voters. Perhaps you might [url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2008/09/a_story_palin_should_tell.html?hpid=opinionsbox1]read this[/url] and reconsider.
At this point there is only one correct response to this situation. We all need to lift up the Palin family in prayer. We need to ask God to hold them in the hollow of his hand. We need to give praise for the decision for life. We need to pray for all families that face similar circumstances. And we need to pray Gods love and support for all victims of abortion – the innocent murdered babies and their mothers.
Gretta;
My own views don’t fit either party well. I’d be a “religious conservative libertarian” if I had a label. I’m not a “single issue voter”. “Abortion is murder” is where I start listening; what is proposed after that is what I vote on. If no candidate in a race fits into that, I don’t vote on that office.
Returning to the thread, people don’t put their lives on hold over a daughter’s pregnancy–not even an underage daughter’s. The baby will be born between the election and inauguration. Mrs. Palin will be available to help. Bristol will learn about motherhood the same way any new mother does, OJT with advice from the Grandmothers. There will be two such ladies and the job of VP isn’t so demanding it won’t leave time for advice, nor will being a new grandmother be an undue distraction from the job.
Above I mention a mild doubt that the Palins supervised their daughter well enough. That said, I spent Sat. at my parish soup kitchen assisted by a pair of girls in the 15-16yr. old range. Both were tired. One, a lifelong parishioner, had been out until 2am at a party. The other, a stranger working off public service credits for school, had been at a slumber party where they’d forgotten to slumber. This is normal for teens to be allowed to do. It leaves ample room for sex to happen with the parents being no wiser until too late. Any of us who do work with youth have seen it happen time and time again. You forgive, instruct, and move on with life–even if life is running for office.
Jeffrey A. Roberts
#66 Gretta, few people line-up with the crude stereotypes so-beloved by media scripts. I have to agree … you have an interesting mix of priorities and values. You stated your desire to see “Christian charity” reflected in the government policies regarding service to the poor and the disadvantaged That is so broad as to obscure understanding of what your concerns really are. Generally, social justice issues are complex and have multiple aspects and many possible solutions.
#1
[i] Well, we’d know what would be happening if this were one of Obama’s daughters, don’t we? [/i]
We do. The conservatives on this blog would be crowing about how the daughter of a mainline church member got pregnant and how it must be because the mainline churches don’t care about premarital sex. (On which point I grant conservatives have a point. But this case shows things aren’t so simple. My parents were hard core leftist Episcopalians who would have executed me if I’d gotten anybody pregnant growing up. And they sure as hell wouldn’t have said they loved and supported me.)
Another thing we know is that if the daughter had had an abortion, her mother would not have released a press release saying that her daughter had her unconditional support.
Why isn’t that boyfriend married to her daughter yesterday? What are they waiting for?
Ms. Palin could put her shotgun talents to some good use here… 🙂
[blockquote]We do. The conservatives on this blog would be crowing about how the daughter of a mainline church member got pregnant and how it must be because the mainline churches don’t care about premarital sex. [/blockquote]
Possibly, but doubtful. First, TUCC isn’t a “mainline” church, but a diseased member of an already stumbling denomination. Second, we probably wouldn’t have even heard about it because the lass would have been dispatched to an abortion mill ASAP so as to not “punish” her with a child.
Sarah, I’m sure some liberals do think people should have sex before marriage. But it’s not actually a “liberal” philosophy. That is a very particular philosophy. What is essential to liberalism is the notion of choice: individuals choose. That’s where morality begins.
Granted, it is a contestable point but that’s liberalism’s heart.
So as far as “endorsing,” I’m sure you could find some liberals endorsing. And I’m sure you could find conservative having sex outside of marriage. And getting divorced. A liberal could also say, “I won’t have sex outside of marriage, but perhaps other people can. It makes no difference to me.” A liberal could say that and still be a “liberal.”
A conservative might say that all sex outside of marriage puts you in the risk of going to hell for all eternity: A sixteen year old who thinks about someone of the opposite sex is potentially on the road to eternal damnation unless they directly to confess to God every sexual temptation they have. If you think about boys, you are a sinner, Sarah. On the road to hell. So stop dating them.
“they want Christians to become less rigid and recognize how irrelevant Scripture is, and how it has nothing to do with “God†anyway, but is merely a book of fantasies written about God by humans. It’s a positive mantra—amongst liberals who claim to be Christians on this very blog in fact.”
Um… I don’t want you to become less rigid. I think you are hilarious. In fact, I think Jesus wants both of us in relationship with him. I imagine you as pious as John the baptist, whereas I’m hanging with gluttons and drunkards.
Engaging you sharpens my debating skills. So I don’t want you to change, Sarah. Nor do I think its a book about fantasies: that the church considers scripture historical is crucial to social progress. Do I interpret scripture the same? No. Do I interpret it as mythical? A few parts (say, constructing creation in six human days). Still, it is true, some liberals argue the way you ascribe them. I don’t think their arguments are essential to “liberalism,” which is a philosophy that places morality in the location of human agency.
“RE: “Liberals have nothing against non-Christians having sex if they want to,†. . .
Right—in fact, it’s a sacrament.”
I’m confused. Sex is a sacrament? Perhaps this is the confusion: I see sex as just sex. I see marriage as a sacrament: the promise. Sometimes sex is holy, sometimes it is just sex, sometimes it’s profane. I don’t subscribe to a manichean view of it. If you do, God bless you. You do what you have to.
“It’s refreshing, though, to see liberals on this thread suddenly becoming the pious Eagles that they claim conservatives are.”
I admit, when liberals attack Palin, they are being a bit immediate. They should be happy the girl made a choice on her own. They should emphasize that it was her choice, and God bless her for it. She wasn’t coerced into doing it by big government or by the church. She chose, on her own, to keep the child, and we should all commend her for it. But if big government commanded her to have the child, it wouldn’t be much of a moral victory, would it?
Hopper, liberal people on this blog who purport to be “Christian” do indeed believe the Bible is merely a book of fantasies written about God by humans.
Stick around long enough, and you’ll see for yourself.
RE: “the comments about liberals—and in particular liberal Christians—often cross the line into what can only be called vicious. They are, quite frankly, less than Christian.”
You and I have already ascertained that we don’t have the same definition of the word “Christian” so your point is essentially meaningless.
JW,
RE: “If you think about boys, you are a sinner, Sarah. . . . ”
Actually, if I *don’t* think about boys, I am a sinner, John. Christians believe that all human beings — except for one — are sinners.
RE: “I imagine you as pious as John the baptist, whereas I’m hanging with gluttons and drunkards.”
Well, if it makes you feel better about yourself — more youthful and more hip — than you fantasize as you need to, John. But . . . fantasies do inform the readers quite a bit. ; > )
[i]Hopper, liberal people on this blog who purport to be “Christian†do indeed believe the Bible is merely a book of fantasies written about God by humans. [i]
By your standards, the conservatives do also. They just pretend otherwise.
Sid? What are you talking about?
[blockquote] You stated your desire to see “Christian charity†reflected in the government policies regarding service to the poor and the disadvantaged That is so broad as to obscure understanding of what your concerns really are. Generally, social justice issues are complex and have multiple aspects and many possible solutions. [/blockquote]
Exactly. This thread is about Sarah Palin, her political decisions, and how (if at all) her family’s current situation affects her ability to govern, not my political philosophy. Which is why I briefly gave broad categories about my own opinions to illustrate my point that my political outlook is not easily catagorized as conservative or liberal. I simply didn’t feel that this was “on topic” to give the full “what Gretta believes” (nor do I think that most folks would be that interested!).
Boy, most of the bloggers over on the LA Times website sure are cranky and mean–I thought they were the ones usually accusing the Republicans of being exclusive and holier-than-thou…
The Palin family’s personal decisions on what they do or don’t do or how they divide the labor in their family is THEIR business. And, as long as none of them are lying through their teeth to the American public or breaking the law, then, in my view, all the talking heads, liberal or conservative, should simply shut up.
RE: “By your standards, the conservatives do also.”
Nope — not by my standards at all.
I really have zero respect for this idea that they ‘going to get married.’ They could do so today – but they’re waiting, perhaps because they’re planning for a ceremony. Well, I have no respect for that – they don’t deserve a nice ceremony. Sign the contract and be done with it. So, in response to your comment on the other thread, Jeffersonian, yes I know they say they’re getting married, and I don’t respect them for it. The mere fact that they’ve waited this long makes me wonder if the guy is going to back out eventually.
I stand by my assertion that conservatives believe scripture no more and no less than liberals – it’s off the topic of this thread, but briefly: I see all the same reasoning on both the left and right for why scripture doesn’t say what it plainly does say. They simply apply it to different portions of scripture.
Hey Sarah:
“Actually, if I *don’t* think about boys, I am a sinner, John. Christians believe that all human beings—except for one—are sinners.”
You are absolutely right, Sarah. You’re a sinner. God bless you. And I don’t judge you for it. If you would, continue to work on it.
“Well, if it makes you feel better about yourself—more youthful and more hip—than you fantasize as you need to, John. But . . . fantasies do inform the readers quite a bit. ; > ) ”
Feel better? Never thought of it that way before….
But I’m glad you also hang with glutton and drunkards. They are definitely excellent company! Fortunately, so did Jesus, who was considered one by his contemporaries. If you don’t, well, God bless you anyways! You’re a better person than I am, as I can usually tell.
[blockquote]Sign the contract and be done with it.[/blockquote]
‘cuz, y’know.. that’s what it’s about.. checking those boxes off. /snark
Do you really think speculating on the kids’ motives is a good Christian witness? FWIW, I agree, they ought to move forward with Christian pre-marriage conseling and marriage as soon as possible, but approaching marriage like it’s a box to be checked is a recipe for further problems.
#74 I’m confused. Sex is a sacrament? Perhaps this is the confusion: I see sex as just sex. I see marriage as a sacrament: the promise. Sometimes sex is holy, sometimes it is just sex, sometimes it’s profane. I don’t subscribe to a manichean view of it. If you do, God bless you. You do what you have to.
Sex is a sacrament according to the Roman Catholic church. It is the physical joining of man and woman into “one flesh” from which new life comes. The sacrament of marriage is the symbol of that physicial joining, but they are both halves of one whole.
Sex and Marriage are both holy because both symbolize the union of Christ and His church. The Eucharist is the physical equivalent of sex. Through the physical joining of Christs Body and ours, we become one flesh. Christ is married to His church. The Eucharist is the physical portion of that joining, as confirmation/baptism is the symbolic joining.
So yes, premarital sex is wrong. (I can’t understand why I have to teach an Episcopal priest so obvious a lesson). Using sex outside of marriage is like barfing up the Eucharist, because you are bulimic or on the Atkins diet, and therefore are limiting calories. The Eucharist is not (just) about eating, and sex is not (just) about having an orgasm. The fact that there may be pleasure in both is a grace not an excuse for gluttony and contempt.
However, despite the fact that Bristol engaged in sin, it is right and proper that her family love, encourage, and support her and her family in repentance. I agree that Bristol will be growing up very quickly. As for Palin, my own thoughts (as the mother of an 18 year old daughter) is very much “There but for the Grace of God go I”.
I suspect most conservatives think like myself.
Her demand for privacy is understandable, but it fails the simplest reality test. A candidate for president of vice president is in a very different class from the rest of us. The voters have every right to know that elements in a candidate’s life that speak to the candidate’s judgment, honesty and integrity. T hat daughter has gotten “knocked up” as the vulgar phrase quite usefully puts it, is a legitimate matter for public inquiry in the candidate’s biography. The public can ask, “How can an evangelical, faced with this problem, utter no word of criticism, when, had it been someone else’s daughter, should well have called for judgment?” “Where were both mother and father when this situation was being created? Did they know nothing? Or were they not paying attention?” “The governor’s words show us a candidate trying to sweep a social mess under the rug with smooth words. What will she do when she faces damaging crises in the national government over which she has no control but shares responsibility?”
If the problem had not been unwed motherhood, but drug use, for example, could she still demand privacy? I might add that the Chinese are little more sensible than we: When a child does well, the PARENTS are praised, and when a child does badly, t he reverse is the case. The voters may see in the daughter a microcosm and their demand to know is both just and reasonable. Larry
#87 Actually I agree. However I think if one were to do this, it would be appropriate to do it rather more broadly.
For example, I think character makes a difference in terms of hiring somebody. I think if somebody abandons their children, (“knocks” up a girl and goes off to leave her with being an “unwed” mother or have an abortion) this is relavant.
I think that such items should be as easily accessed as a credit report, and just as folks may decline to hire due to prior bancrupcies, or prior criminal convictions, they should decline to hire because of failure to be a husband and father etc.
Actually, I also think that the fact that Obama has a brother in abject poverty, that he does not appear to have made any contribution to is relavant. The Big O had time to go shake the hand of very other guy in the world, but did not have time to go to Kenya.
I think that is quite telling. And it is relavant to discuss what it means for “family values”.
Has anyone considered (particularly Gretta) what a lifetime burden it would have put on the pregnant daughter Bristol had her Mother quite the race because of her? Sarah handled the matter in an enlightened Christian manner. Have we also ignored the fact that her husband Todd can be a fulltime househusband for the children and won’t need to be up on the North Slope or on a fishing boat with Sarah’s paycheck. Please folks, give this remarkable lady a break.