web analytics

One Conservative Reaction to News that Sarah Palin’s Daughter is Pregnant: What would Obama Think?

It is a good thing that McCain and Palin didn’t attempt to hide the fact that Sarah’s daughter, Bristol, is pregnant.  I wouldn’t dare try to attempt a chronology, but it sure seemed like Palin pre-empted the liberal mudslinging in getting out the truth.  Or didn’t you know that the left has been trying to say that Sarah’s newborn child, the one with Downs Syndrome, is the baby that is actually Bristol’s?  I don’t know the background of this particular blog but it seems to explain the rumors on that point well enough.  If that wasn’t bad enough, while simultaneously suggesting that the baby is actually Bristol’s and not Sarah’s, the left has folks out there (Alan Colmes) saying that the newborn’s Downs Syndrome is Sarah’s fault for not getting proper pre-natal care.

Now, that argument alone needs a thumping but I’m not going to dish it out right now.

Anyway, should this matter?  Should this make conservatives think twice?  Already the blogosphere is ringing with the insinuation that a pregnant daughter somehow discredits or undermines the parents’ moral platform.  The left is all a titter about a young couple engaging in the behavior that the left itself is hellbent on promoting, except the whole ‘keeping the baby’ part.   I suppose some more measured voices on the left will be content so long as it was Bristol’s own choice to keep the baby, but there will be others on the left that believe that Bristol is ruining her life.  There will be some on the left that believe that this is the worst thing in the world that could happen to a young teenager girl.

In fact, there are some people that believe that actually carrying the baby to term would be a punishment.

In fact, such a person is running for president.  His name is Barack Obama:

When it comes specifically to HIV/AIDS, the most important prevention is education, which should include — which should include abstinence education and teaching the children — teaching children, you know, that sex is not something casual. But it should also include — it should also include other, you know, information about contraception because, look, 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,

http://lifenews.com/nat3827.html

Ok, so a baby isn’t a consequence, it is a punishment.  Got it.

So, the first thing that comes to my mind is that if Barack’s daughters were a little older we could be quite certain that there wouldn’t any scandal like with the Palins.  Why not?  Because if they got pregnant we’d never hear about it.  Presumably, they’d terminate, and we’d never know that his daughters had been sexually active before it was wise.

The next thing that comes to my mind is that a willingness to own up to ones mistakes and take responsibility for them is really an asset.  Bristol has a hard road ahead of her.  There is no question about that.  I know a little bit about that road, myself.  It takes courage to choose that road and good sense to realize that the mistake was her own- and not the child’s.

But to the central issue:  does Bristol’s behavior undercut the moral position of her parents?  I say no.   If the Palins had disowned their daughter, that would have undercut their moral position.  For the Christian faith has never been about being perfect and always about owning up to one’s mistakes and receiving forgiveness.

In my mind, this whole affair assures me that the Palins are real people with real problems with the right attitude for dealing with those problems.  It stands in stark contrast to how it seems Mr. Obama would handle a similar situation.   Mr. Obama apparently would prefer that his daughters get an abortion if they were in this position, viewing the baby as a punishment.   The Palins, on the other hand, wouldn’t take it out on the baby, who had nothing to do with the behavior of the daughter and her boyfriend.  One suspects that they have nonetheless had a long conversation, but there is no hint that they plan on throwing Bristol under the bus.

Which attitude do we want carrying the day in Washington DC?

Share

2 comments

    • Anthony on September 1, 2008 at 11:26 pm
      Author

    Do you want to comment on this post or read or contribute to the discussion on it? Click here: http://sntjohnny.com/smf/index.php/topic,2875.0.html

    • Anthony on September 1, 2008 at 11:29 pm
      Author

    An update copied and pasted from my forum:
    —————
    It looks like perhaps Alan wasn’t as stupid as I initially thought. It did sound like this is what he meant what with the ‘prenatal’ talk. Alan removed his offensive post so I only knew of it from bloggers and only a screenshot remained of a portion of the post. I looked at that screenshot and see that it recapitulates what Cop said.

    Note: my point was that two mutually contradictory smears are being given full sway, and it wasn’t necessarily about the medical care.

    That said, I’ve now looked at the source document (http://www.adn.com/626/story/382864.html) and it tells a different story and frankly puts Alan back in the ‘very likely stupid’ category. Possibly the rest of his post connected it all the way back to the Downs Syndrome, as it looks like others had a similar reaction, but since he deleted it, I guess we’ll never know.

    Some highlights from the source article.

    Quote
    Palin said she felt fine but had leaked amniotic fluid and also felt some contractions that seemed different from the false labor she had been having for months.

    A woman can leak amniotic fluid and not be entirely certain what is going on or that birth is imminent. Four weeks early one can see how this could be cause for confusion, and not necessarily irresponsibility. On the other hand, a woman’s ‘water’ can break so that there is no question that it is broke.

    Quote
    Palin kept in close contact with Baldwin-Johnson. The contractions slowed to one or two an hour, “which is not active labor,” the doctor said.

    One to two an hour is not only ‘not active labor’ but is a far cry from active labor.

    Quote
    “Things were already settling down when she talked to me,” Baldwin-Johnson said. Palin did not ask for a medical OK to fly, the doctor said.

    “I don’t think it was unreasonable for her to continue to travel back,” Baldwin-Johnson said.

    Her doctor, Baldwin-Johnson gave her the all clear.

    Quote
    Still, a Sacramento, Calif., obstetrician who is active in the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said when a pregnant woman’s water breaks, she should go right to the hospital because of the risk of infection. That’s true even if the amniotic fluid simply leaks out, said Dr. Laurie Gregg.

    If you are quite certain that it is amniotic fluid. There very well could have been doubt. When my wife ‘leaked’ she couldn’t tell if it was amniotic fluid or not, since she’d been leaking urine for weeks and months. (She’d kill me if she knew I was writing this). We took her in not because of the ‘leaking’ but because of her general discomfort.

    It sounds like it was actually determined that it was amniotic fluid after the fact, after she arrived in Alaska. Honestly, if it is only leaking then I don’t see how a woman is going to be able to verify it really is amniotic fluid, and with the contractions going away, in light of it being four weeks early, I could easily see how it might be perceived as a false alarm. If I recall correctly, we had a false alarm, too.

    Quote
    Baldwin-Johnson said she had to induce labor, and the baby didn’t come until 6:30 a.m. Friday.

    This cinches it to me. It was only once they touched down in Alaska that they determined that it was amniotic fluid. It sounds like there had been a very slight rupture but without any contractions coming on the heels of it to make it clear what was going on, thus the need to induce in light of the discovery that it was amniotic fluid.

    I’ve driven my wife to the hospital three times while in labor. There ain’t no way in heck she’d have been able to fly in an airplane and hold her composure so that no one knew she was in labor pains. Just no way.

    Also, in light of these ambiguities as she was experiencing them, it makes perfect sense to me that she’d want to get to her home hospital. Some doofus on one of the blogs made out that since she had a Downs Syndrome baby the best thing would have been to stay in Texas. This is nonsense. Speaking as one who has a similar experience, everybody at the hospital is prepped to deal with the specific concerns for this specific delivery, ahead of time. Everyone knows all the history, everything is planned for, etc. Sure, a good hospital will be able to wing it, but one can easily understand why she’d want to get back if she thought she could.

    I lived the alternative. My daughter was born at the hospital where everything was ready for her, but because she came early, the person who was going to do all the operations on her was not in town. As a consequence, my daughter had to be airlifted to a facility two hours away. We were thrust into uncertainty: new doctors, new procedures, new facilities… nurses unaware of the situation, etc, etc. In fact, because of the chaos, numerous services that would normally have followed as a matter of course did not happen.

    SO, especially because the child was special it makes sense that she’d want to get back.

    We’re just going off of a news story here, but based on what I read it seems to be a far cry from the rank irresponsibility being impugned on her.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

20 − thirteen =