Let's Talk about Sarah Palin!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pregnancy happens. The problem is that SP is so morally opposed to abortion that she's putting her teenage daughter through a shotgun marriage that will surely (mark my words) end in divorce in a few years. And it's this shotgun marriage that brought on the relationship with the unsavory future mother-in-law of Bristol.

Actually, it's the decision to have the child that brought on the relationship. Marriage or no marriage, the woman is still the grandmother of Bristol's daughter.

And I don't think it's fair to attack Sarah Palin as a bad parent because her daughter made some of the same risky decisions that millions of teenagers make every year. Some are lucky; some are not. SP tried to teach her daughter what she believes in, she failed, and she stood by her daughter.

Can't stand the woman or her policies, FWIW.

[Anonymous]

I wish more people could understand a different perspective.
The rest of the world moves to different beats. Not everyone is looking for their kids to go to Sidwell and Harvard, and that's OK. There is a huge demographic in this country that looks at teens as adults who are dating with hopes of marriage and kids, lots of kids. To many people, these pregnancies are a blessing and an exciting time, rather than a "nightmare". The babies are welcomed and the grandparents are proud. Yes, the divorce rate is high when marriage comes early. That is a sad fact, but we have our issues that they wonder about too, as we have our own peculiarities. Being a 43 year old first time mother is odd to many cultures. They wonder why we push our slightly above average kids to get into and perform well at the best schools. We wonder why they push their kids to one church event after the other. Having a child as a teen in many places is just 3-4 years earlier than the norm. Here, it is 20 years earlier!

On the note of the "fundie" thing, they are entitled to their beliefs. Every teen birth reminds many Christians of Mary, the mother of Christ, and that is also OK. These women can go to school and have careers outside the home if they like. If not the career of mothering is a very good option.
I one read a study that was published in the WSJ, where an economist looked at the economic outcome for women who had children as teens when compared to their peer group. The teen mothers made more money over a lifetime than the others. That is not to say that their lives weren't negatively affected by early childbearing, but it is in no way the end of the world.

I hope that Bristol can have a wonderful life with her child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish more people could understand a different perspective.
The rest of the world moves to different beats. Not everyone is looking for their kids to go to Sidwell and Harvard, and that's OK. There is a huge demographic in this country that looks at teens as adults who are dating with hopes of marriage and kids, lots of kids. To many people, these pregnancies are a blessing and an exciting time, rather than a "nightmare". The babies are welcomed and the grandparents are proud. Yes, the divorce rate is high when marriage comes early. That is a sad fact, but we have our issues that they wonder about too, as we have our own peculiarities. Being a 43 year old first time mother is odd to many cultures. They wonder why we push our slightly above average kids to get into and perform well at the best schools. We wonder why they push their kids to one church event after the other. Having a child as a teen in many places is just 3-4 years earlier than the norm. Here, it is 20 years earlier!

On the note of the "fundie" thing, they are entitled to their beliefs. Every teen birth reminds many Christians of Mary, the mother of Christ, and that is also OK. These women can go to school and have careers outside the home if they like. If not the career of mothering is a very good option.
I one read a study that was published in the WSJ, where an economist looked at the economic outcome for women who had children as teens when compared to their peer group. The teen mothers made more money over a lifetime than the others. That is not to say that their lives weren't negatively affected by early childbearing, but it is in no way the end of the world.

I hope that Bristol can have a wonderful life with her child.

a few questions:

1. in re: "There is a huge demographic in this country that looks at teens as adults who are dating with hopes of marriage and kids, lots of kids." Where exactly is this happy, teen pregnancy place? Or are you referring to a specific culture? If this demographic embraces teen pregnancy, then I'm quite certain educational levels are fairly low. Furthermore, you really are discussing extremes here when you mention Harvard and other high profile educational institutions. Most Americans can't even imagine sending their children to Harvard or Cornell or Princeton. Sidwell and its brother and sister schools? same thing . . . Most Americans opt for public institutions. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the "common" citizen is embracing teen marriage/pregnancy.

2. in re: fundamentalism - "Every teen birth reminds many Christians of Mary, the mother of Christ, and that is also OK." Honestly, PP, that's just a weird statement. "Fundies," as you so refer to them, certainly do not approve of teen sex. Sex is off limits unless you're married. So unless these "fundies" belong to some strange sect that marries off their teen children, I don't think your statement has much validity.

3. in re: WSJ - Please tell me which economist discovered that teen mothers made more money "over a lifetime than the others," which, I'm assuming, means their counterparts who became mothers later in life. Was this economist comparing women within the same age bracket? Or did he study teen moms born in the 50s, for example, and then compare them to older moms born in the 60s?

[Anonymous]

We keep hearing about Bristol and her shotgun marriage. Just when do we expect this marriage to take place? I bet anything that it never does....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish more people could understand a different perspective.
The rest of the world moves to different beats. Not everyone is looking for their kids to go to Sidwell and Harvard, and that's OK. There is a huge demographic in this country that looks at teens as adults who are dating with hopes of marriage and kids, lots of kids. To many people, these pregnancies are a blessing and an exciting time, rather than a "nightmare". The babies are welcomed and the grandparents are proud. Yes, the divorce rate is high when marriage comes early. That is a sad fact, but we have our issues that they wonder about too, as we have our own peculiarities. Being a 43 year old first time mother is odd to many cultures. They wonder why we push our slightly above average kids to get into and perform well at the best schools. We wonder why they push their kids to one church event after the other. Having a child as a teen in many places is just 3-4 years earlier than the norm. Here, it is 20 years earlier!

On the note of the "fundie" thing, they are entitled to their beliefs. Every teen birth reminds many Christians of Mary, the mother of Christ, and that is also OK. These women can go to school and have careers outside the home if they like. If not the career of mothering is a very good option.
I one read a study that was published in the WSJ, where an economist looked at the economic outcome for women who had children as teens when compared to their peer group. The teen mothers made more money over a lifetime than the others. That is not to say that their lives weren't negatively affected by early childbearing, but it is in no way the end of the world.

I hope that Bristol can have a wonderful life with her child.

a few questions:

1. in re: "There is a huge demographic in this country that looks at teens as adults who are dating with hopes of marriage and kids, lots of kids." Where exactly is this happy, teen pregnancy place? Or are you referring to a specific culture? If this demographic embraces teen pregnancy, then I'm quite certain educational levels are fairly low. Furthermore, you really are discussing extremes here when you mention Harvard and other high profile educational institutions. Most Americans can't even imagine sending their children to Harvard or Cornell or Princeton. Sidwell and its brother and sister schools? same thing . . . Most Americans opt for public institutions. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the "common" citizen is embracing teen marriage/pregnancy.

2. in re: fundamentalism - "Every teen birth reminds many Christians of Mary, the mother of Christ, and that is also OK." Honestly, PP, that's just a weird statement. "Fundies," as you so refer to them, certainly do not approve of teen sex. Sex is off limits unless you're married. So unless these "fundies" belong to some strange sect that marries off their teen children, I don't think your statement has much validity.

3. in re: WSJ - Please tell me which economist discovered that teen mothers made more money "over a lifetime than the others," which, I'm assuming, means their counterparts who became mothers later in life. Was this economist comparing women within the same age bracket? Or did he study teen moms born in the 50s, for example, and then compare them to older moms born in the 60s?

What I meant is that they see teens dating with the plan to LATER marry and have kids, but not much later. The friends I have don't see their kids marrying until in their 30's. For many parts of the country that is very late. The average for a woman in the US is 25 years. In less educated groups it would be younger. So, yes, many of those people will marry their high school sweetheart at 21.
I was just using the term "fundie" because someone else in this thread did.
It is often a reminder to women considering abortion that Mary was "alone" when she had Jesus. Yes, it is a common comparison.
Christian fundamentalists do not approve of sex outside of marriage, but if a married couple happens to be in their teens, it is OK. The disapproval of contraception and abortion is often MUCH stronger than disapproval of premarital sex. So, if a woman becomes pregnant, it is important that she have the baby. It is considered respectful if the man marries the girl. That is not the worst suggestion, when you consider that it might help keep the father around for that child's critical early years.
The Wall Street Journal Article was about 10 years old, but it compared women by cohort, that is, they shared a statistical demographic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish more people could understand a different perspective.
The rest of the world moves to different beats. Not everyone is looking for their kids to go to Sidwell and Harvard, and that's OK. There is a huge demographic in this country that looks at teens as adults who are dating with hopes of marriage and kids, lots of kids. To many people, these pregnancies are a blessing and an exciting time, rather than a "nightmare". The babies are welcomed and the grandparents are proud. Yes, the divorce rate is high when marriage comes early. That is a sad fact, but we have our issues that they wonder about too, as we have our own peculiarities. Being a 43 year old first time mother is odd to many cultures. They wonder why we push our slightly above average kids to get into and perform well at the best schools. We wonder why they push their kids to one church event after the other. Having a child as a teen in many places is just 3-4 years earlier than the norm. Here, it is 20 years earlier!

On the note of the "fundie" thing, they are entitled to their beliefs. Every teen birth reminds many Christians of Mary, the mother of Christ, and that is also OK. These women can go to school and have careers outside the home if they like. If not the career of mothering is a very good option.
I one read a study that was published in the WSJ, where an economist looked at the economic outcome for women who had children as teens when compared to their peer group. The teen mothers made more money over a lifetime than the others. That is not to say that their lives weren't negatively affected by early childbearing, but it is in no way the end of the world.

I hope that Bristol can have a wonderful life with her child.

a few questions:

1. in re: "There is a huge demographic in this country that looks at teens as adults who are dating with hopes of marriage and kids, lots of kids." Where exactly is this happy, teen pregnancy place? Or are you referring to a specific culture? If this demographic embraces teen pregnancy, then I'm quite certain educational levels are fairly low. Furthermore, you really are discussing extremes here when you mention Harvard and other high profile educational institutions. Most Americans can't even imagine sending their children to Harvard or Cornell or Princeton. Sidwell and its brother and sister schools? same thing . . . Most Americans opt for public institutions. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the "common" citizen is embracing teen marriage/pregnancy.

2. in re: fundamentalism - "Every teen birth reminds many Christians of Mary, the mother of Christ, and that is also OK." Honestly, PP, that's just a weird statement. "Fundies," as you so refer to them, certainly do not approve of teen sex. Sex is off limits unless you're married. So unless these "fundies" belong to some strange sect that marries off their teen children, I don't think your statement has much validity.

3. in re: WSJ - Please tell me which economist discovered that teen mothers made more money "over a lifetime than the others," which, I'm assuming, means their counterparts who became mothers later in life. Was this economist comparing women within the same age bracket? Or did he study teen moms born in the 50s, for example, and then compare them to older moms born in the 60s?

What I meant is that they see teens dating with the plan to LATER marry and have kids, but not much later. The friends I have don't see their kids marrying until in their 30's. For many parts of the country that is very late. The average for a woman in the US is 25 years. In less educated groups it would be younger. So, yes, many of those people will marry their high school sweetheart at 21.
I was just using the term "fundie" because someone else in this thread did.
It is often a reminder to women considering abortion that Mary was "alone" when she had Jesus. Yes, it is a common comparison.
Christian fundamentalists do not approve of sex outside of marriage, but if a married couple happens to be in their teens, it is OK. The disapproval of contraception and abortion is often MUCH stronger than disapproval of premarital sex. So, if a woman becomes pregnant, it is important that she have the baby. It is considered respectful if the man marries the girl. That is not the worst suggestion, when you consider that it might help keep the father around for that child's critical early years.
The Wall Street Journal Article was about 10 years old, but it compared women by cohort, that is, they shared a statistical demographic.

ok - fair enough

thanks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a difficult time with the equation articulated by 12/24/2008 00:18 that fundamentalist religious beliefs = bad parent.

This is not the way I raise my children, and clearly not the way 12/24/2008 00:18 plans to or is raising his/her children, but different in my mind does not equal bad.

This is the kind of absolutist judgment that the left equates with fundamentalism, isn't it?

Sorry, I wasn't clear. Fundamentalist religious beliefs do not equal bad parenting. I'm sure there are many parenting issues I'd agree with 100% with many fundamentalist parents.

What I object to in Sara Palin is her hypocrisy. She's not an uneducated person who expected to spend her career working in a salmon canning factory. She uses her fundamentalist beliefs to promote herself, yet the way she raises her children does not appear to adhere to fundamentalist values.

[Anonymous]

Hmm - the fact that Bristol had sex outside marriage doesn't equate to Sarah not adhering to her values. Unless of course you subscribe to the philosophy that parents really do control their children's actions until they reach age 18.

And to the poster wondering if the wedding of Bristol and the hockey hunk will ever occur - well at times it is best if it doesn't - at least in my family's experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmm - the fact that Bristol had sex outside marriage doesn't equate to Sarah not adhering to her values. Unless of course you subscribe to the philosophy that parents really do control their children's actions until they reach age 18.

Would be interesting to know which posters on this thread have or have had teenagers in their house. It's pretty complicated trying to parent a teenager. Of course, one lays the groundwork as best one can and some of us do it better than others. But in the end we have a lot less control over their behavior than we would like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm - the fact that Bristol had sex outside marriage doesn't equate to Sarah not adhering to her values. Unless of course you subscribe to the philosophy that parents really do control their children's actions until they reach age 18.

Would be interesting to know which posters on this thread have or have had teenagers in their house. It's pretty complicated trying to parent a teenager. Of course, one lays the groundwork as best one can and some of us do it better than others. But in the end we have a lot less control over their behavior than we would like.

PP, you mention control. That's the main issue - just how much do we control our teens. Striking a balance is different for every family b/c each family structure is unique. A single mother, for example, obviously has more obstacles to face than a married couple. The key is being true to yourself.

Other PPs mentioned the hypocrisy in how Palin has raised her kids. If a parent says one thing but acts in a contrary manner, what message is s/he giving the kids? That's where Palin has failed miserably. Don't support sex education b/c that's bad. But do encourage your pregnant teen to marry her teenage boyfriend b/c that act of marriage will erase any evidence of premarital sex!

[Anonymous]

What did Palin say that she contradicted? I must have missed this?

[Anonymous]

Did Bristol Palin have her baby yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What did Palin say that she contradicted? I must have missed this?

Her behavior is contradictory. She is against sex ed in the schools, her daughter becomes pregnant, and now she's pushing marriage on two teens. She's reactive, NOT proactive.

By forcing marriage on the two, she's making a mockery of this union while at the same time hoping to tone down the controversy surrounding premarital sex.

It's absolutely absurd. How long do you think this marriage will last? By attempting to solve one problem she's creating another.

Why can't she just admit that she raised her daughter in the dark, which ultimately resulted in this unplanned pregnancy?

If that's not an example of hypocrisy, then I don't know what is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did Bristol Palin have her baby yet?

who cares? is she a friend of yours?

[Anonymous]

Do we know that Sarah Palin is forcing the marriage. If we can subscribe to the view that Sarah did not tell her daughter to have sex, did not tell her daughter to become pregnant, probably told her daughter to save herself for marriage - and DD ignored all of that - who is to say? I think the entire argument is based on a lot of presumptions about people and their private conversations that we have no way of knowing whether they are true or false.

And asking someone to save themselves for marriage, or not to have sex outside marriage does not equal keeping her daughter in the dark about the birds and the bees. Honestly, where do these ideas come from?