Fake news: Palin's daughter's pregnacy confirms she is Pro-Life
This story from cnn.com if not fake news, is at least very confused news or a reporter desperate to find a story.
If you've been away for the weekend, the story broke that Republican VP Candidate Sarah Palin's unmarried daughter is having a child at age 17. For the record, Ms. Palin is a supporter of abstinence education.
Teenagers will do what teenagers do, so I'm personally not concerned with respect to the story. We all know that children are independent human beings that make their own choices and after a point, parents should not be responsible for the actions of their children, good, bad or ugly. For me, a lot of the interest comes from how the media and the talking heads are treating this story.
From the CNN story, as you can imaging the "Family Research Council" is a conservative, pro-family group.
"Fortunately, Bristol is following her mother and father's example of choosing life in the midst of a difficult situation," Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said.
Another segement continues:
Evangelical leader Richard Land also backed Palin completely.
Granted, in her position, she has no choice as it would be the end of her mother's political career if she didn't have the baby, but that is another blog post.
Somehow someone being pro-choice to the people in these articles means they are pro-abortion in all cases and somehow choosing to have a child means you are pro-life when in fact it means you've made a choice. They missed the "choice" part. Pro-choice means a woman has the right to choose either an abortion OR having a child.
If you've been away for the weekend, the story broke that Republican VP Candidate Sarah Palin's unmarried daughter is having a child at age 17. For the record, Ms. Palin is a supporter of abstinence education.
Teenagers will do what teenagers do, so I'm personally not concerned with respect to the story. We all know that children are independent human beings that make their own choices and after a point, parents should not be responsible for the actions of their children, good, bad or ugly. For me, a lot of the interest comes from how the media and the talking heads are treating this story.
From the CNN story, as you can imaging the "Family Research Council" is a conservative, pro-family group.
"Fortunately, Bristol is following her mother and father's example of choosing life in the midst of a difficult situation," Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said.
Another segement continues:
Evangelical leader Richard Land also backed Palin completely.
"This is the pro-life choice. The fact that people will criticize her for this shows the astounding extent to which the secular critics of the pro-life movement just don't get it," Land said in a statement.
Oh wait, but she made the "choice" to keep the child, maybe you don't get it Rich. The fact that she has a choice and not a government fiat that decrees she must have the child sure seems like a good thing to Libertarian minded me. I love the fact that people can keep their children (unlike China) and the fact that people can choose to not have children (unlike America a while ago).Granted, in her position, she has no choice as it would be the end of her mother's political career if she didn't have the baby, but that is another blog post.
Somehow someone being pro-choice to the people in these articles means they are pro-abortion in all cases and somehow choosing to have a child means you are pro-life when in fact it means you've made a choice. They missed the "choice" part. Pro-choice means a woman has the right to choose either an abortion OR having a child.
posted by beatdodgers at
8:57 AM
1 Comments:
If you are FOR choosing whether or not you can have an abortion, you are FOR choosing ABORTION.
The unborn child doesn't have the right to choose whether or he or she gets to live or die, why should someone who was irresponsible enough to conceive that child, without wanting one, choose for him or her.
If you're responsible enough to have sex, you should be responsible enough to take care of a child that you created. And yes, human development begins at fertilization, so the person choosing an abortion is killing another human being.
You know, when I was in High School, I read an article somewhere about the reasons that women choose to have abortions. One was the desire to delay or end childbearing, here's my solution -don't have sex. Another was the concern over the interruption of work or education, again - don't have sex. If you have issues of financial or relationship stability - don't have sex. And finally, perceived immaturity - if you're mature enough to have sex, and create a life, you should be mature enough to take responsibility for your actions. OR DON'T HAVE SEX UNTIL YOU ARE READY TO COMMIT YOURSELF COMPLETELY TO TAKING CARE OF A CHILD!
Is it really that hard to not have sex? No. And I know this for a fact.
Now, there are reasons to discontinue pregnancy, such as rape or danger to the pregnant woman's or to the child's life or health. Some people say incest too, but gross. You know who you're related to, so don't have SEX with that person.
Rape and danger to the life of the woman and/or child, shuld be the ONLY reasons to terminate a pregancy, in my opinion.
Agree or disagree, that's YOUR right ;)
Post a Comment
<< Home