Sarah's morals

Discussion in 'Politics' started by B_Nick8, Sep 7, 2008.

  1. B_Nick8

    B_Nick8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    11,912
    Likes Received:
    44
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
    So abortion should be criminalized even in the case of rape or incest because human life begins at conception. I don't agree, but that's just me. And sexual education should not be taught because, oh, I don't know, maybe that will just encourage kids, knowing about birth control and all. Abstinence makes the heart grow fonder.

    Bristol's "mistake" is well-known, but no one seems to talk about the fact that Sarah and Todd eloped ( to "save her parents the cost of a wedding" she has said) on August 29th, 1988 and she gave birth to Track on April 20, 1989. If her son had been born such a preemie, you know it would have been made part of her story of adversity and bravery, just as her special needs child was.

    I'm not saying that makes her a "bad" person, but we're two generations into premarital pregnancy here. There's at least a whiff of moral superiority and hypocricy in the air. I don't care what she does in her bedroom, in her life or in her own family, but I don't want her telling me what I can do in mine. Or you, yours. And I sure as hell don't want her legislating it.

    (And I'm afraid it goes without saying that a Democrat in her position would be crucified for being in the same situation but that's another issue.)
     
    #1 B_Nick8, Sep 7, 2008
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2008
  2. hottcjimmyv

    hottcjimmyv Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    home: Dixie, school: north east
    cheers, Nick. I'm in almost total agreement, and I have a problem with applauding a 17 year old for choosing to raise this child herself in a marriage predicated on a pregnancy (instead of love) rather than hand the child over to someone who is prepared for parenthood and unable to conceive. Sure, she is with her rights, but should we applaud it? I don't think so.

    what's the difference between Rick Santorum and Sarah Palin? The lipstick.
     
  3. goodwood

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2005
    Messages:
    1,804
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    36
    Location:
    Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas
    Good post Nick. All true. I can't see how anyone here would disagree. This is great to have a politics forum here.
     
  4. B_phe1249

    B_phe1249 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    I really like Palin and will be glad to have her as VP
     
  5. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,387
    Likes Received:
    2,127
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    We still don’t know a lot about Palin except that she’s better at delivering a speech than McCain and that she defends her own pregnant daughter’s right to privacy even as she would have the government intrude to police the reproductive choices of all other women. Most of the rest of the biography supplied by her and the McCain camp is fiction.

    She didn’t say “no thanks” to the “Bridge to Nowhere” until after Congress had already abandoned it but given Alaska a blank check for $223 million in taxpayers’ money anyway. Far from rejecting federal pork, she hired lobbyists to secure her town a disproportionate share of earmarks ($1,000 per resident in 2002, 20 times the per capita average in other states).

    Though McCain claimed “she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities,” she has never issued a single command as head of the Alaska National Guard. As for her “executive experience” as mayor, she told her hometown paper in Wasilla, Alaska, in 1996, the year of her election: “It’s not rocket science. It’s $6 million and 53 employees.” Her much-advertised crusade against officials abusing their office is now compromised by a bipartisan ethics investigation into charges that she did the same.

    How long before we learn she never shot a moose?
     
  6. B_Nick8

    B_Nick8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    11,912
    Likes Received:
    44
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
    ...Or that the title she won in that beauty pagent was Miss Congenitality? :wink:
     
    #6 B_Nick8, Sep 8, 2008
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2008
  7. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    883
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    Then either you are ignorant of her policies, which is sad...
    Or you are in support of her anti-American stances on insinuating religion into government, misappropriating government funds, and denying freedom of speech.

    In the former instance you are simply an apathetic doofus who votes on 'likability".
    IN the latter you are in league with treasonous ideas that suborn the undermining of the constitution.

    Either way, not an admirable stance.




    BTW- the Flag is just a piece of cloth....a SYMBOL....

    What does it symbolize?

    It symbolizes the Constitution.
    The Constitution IS the United States.

    Either be a patriot and uphold it...

    or get the hell out and start your own Christian theocracy...
    Just do it elsewhere.
     
  8. Bellatrix

    Bellatrix New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    53
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Female
    Whoever imagined that we would see a Republican convention rapturously applaud an unwed teen mother?


    Yet that is just what happened on Wednesday night in St. Paul. At the conclusion of Sarah Palin’s triumphant speech, the Alaskan Governor welcomed her family onto the stage: her husband, her five children and the fiancé of Bristol, her visibly pregnant 17-year-old daughter.
    That moment confirmed a dramatic evolution in American politics: the transformation of the pro-life movement from an unambiguously conservative force into something more complex.


    A quarter century ago, a sympathetic journalist named Burton Yale Pines set out to understand the origins of the then-young social-conservative movement.


    Abortion certainly ranked as issue number one, reported Pines in his 1982 book, Back to Basics. But abortion did not stand alone. Social conservatives cared almost as much about relaxed standards of sexual morality, about government interference in home schools and about the then-new issue of homosexual rights. Social conservatives were united, Pines observed, by their “determination to [defend] the traditional nuclear family [from] more than a decade of attacks from anti-family forces on the left.”


    Many or most of the issues that excited those first social conservatives have since faded away. The pro-life movement, however, has gone from strength to strength, breaking away from its culturally conservative origins and finding new allies in unlikely places.


    The pro-life movement has made common cause with the movement for the rights of the disabled. Impaired pregnancies are highly likely to be aborted, including more than 90% of Down Syndrome pregnancies (according to a 2002 survey of American patients).
    Pro-lifers have discovered shared values with critics of biotechnological research and commercial reproductive technology, such as the former Ralph Nader lawyer, Wesley Smith.


    The disproportionate incidence of abortion among non-whites has caused pro-life leaders like former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee to take a new interest in issues of race and discrimination. (The one-third of the U.S. population that is not white has two-thirds of the abortions.)
    The whole world witnessed this week that the pro-life movement has accepted gender equality and leadership roles for women.
    Most fascinating of all, the pro-life movement has come to terms with the sexual revolution. So long as unwed parenthood is considered disgraceful, many unwed mothers will choose abortion to escape disgrace. And so, step by step, the pro-life movement has evolved to an accepting — even welcoming — attitude toward pregnancy outside marriage.



    Religious groups have opened crisis pregnancy centres -- at least 2,200 across the United States as of 2006 -- serving perhaps half a million women per year. The spirit of these centres is well expressed in a 2006 article in Christianity Today by Amy Laura Hall, director of the theology program at Duke Divinity School.


    Hall urged evangelical communities to support “alternative high schools where pregnant girls may continue their education. We could work for maternity leave and flexible schedules at all levels of education and enterprise, especially at institutions overtly committed to Christian witness … advocating for systematic acts of mercy through a matrix of services to offer single mothers a safety net of care.”


    She concluded: “After hearing me give a talk on abortion, eugenics and teenage pregnancy, my oldest daughter, with whom I had not yet initiated a talk about birds and bees, looked up at me and said frankly, ‘Mom, if God gives me a baby before I am married, I won’t worry. I know that you and Dad would take care of it so that I could stay in school.”


    And indeed, this approach seems to have worked. As the stigma attached to unwed motherhood has diminished, the United States has seen both a huge increase in the proportion of babies born out of wedlock -- now reaching almost 37% -- and a striking decline in the incidence of abortions.


    In 1981, 29.3 abortions were carried out for every 1,000 women of childbearing age in the United States. By 2005, that rate had tumbled to 19.1 per 1,000 women.


    The experience of the Palin family symbolizes the effect of the pro-life movement on American culture: Abortion has been made more rare; unwed motherhood has been normalized. However you feel about that outcome, it is not well-described as either left-wing or right-wing.
    © David Frum
    dfrum@aei.org

    Well, this isn't 1981, so, you'd have to explain to me why a 1/3 drop in abortions in the U.S. isn't a good thing for women.

    http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomme...

    And, maybe, she feels the birth of her first son, was just the beginning of her life with her husband, like alot of us do that have been married, forever. lol
     
  9. B_Nick8

    B_Nick8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    11,912
    Likes Received:
    44
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
    Who indeed. That is the poorest excuse for "applause" I can imagine. Support I can believe. Love from the child's family and inner circle, of course. But you're implying mass praise which is ridiculous.

    I don't buy this hysterical, instantaneous, born again, evangelical conversion of the Rupublican party to unwed teenage motherhood and "support them-of". It's politically expedient to do so in this case and in this case only so excuses are being made. Just for one minute color the Palins black or Hispanic and even make them middle class and try to picture the same leniency being given them. Doesn't happen.

    Bristol is being given a pass that wouldn't be given almost any other girl in this country, but much worse, it sets a horrible example for teenage girls everywhere, most egregiously in light of your "rapturous applause". This is the worst kind of hypocrisy
     
  10. Bellatrix

    Bellatrix New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    53
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Female

    Of course she is, after the ridiculous rumor that Trig was not Sarah's child.

    If you watched really closely, the nomination film, shows Bristol wearing a band on her left ring finger. The chances of a uncommitted girl of 17 wearing a ring, AND of having a Down's baby, are SLIM. Alone the chances of a teenager bearing a Down's child is about 20,000 to 1.

    The question of abortion will simply now be given to the individual states....

    Palin, nor her daughter have flip-flopped on their "Right to Life" stance.
     
  11. B_Nick8

    B_Nick8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    11,912
    Likes Received:
    44
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
    You are making absolutely no sense whatsoever. No one is talking about Bristol in relation to having a child with Down's Syndrome and it wouldn't matter if she did. And, quite frankly, the chances of a girl of 17 wearing a ring, committed or not, are somewhere between 85 and 100%.

    Leaving the question of abortion to the individual states will simply mean a return to the concept of "abortion factory" states and long distance travel for the girls who can afford it and back-alley botches for those who can't as it was before Roe v. Wade.

    I don't believe I've ever said Palin has flip flopped on the issue. And I couldn't care less what Bristol's position on the matter is. I'm saying that I want this, and many other issues to remain a matter of individual choice and that I don't want people in office to be legislating the ways in which I and the rest of the country choose to conduct our personal lives.
     
    #11 B_Nick8, Sep 8, 2008
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2008
  12. Bellatrix

    Bellatrix New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    53
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Female
    With individual choice, comes individual responsibilities, both Palin & her daughter have taken on their's, and yet, you are judging her, based on her private life. The same thing you don't want in yours...

    And yet, you haven't mentioned the 'value' of an adoptive family, or it's overwhelming cost to childless couples.

    Not everything can, or needs to be "changed" by medical procedure. I'm wondering how many posters were adopted???
     
  13. B_Nick8

    B_Nick8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    11,912
    Likes Received:
    44
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
    Some of your points are valid; your 'arguments' are simply inane.
     
  14. Bellatrix

    Bellatrix New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    53
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Female
    Well, quite simply, if your mother or mine had an abortion, or for that matter any other poster's mother, we wouldn't be having this conversation. :wink:

    Then what 'choice' would you have. Not all of us want one, ya' know!
     
  15. jexeter87

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2007
    Messages:
    84
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    20
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London (GB)
    Verified:
    Photo
    I would like to have choice, should I want it. Just because some people don't want something doesn't mean no one should.
     
  16. stratedude

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,865
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    53
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ohio
    Conservatives don't believe that allowing doctors (or anyone else) to kill a living human being is 'intrusion' or 'policing the reproductive choices of women.'

    Conservatives believe that reproductive choice means being able to chose to have sex or not. Liberals believe that humans don't have that choice, so decisions begin with whether or not to kill the baby. To conservatives, abortion is no different than what Casey Anthony apparently did to her daughter.

    You really need to ask yourself when a human being earns rights. Virtually all LIBERALS are against PARTIAL BIRTH or LATE TERM abortion, so the arguement as to whether a baby gets rights at birth seem to have been resolved. The "time-of-rights" now seems to be at the start of the 3rd trimester. So what happens that makes the baby so much more important then? Why not rights earlier? If you couldn't grind up a human being's skull in the 3rd trimester, why can you in the 2nd?

    Conservatives think this arguement is silly. Choose whether or not to have a baby when you decide whether or not to have sex. If you decide to have sex before you are married, then realize that if you have a child and if you don't get married, that your child has a proven, statistical disadvantage to those that grow up with both mother and father. You can't argue with the stats.
     
  17. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,387
    Likes Received:
    2,127
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    Conservatives have no problem delivering 'shock and awe' to very much alive Iraqis. No debate there on if life has begun or not. They are alive. They also have no problem with the death penalty. And blisffuly unconcerned if the state is executing innocent people. So what?

    And apparently they have no problem doing the same thing to Iran should they so desire. Yet they wrap murder in the Bible. Really no different than bin Laden.

    But the entire point is to control sexual activity. The even want to lable the birth control pill as abortion. And no scientist in the world will say preventing pregnancy is abortion.


    Treating the Pill as Abortion, Draft Regulation Stirs Debate

    By STEPHANIE SIMON
    July 31, 2008; Page A11

    Set aside the fraught question of when human life begins. The new debate: When does pregnancy begin?

    The Bush Administration has ignited a furor with a proposed definition of pregnancy that has the effect of classifying some of the most widely used methods of contraception as abortion.

    A draft regulation, still being revised and debated, treats most birth-control pills and intrauterine devices as abortion because they can work by preventing fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus. The regulation considers that destroying "the life of a human being."

    Many medical groups disagree. They hold that pregnancy isn't established until several days after conception, when the fertilized egg has grown to a cluster of several dozen cells and burrowed into the uterine wall. Anything that disrupts that process, in their view, is contraception.
     
    #17 sargon20, Sep 8, 2008
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2008
  18. B_Nick8

    B_Nick8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    11,912
    Likes Received:
    44
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
     
  19. Bellatrix

    Bellatrix New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    53
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Female
    "She's unqualified. A "right-wing man in a skirt and fetching up-do." Feminists went apoplectic when she was chosen as Senator John McCain's running mate. The same feminists who keep saying we must have more women in politics suddenly changed their minds. "We need more women--just not that kind of woman."

    Different waves of feminism have rolled in since the suffragettes fought for the right to vote. Today, few are sure what feminism is.

    Their palette is left-wing and non-negotiable -- especially the part about unrestricted access to, and, ideally, public funding for, abortion.

    But the "choice" label is not something every woman wants.

    In this very polarized context, it's not surprising that only the very strongest of conservative and pro-life female politicians would rise to the top. It takes a lot of guts not only to stand up to the kind of sisterly abuse described above, but also to compete effectively in a traditionally male-dominated field. To those untainted by ideology, Sarah Palin is gritty determination personified. To establishment feminists, however, she's a disaster.

    Why? Two words: family values. She has five kids (which is at least four too many for a dogmatic, career-obsessed feminist) and she's pro-life, even in cases of rape and incest. That she also insists on having the rewarding career that feminists wish they had themselves is just too much. It's driving her feminist opponents around the bend -- they now find themselves criticizing her for neglecting her children, which is more than a little rich coming from people who never tire of reminding mothers that staying at home to look after their children is a cardinal sin.

    It's not a pretty sight.

    Ultimately, feminism -- in its current manifestation as a hodge-podge of left-wing positions on abortion, gender quotas and family law -- has become a brittle, insecure ideology. Nothing highlights this better than the animus feminists reserve for a woman like Sarah Palin.




    Obama keeps saying that Clinton supporters who vote for John McCain will cause Roe Vs Wade to be overturned. That is a total lie. First the Democrats will have both a majority in the House and the Senate and there is no way any Supreme Court Justices that John McCain puts up for a vote can be put on the court without Democratic approval. Since Roe VS. Wade became law there have been five Republican administrations, and Roe Vs. Wade is still the law of the land. Republicans have appointed many Supreme Court Justices and the only ones who do not legislate from the bench and follow the constitution are justices that have been appointed by Republicans. Democrats have used this same worn out tactic to try to drum up fear against their Republican opponents in every elections since Roe VS. Wade became law.

    Barack Obama will appoint far left wing liberal activist Judges who will be out to bring extreme liberal activist laws that will destroy the Consititution. Which is but hanging by the thinnest thread already. It will be all about legislating from the bench. I could foresee Homosexual marriage becoming the law of the land. I could foresee it becoming illegal for conservative organizations from even mentioning God in public, groups like the Boy Scouts of America. We at least have a good chance of keeping a conservative majority on the Supreme Court with John McCain and absolutely no hope at all with Barack Obama.
    If an Obama presidency doesn't just send chills down your spine then you had better be checking your pulse. It would be much, much worse than The Carter Administration. God Bless and Protect The United States Of America.
     
  20. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,387
    Likes Received:
    2,127
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    Complete unadulterated

    :bsflag:


    Go back to Fox News. There you don't have to prove anything. Anti-intellectual and always wrong.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted