It had to happen ... we knew it would.
CNN used the story about Sarah Palin's daughter to promote sex-ed in schools through the Alliance for Reproductive Justice ("abstinence doesn't work"). Former Secretary of Education Bill Bennett called Wolf Blitzer on the carpet (Newsbusters):
But that first piece of attack of journalism, Wolf, I got to speak to. We all praised Barack Obama, myself included, for saying, do not use the case of this child to start to beat up Sarah Palin and to use this as an opportunity to make points for the Center for Reproductive Pregnancy [Alliance for Reproductive Rights]. That was really out and out outrageous. That should not happen on CNN.Besides advocacy journalism, the debate brings up the common practice of using singular events to drive public policy and assert an ever changing moral code based upon a pragmatic interpretation of societal outcomes. Any deviation from a desired result or behavior yields a re-thinking of our understanding of what is right and a call for the government to initiate another social engineering program or policy.[snip]
What we should do is what's most effective. Abstinence education I believe, the best programs are the most effective. But these are decisions that can be made at the state level. But that bit of advocacy has no place on CNN and its respectable journalism.
But moral standards are not relative, do change and are independent of individuals. Teen pregnancy rates (or the pregnancy of one person) provide no support for an anti-abstinence organization but simply reflect the failings of individuals to do what is right.
Sex-ed was taught at the school along with contraception.
This Abstinence is a farce.
What this is really about, they want her to take her daughter to have an abortion.
They say Palin's daughter is a private family matter and shouldn't be covered... Then why the heck should there be national abstinence programs or laws on abortions?
Then why even bring her family into the campaign as a 'family values' talking point? They want their cake and eat it, too. "Look! My son is in the military! Look! We're a family! Oh, no, You're not allowed to rebut this with any negative points. That's a low-blow."
Her family goes to the very core of her flaws in leadership. No birth control results in having a kid... at 44 years old... which turns out to have Down's Syndrome (which is related to the age of the mother). There are reasons why 44 year old women either use protection or get themselves or their partner sterilized.
Abstinence education (plus no birth control) is directly tied into her own daughter getting pregnant at 17 years old and out of wedlock.
Her questionable judgement has put her entire family at risk, and she wants to see her judgement exported at a national level.
No. Her family is a banner case against her own policies.
This is a disgrace by both of you. First, her daughter is off limits, because her daughter isn't running for the Presidency or for vice President.
Also, abortion is murder. Abortion is about ripping into limb innocent babies. That's the definition of it whether you like it or not. Also, in your mind all kids with down's syndrome should die via abortion if a woman wants to. Sorry, I don't live in Nazi Germany. I live in America.
You can debate whether Palin is qualified for being a VP candidate, but her daughter's decision to keep the baby and marry her boyfriend should be praised. It shouldn't become scorned. Also, Palin didn't bring her daughter into the campaign. The media went into her personal life. Also, you judge candidates by their policies not by their children. You hypocrites constantly judge anyone that disagree with your views as hateful yet some of your crowd are hateful against a daughter. Abstience put in the proper context have always worked. Sexual education and issues of contraception should be the parent's decision not forced by the state at all.
I do think abstinence education works. My parents always supported abstinence. And guess what? I never had pre-marital sex. Neither did any of my siblings or cousins. Or friends. In fact, none of us were even tempted. I think this is because our parents were PRESENT in our lives. They didn't just tell us not to have sex, and then disappear to their high powered careers, like Sarah Palin did. I don't blame her child for her behavior. I blame Sarah Palin for putting her career before her children. And now she wants to abandon her Down syndrome baby to be a vice-president? Success isn't everything.
Timothy: Do you realize that the Republics/McCain party were the first ones to talk about the daughter's pregnancy in the major media? Before that, it had only been brought up in a few corners of the internet. No one knew about it before they told us about it. Palin brought her daughter into this.
Abortion is not murder. I live in America, but I'm not sure you do- because if you did, you would realize that legally, abortion is not murder. The definition of abortion has nothing to do with ripping into limb innocent babies (which I actually don't understand the grammar there... is limb a verb?). Abortion is simply to terminate a pregnancy. And the abortions that are legal have nothing to do with an innocent child- they remove cells from the woman's uterus, not a child.
Why should I praise a teenager for making a rash decision? She is allowed to keep her baby, that's no one's business. But I don't think we should praise her for marrying the boyfriend. A baby is not the basis of a marriage. If they weren't planning on getting married before hand, then they obviously aren't ready to now all of a sudden. I have a strong feeling that this marriage either wont happen, or will end in divorce once they're out of the public eye.
Lydia -
The legality of child killing in the womb has no bearing on whether or not the act is a "murder". Government is not source of truth or the originator of morality (I'm sure that on many topics other than abortion you would agree). We have minds that enable us to reason, to know that the illegitimate taking of a human life ought to be illegal, as it was in the many years preceding 1973. We know, for example, that Hitler's treatment of the Jews was murderous despite the legality of the act. Similarly, it is patently obvious that killing a child, albeit prior to birth, is murder.
When abortions are performed, the human child is a separate organism, with a unique identity. You may attempt to demean this human life by calling him or her a collection of cells, but this doesn't change the scientific facts.
The reason Timothy uses the term "ripping" is that the child, who is distinguishable by his body parts, is literally torn apart during the abortion procedure, which you simply with the word "terminate". Some abortions are performed so late that the baby survives and is born (hence the born alive infant protection act which Obama opposed) Again, your language doesn't change the medical facts.
kotql uqcsazh rhulcg
http://adderall.withoutprescriptiononline.com adderall without prescription online