Sarah Palin's Daughter Pregnant

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
However her support of abstinence education does make this utterly hilarious.[/quote]

Why?

[quote]makkun wrote:
Abstinence education failed? Impossible! :wink:

[/quote]

Yep it fails cause it is human nature to want to have sex, it’s the same reason the war on drugs is a failure. You can’t beat human nature.

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Don’t tell me that if one of Obama’s daughters would get pregnant at 17, the outrage wouldn’t be tremendous.
For same reason a candidate should be married and have children, this matters: A candidate is expected to have a model familiy and live a life according to certain values. Values, that some candidates and partys are even more eager to promote.

Sarah Palin’s values somehow didn’t stick to her daughter’s uterus, and that is telling.
[/quote]

if obama’s daughter got prognant at 17, it would be aborted and no one would hear about it, and if it got out the left wouldn’t give a rat’s ass.

or they would keep it and the left wouldn’t give a rat’s ass.

[quote]lixy wrote:
The issue is whether girls (be they privileged kids or crack whores) should be taught about sex and given access to contraception. The question of women’s rights to do as they please with their bodies is central to this newsbite as well.

“Why does this matter?”, you ask. Because it’s ironic that Palin happens to oppose both.[/quote]

Show me an exact quote of her opposing teaching her children about sex.

What kind of access to contraceptives do children need?

I liked it better when you were sulking in your dorm room after having your ass kicked by the canadian.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
pookie wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Are they willing to throw their women’s movement under the bus just to attack a VP candidate? Somehow I doubt it.

Palin’s a feminist now?

If people attack Palin because she’s a woman, you might have a point.

Attacking her retrograde ideas and positions has nothing to do with her being a woman.

Retrograde ideas? Such as? She believes in abstinence? Really? You want to take on the entirety of the Catholic American population by ridiculing something like that?

That’d be REAL good for the new messiah. [/quote]

BELIEVING something, and wanting it taught in schools when it’s undeniably a failure, are two very different things. Just like her retarded support of creationism in the classrooms, Palin seems incapable of making that very simnple distinction.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
However her support of abstinence education does make this utterly hilarious.[/quote]

Why?

[quote]Floortom wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pookie wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Are they willing to throw their women’s movement under the bus just to attack a VP candidate? Somehow I doubt it.

Palin’s a feminist now?

If people attack Palin because she’s a woman, you might have a point.

Attacking her retrograde ideas and positions has nothing to do with her being a woman.

Retrograde ideas? Such as? She believes in abstinence? Really? You want to take on the entirety of the Catholic American population by ridiculing something like that?

That’d be REAL good for the new messiah.

BELIEVING something, and wanting it taught in schools when it’s undeniably a failure, are two very different things. Just like her retarded support of creationism in the classrooms, Palin seems incapable of making that very simnple distinction.
[/quote]

oh, I don’t mind making schools completely neutral to any kind of sex education.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Retrograde ideas? Such as? She believes in abstinence? Really?[/quote]

Really. All studies show that abstinence does not work.

Why keep pushing it in an age where procreation is well understood and many means are at our disposal to control it.

Other retrograde ideas: Supports teaching creationism (or intelligent design) along with evolution in science class. Following that logic, I guess we should also teach “Stork Theory” in biology and “Evil spirits” as a competitor to germ theory… Astrology alongside astronomy and let our medical students decide by themselves if diluting a solution makes it stronger (as per homeopathy) rather than weaker.

She thinks you can drill yourself out of your current energy problems.

Why aim so low? I’ll take on the pope and the world-wide billion of Catholics on the topic.

I’m pretty sure any new messiah would be just as soundly ignored as the last one was.

Rainjack,

the German words you’re looking for are:
lustig - funny
komisch - comical
amuesant - amusing
or my favourite:
zum totlachen - laughing yourself to death

I know - it’s such a poetic language. :wink:

As for the political dimension - and what makes it more than real-life comedy: If McCain didn’t know in advance, it’s an issue of trust between them and that wouldn’t bode well for their campaign. If McCain knew, as his team says, it may be an even more genius move to make her VP candidate: bringing in a candidate who appeals to the evangelicals (who’ve been sceptical of him for a long time) and at the same time stands for the reality of post-modern family. Brilliant.

Meanwhile the race stays highly entertaining. :slight_smile:

Makkun

[quote]Rocky101 wrote:
[…] Yep it fails cause it is human nature to want to have sex, it’s the same reason the war on drugs is a failure. You can’t beat human nature.[/quote]

As was once again proven for all of us to see. :wink:

Makkun

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Don’t tell me that if one of Obama’s daughters would get pregnant at 17, the outrage wouldn’t be tremendous.
For same reason a candidate should be married and have children, this matters: A candidate is expected to have a model familiy and live a life according to certain values. Values, that some candidates and partys are even more eager to promote.

Who is outraged? So far, the only people posting ave been those who thought it was funny.

I don’t know how it translates in German, but outrageous, hilarious, etc. are all words used to describe things people find humorous - not anger.

Sarah Palin’s values somehow didn’t stick to her daughter’s uterus, and that is telling.

What the fuck does that even mean?

[/quote]

He is saying she didn’t do her job as a mother. Maybe true. Maybe not. Unfortunately, sometimes kids fuck up and they fuck up big despite parents’ best efforts.

[quote]pookie wrote:

Really. All studies show that abstinence does not work.
[/quote]

lol

Teaching abstinence is irrelevant and off topic.

The real story here is that the Democrat machine will take a personal, family situation and try to politicize it. It will backfire.

There’s no hypocracy here on Palin’s or her family’s part. Her teenage daughter conceived a child out of wedlock. She’s not aborting it-- she’s going to have it and raise it. It’s consistent with the family’s Pro-Life stance.

I shutter to think what would have happened to the baby in a family with much looser moral values, especially in a family with such high political aspirations as the Obamas or the Clintons. Maybe that’s below the belt, but again, the Palin’s are doing the right thing. Just another illustration of how they’re a pretty typical family dealing with (unfortunately) common circumstances.

Look at the hypocracy of John Edwards recently. What a scumbag.

Let the media and the Democrats pound on this irrelevant story-- it will backfire. Hell, the whole Democrat base is full of single women on welfare bearing bastard children. Why do you think they pander so much to that demographic?

McCain Palin 2008
For Immediate Release
September 1, 2008
Contact: Press Office
703-650-5550

Statement from Sarah and Todd Palin

ARLINGTON, VA – Today, Sarah and Todd Palin issued the following statement regarding today’s Reuters story:

"We have been blessed with five wonderful children who we love with all our heart and mean everything to us. 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. We’re proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support.

“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 to respect our daughter and Levi’s privacy as has always been the tradition of children of candidates.”

[quote]pookie wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Retrograde ideas? Such as? She believes in abstinence? Really?

Really. All studies show that abstinence does not work.

Why keep pushing it in an age where procreation is well understood and many means are at our disposal to control it.

Other retrograde ideas: Supports teaching creationism (or intelligent design) along with evolution in science class. Following that logic, I guess we should also teach “Stork Theory” in biology and “Evil spirits” as a competitor to germ theory… Astrology alongside astronomy and let our medical students decide by themselves if diluting a solution makes it stronger (as per homeopathy) rather than weaker.

She thinks you can drill yourself out of your current energy problems.

You want to take on the entirety of the Catholic American population by ridiculing something like that?

Why aim so low? I’ll take on the pope and the world-wide billion of Catholics on the topic.

That’d be REAL good for the new messiah.

I’m pretty sure any new messiah would be just as soundly ignored as the last one was.
[/quote]

Wow. Maybe you should go work for Barry’s election campaign. That would be about the best thing that could happen for McCain after putting Palin on the ticket with him.

But I guess when it comes time for actually putting your money where yout mouth is with respect to exposing your children to different viewpoints, you are a lot more talk than you are action.

Good luck with those Catholics.

[quote]Floortom wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pookie wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Are they willing to throw their women’s movement under the bus just to attack a VP candidate? Somehow I doubt it.

Palin’s a feminist now?

If people attack Palin because she’s a woman, you might have a point.

Attacking her retrograde ideas and positions has nothing to do with her being a woman.

Retrograde ideas? Such as? She believes in abstinence? Really? You want to take on the entirety of the Catholic American population by ridiculing something like that?

That’d be REAL good for the new messiah.

BELIEVING something, and wanting it taught in schools when it’s undeniably a failure, are two very different things. Just like her retarded support of creationism in the classrooms, Palin seems incapable of making that very simnple distinction.
[/quote]

Retarded support of creationism in the classroom???

Hey idiot, go read the Declaration of Independence,

“endowed by our Creator” what do you think the founders meant???

why shouldn’t both sides be talked about in schools?

The founders obviously believed in Creation. That does not mean it has to be taught as fact. But it should certainly be taught that the framers of our Constitution believed in it. And so do many Americans.

What is the problem with that?

God forbid we teach something that just may be true!!!

[quote]pookie wrote:
She thinks you can drill yourself out of your current energy problems.
[/quote]

Please cite your references for this statement.

[quote]pookie wrote:
She thinks you can drill yourself out of your current energy problems.
[/quote]

Finally, Miss Palin’s reason for dropping her pants revealed.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Teaching abstinence is irrelevant and off topic.

how they’re a pretty typical family dealing with (unfortunately) common circumstances.[/quote]

I think that teaching abstinence as the only valid form of birth control leads directly to the unfortunate circumstances being so common.