Who Cares? Magazine, Special Edition

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Republican Vice-Presidential pick Sarah Palin's teenage daughter is pregnant! She plans on marrying the father and raising the baby! Who Cares!

No, really, who cares? It's a private family matter, and part of being a modern woman is having the freedom to choose your life's path. The fact that this young woman and her young man have chosen a traditional path doesn't say anything about how effective Governor Palin would be as a Vice President. And you know what? The young woman in question isn't running for office, and the failure of her birth control should not be a topic for public debate.

So seriously, Who Cares? It's none of our business.

16 comments:

The Mechanicky Gal said...

Yes, her life is her choice, but her mother is determined to make sure that other women DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. That they only have HER CHOICE.
That makes it an issue.

Random Michelle K said...

Actually, this prominently displays the failures of abstinence only sex education.

The Mechanicky Gal said...

I was just going to mention that. Abstinance only has been the cornerstone of sex education - after all, every teen can "just say no!"
Riiiiight.
And of course all teens that get knocked up have loving caring supportive families to ensure that their lives can continue on uninterrupted, right?

Janiece Murphy said...

Amy, Sarah Palin's pro-life stance is absolutely an issue, and is open to debate and criticism, as is all of her positions.

Her daughter's reproductive choices? Not so much.

Michelle, I agree with your assessment IRT abstinence only sex "education." Ms. Palin's pregnancy can only be described as "ironical" in light of the Governor's position.

However, in the interest of civility and respect, I don't think Ms. Palin's personal situation should be up for public debate, because she's not running.

The topics of the Governor's position on abortion, sex education, separation of church and state? You betcha. Rake her over the coals, social conservative that she is. But making it personal to the Governor's daughter is tacky and inappropriate.

Random Michelle K said...

I think I disagree. Not that Miss Palin should be brought into the spotlight--that is 100% correct. Families should be left alone.

However, I think an argument can be made the even in good families, where parents do everything right, kids are still going to have sex outside of marriage, and so MUST be protected not just against pregnancy, but also against STDs.

I see this as an example of the absolute failure of abstinence only education.

Janiece Murphy said...

I don't disagree, Michelle. I happen to believe that abstinence only sex education is the stupidest idea ever.

But is it really necessary to discuss Ms. Palin's situation in order to make this point? Sure it's a great example, and the temptation is to shoot those fish in the barrel since they so conveniently decided to spawn there, but NO. I don't want to be the kind of person (or be a member of a party) that believes publicly berating this young woman in order to achieve your political goals is the right thing to do. Because it's not.

Which is not to say that I won't publicly berate Governor Palin for being a backwards idjit on topics relating to her social conservatism. She's not off-limits.

Random Michelle K said...

That was kinda what I was getting at.

The knowledge is out there, we don't have to use names.

But we can make people think.

Maybe

Janiece Murphy said...

::snort::

Michelle made a funny!

The Mechanicky Gal said...

Just another thought - by accepting the nomination, did S.P. not understand that this would bring her daughters personal plight to the attention of THE WORLD? And that there would be commentary? And that some of that commentary would bring harsh spotlights on her daughters personal life? Yes, her daughter should be able to be pregnant in privacy, but given the circumstances of the disclosure and the Republicans stance on sex/birth control/ABORTION (had to get that in with caps....) she had her business thrown out there in teh middle of the street. Unfortunate though it was. I agree that it is private, but the point I was really making is that SHE has choices that her mother is willing, no GUNNING to make sure that others DON'T have.

Janiece Murphy said...

Amy, I'm sure she did. In fact, if I was cynical social-conservative haytah, I would say that having this issue in the forefront might be a ploy to prevent discussions of her social conservatism because her daughter is "off-limits."

And while I do believe her daughter is off-limits, her own politics is not.

As a candidate, I'm pretty sure she's not my cup of tea.

Because social conservatives do make me throw up in my mouth a little.

Steve Buchheit said...

As the VP candidate for the party that brags about their "Family Values," I think it is open to public criticism. Clearly this shows their "Family Values" (both pre-marital sex and choosing to keep the baby). If one side of that is to be held up for praise (as it is by many of the social conservative leaders), the other side is open to debate.

Janiece Murphy said...

Steve, I'll agree that they can't have their cake and eat it too.

If the campaign holds up her decision to marry the father and keep the baby as a shining example of their moral fortitude, then they've opened the door for criticism of the pre-marital sex.

In my mind they can do one of two things: Shut the hell up about it. That means no discussion of Ms. Palin at all, or they can open that door. If they open the door? It's fair game.

But only if they make it so.

Jeri said...

Can you imagine what it would have done to the Palin candidacy if a background check had revealed that the daughter had been pregnant and chosen to terminate it? That might have been a bigger circus yet, given Palin's stated stances on the subject.

But I agree with Janiece - Ms. Palin's pregnancy and future life as a parent is absolutely off limits, she is a private citizen and didn't sign up for the three-ring circus.

Steve Buchheit said...

Jeri, if I were the more cynical type, I would say that had some bearing on the choice to keep the pregnancy. But I'm not that cynical, yet.

Carol Elaine said...

I'm with you on this one, Janiece and Jeri. I mean, I don't have a problem using this to point out that, as has been mentioned above, abstinence education simply doesn't work, but that's about as far as I would go.

I don't see this particular issue as hypocritical on Palin's part (there are other things that appear hypocritical in her resume which should be nailed to her door) nor do I necessarily see it as a failure as a mother (even the best of parents have teens who go against their parents' wishes). Just, again, that (sing it with me, kiddoes) abstinence education simply doesn't work. That's the point that needs to be hammered home.

(The BF and I had a big ol' discussion about this last night and we disagree about the hypocrisy factor, so it's definitely on my mind.)

The Mechanicky Gal said...

So, while I am tippity-typing my brains out here at work, does this choice indicate that McCain has poor choosing skillz? That his first decision has been a poor one and who knows what kind of even poorer (sorry, is that a word? It should be) choices he will make as Pres.? AND can you imagine if he were to die and she were to assume the powers of President?
My brains are leaking out my ears now.