2008 Woodie Awards
Sarah Palin and her daughter: hypocrisy inaction
Sonia Vasile
Issue date: 9/18/08 Section: Opinion
Call it Juno. Or maybe Juneau, as in the Alaskan city. By now, can there be anyone left who hasn’t heard of Bristol Palin? I’d be surprised if there were, since it seems like anyone who is even the slightest bit political has stated their stance on the pregnant, unwed, seventeen-year-old daughter of potential Vice President Sarah Palin.
To be honest, I feel bad for poor Bristol. I even pity her mother. Imagine your child’s mistake being subject to either applause or scorn and mockery, being the topic of numerous debates between pundits on national television, the audience composed of hundreds of millions of your potential voters. What happened to privacy? Sarah Palin must be wishing for the public to just leave Bristol alone, and to be decent enough to grant her daughter the privacy she so desperately needs. You know, to leave her alone with her – what’s the word …? Oh, I know: choice.
Actually, I take it all back. I don’t feel sorry for Sarah Palin. And I say that yes, this should be a topic of discussion and yeah, I am absolutely passing judgment here. But don’t misunderstand my point – it’s not the pregnant, underaged and engaged Bristol and her pregnancy that I feel deserves scrutiny. No one should be exploiting her or her situation. But Bristol’s pregnancy brings with it legitimate questions regarding her mother’s political stances. And not only is it our right, but it’s our responsibility to question our politicians.
Here’s the problem: Sarah Palin is not only enabling, but encouraging and applauding her daughter for making the choice that she doesn’t want others in the same situation to have.
Not sure what I mean? Here, I’ll start this with a quote by Palin herself: “Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they are going to have the love and support of our entire family.” Something I feel that pairs with it nicely is this snippet from the official Republican platform: “[The Republican Party has] a moral obligation to assist, not to penalize, women struggling with the challenges of an unwanted pregnancy.”
Nice, right? Her love and concern for her daughter is admirable. She seems to understand that this is going to be difficult and wants to do whatever she can to help. Sounds like someone who definitely practices what she preaches.
Except not. There are some other things that need to be brought to attention. And this is important, so it earns the bold font. In April of this year, she reduced funding on a state program that would serve teen mothers in need of a place to live by over 20 percent.
What a compassionate conservative you are, Sarah Palin! You know that your daughter has found herself in too far over her head; you know that she and her future husband (which, in teen pregnancy, is a luxury few can claim to have) are going to be facing these “difficulties” very soon. Like any parent, you believe in providing as much support as you possibly can, as well as a safe place to live during this “difficult” time for your pregnant daughter.
But what about the other pregnant teenagers? Those who don’t have a strong (and wealthy) family support system? Those without somewhere to go? They’re the ones who most desperately need this funding. But hey, they’ll disappear into the cracks of society soon enough. And this slashing comes from someone who is not only a governor, but is being held as a representative of the Republican Party. Way to adhere to your own political platform.
And there’s still more. Sarah Palin opposes abortion even in the case of rape or incest, and rather than believing in comprehensive sex education, she believes in abstinence-only education. I will never understand why conservatives oppose both abortion and contraceptive and STD education, but that’s the topic for another rant and another day.
So here’s someone who not only doesn’t believe in abortion, even in cases of rape or incest, or sex education, but also has her very own pregnant teenage daughter. Palin should be a champion at campaigning for the all the teenage mothers who want to (or have to) carry their pregnancies to full-term and raise a child. Given her extremist views and how she doesn’t want any abortions ever, you’d think that she’d allocate as much money to teenage mothers as possible, but what does she do? She cuts funding for a program that would help those who need it, but is aimed toward those who don’t have the last name “Palin” and the luxuries that accompany it. This makes no sense!
There’s nothing romantic or light about teen pregnancy. It’s stressful, traumatic, difficult, isolating and it forces an overwhelming burden on someone who just cannot handle it. Think of people from your high school. How many of them really would make good mothers at this point in their lives? Probably none. Chances are good that a teen mother could really use some outside help, right? Needing assistance doesn’t mean that they’re bad people, it just means that, you know, children themselves aren’t in the state to raise children. And for someone like Sarah Palin, who is absolutely opposed to both taking care of and preventing an unwanted pregnancy through the allowance of abortion or contraceptives, cutting this outside help isn’t only irresponsible, it’s callous, as well as hypocritical to an immeasurable degree.
I’m so tired of this conservative approach to sex education and abortion. If you’re against abortion, that’s great. Then don’t have one and you’ve said all you need to. To me, the conservative view starts out as patronizing and then transitions to being downright cruel and cutthroat.
It seems as though when it comes to sex education, the Republican way of thinking is that these “kids” just aren’t ready to learn about any options, save abstinence. Students in middle and high school are too young and immature to cope with/understand sexuality. If someone teaches them about birth control, they’ll just get confused and/or they’ll have sex and get pregnant. They’re children, after all. Not adults. Basically, your politicians know what’s best for you and your sex life. Does this sound a little patronizing to you?
But then if a girl makes a mistake and has sex and accidentally becomes pregnant, there’s pretty much a 180 in attitude from the Republican Party. (Fact: Students who have experienced abstinence-only education are less likely to use birth control.) Suddenly this teenage girl is seen as a mature adult who can handle a pregnancy and raise a child. And then it becomes everyone else’s pregnancy. She’s now considered an adult, so she must have this baby, but because she’s still a kid, she’s in no place to decide whether or not if becoming a mother is what’s best for her. This Simpsons quote rings true: “It’s a uter-us, not a uter-you.”
It doesn’t make sense to me. It seems as though Sarah Palin isn’t Pro-Life, it sounds like she’s Pro-Birth. After the baby is born, she doesn’t care what happens to these girls. Doesn’t this sound a little cutthroat to anyone else?
So come on, Sarah Palin. Either provide the luxuries that you will be giving your pregnant daughter to every pregnant teenager or stop being such a hypocrite.
To be honest, I feel bad for poor Bristol. I even pity her mother. Imagine your child’s mistake being subject to either applause or scorn and mockery, being the topic of numerous debates between pundits on national television, the audience composed of hundreds of millions of your potential voters. What happened to privacy? Sarah Palin must be wishing for the public to just leave Bristol alone, and to be decent enough to grant her daughter the privacy she so desperately needs. You know, to leave her alone with her – what’s the word …? Oh, I know: choice.
Actually, I take it all back. I don’t feel sorry for Sarah Palin. And I say that yes, this should be a topic of discussion and yeah, I am absolutely passing judgment here. But don’t misunderstand my point – it’s not the pregnant, underaged and engaged Bristol and her pregnancy that I feel deserves scrutiny. No one should be exploiting her or her situation. But Bristol’s pregnancy brings with it legitimate questions regarding her mother’s political stances. And not only is it our right, but it’s our responsibility to question our politicians.
Here’s the problem: Sarah Palin is not only enabling, but encouraging and applauding her daughter for making the choice that she doesn’t want others in the same situation to have.
Not sure what I mean? Here, I’ll start this with a quote by Palin herself: “Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they are going to have the love and support of our entire family.” Something I feel that pairs with it nicely is this snippet from the official Republican platform: “[The Republican Party has] a moral obligation to assist, not to penalize, women struggling with the challenges of an unwanted pregnancy.”
Nice, right? Her love and concern for her daughter is admirable. She seems to understand that this is going to be difficult and wants to do whatever she can to help. Sounds like someone who definitely practices what she preaches.
Except not. There are some other things that need to be brought to attention. And this is important, so it earns the bold font. In April of this year, she reduced funding on a state program that would serve teen mothers in need of a place to live by over 20 percent.
What a compassionate conservative you are, Sarah Palin! You know that your daughter has found herself in too far over her head; you know that she and her future husband (which, in teen pregnancy, is a luxury few can claim to have) are going to be facing these “difficulties” very soon. Like any parent, you believe in providing as much support as you possibly can, as well as a safe place to live during this “difficult” time for your pregnant daughter.
But what about the other pregnant teenagers? Those who don’t have a strong (and wealthy) family support system? Those without somewhere to go? They’re the ones who most desperately need this funding. But hey, they’ll disappear into the cracks of society soon enough. And this slashing comes from someone who is not only a governor, but is being held as a representative of the Republican Party. Way to adhere to your own political platform.
And there’s still more. Sarah Palin opposes abortion even in the case of rape or incest, and rather than believing in comprehensive sex education, she believes in abstinence-only education. I will never understand why conservatives oppose both abortion and contraceptive and STD education, but that’s the topic for another rant and another day.
So here’s someone who not only doesn’t believe in abortion, even in cases of rape or incest, or sex education, but also has her very own pregnant teenage daughter. Palin should be a champion at campaigning for the all the teenage mothers who want to (or have to) carry their pregnancies to full-term and raise a child. Given her extremist views and how she doesn’t want any abortions ever, you’d think that she’d allocate as much money to teenage mothers as possible, but what does she do? She cuts funding for a program that would help those who need it, but is aimed toward those who don’t have the last name “Palin” and the luxuries that accompany it. This makes no sense!
There’s nothing romantic or light about teen pregnancy. It’s stressful, traumatic, difficult, isolating and it forces an overwhelming burden on someone who just cannot handle it. Think of people from your high school. How many of them really would make good mothers at this point in their lives? Probably none. Chances are good that a teen mother could really use some outside help, right? Needing assistance doesn’t mean that they’re bad people, it just means that, you know, children themselves aren’t in the state to raise children. And for someone like Sarah Palin, who is absolutely opposed to both taking care of and preventing an unwanted pregnancy through the allowance of abortion or contraceptives, cutting this outside help isn’t only irresponsible, it’s callous, as well as hypocritical to an immeasurable degree.
I’m so tired of this conservative approach to sex education and abortion. If you’re against abortion, that’s great. Then don’t have one and you’ve said all you need to. To me, the conservative view starts out as patronizing and then transitions to being downright cruel and cutthroat.
It seems as though when it comes to sex education, the Republican way of thinking is that these “kids” just aren’t ready to learn about any options, save abstinence. Students in middle and high school are too young and immature to cope with/understand sexuality. If someone teaches them about birth control, they’ll just get confused and/or they’ll have sex and get pregnant. They’re children, after all. Not adults. Basically, your politicians know what’s best for you and your sex life. Does this sound a little patronizing to you?
But then if a girl makes a mistake and has sex and accidentally becomes pregnant, there’s pretty much a 180 in attitude from the Republican Party. (Fact: Students who have experienced abstinence-only education are less likely to use birth control.) Suddenly this teenage girl is seen as a mature adult who can handle a pregnancy and raise a child. And then it becomes everyone else’s pregnancy. She’s now considered an adult, so she must have this baby, but because she’s still a kid, she’s in no place to decide whether or not if becoming a mother is what’s best for her. This Simpsons quote rings true: “It’s a uter-us, not a uter-you.”
It doesn’t make sense to me. It seems as though Sarah Palin isn’t Pro-Life, it sounds like she’s Pro-Birth. After the baby is born, she doesn’t care what happens to these girls. Doesn’t this sound a little cutthroat to anyone else?
So come on, Sarah Palin. Either provide the luxuries that you will be giving your pregnant daughter to every pregnant teenager or stop being such a hypocrite.
Viewing Comments 1 - 7 of 7
StoutGrad
posted 9/21/08 @ 12:51 AM CST
Covenant House Alaska grant income received from the State of Alaska:
(2006) $1.2 million
(2007) $1.3 million
(2008) $3.9 million
Do your own research and stay off the huffingtonpost. (Continued…)
Sonia
posted 9/21/08 @ 8:08 PM CST
Wow, way to be super misleading.
Yes, at $3.9 million, it's higher than previous years, but the original proposed budget was, at $5 million, 20% higher. (Continued…)
shortbu5
posted 9/24/08 @ 10:03 AM CST
My big gripe with your editorial isn't the distortion of facts, although that is an issue if you want to be taken seriously. It's the quality of the writing. (Continued…)
Sonia
posted 9/24/08 @ 4:27 PM CST
What facts were distorted? Sarah Palin cut that program's funding by 20%. The veto, in her own handwriting, is right there in my last comment. She's against abortion, birth control and thorough sex-education. (Continued…)
shortbu5
posted 9/24/08 @ 11:32 PM CST
"I will never understand why conservatives oppose both abortion and contraceptive and STD education, but that's the topic for another rant and another day"
The above statement sounds like a generalization and a stereotype to me. (Continued…)
Mark
posted 9/27/08 @ 12:58 AM CST
Unfortunately this is one of the first articles I have read out of the Stoutonia for months, and I was greatly disappointed.
As others have already pointed out here Palin increased funding to Covenant House Alaska by over 300%. (Continued…)
Tianna Lynnae
posted 10/05/08 @ 11:56 PM CST
Wow, Mark. Ever heard of avoiding name-calling when arguing a point? What, so you graduated and suddenly you know all? I must say, your argument was logical and reasonable until you decided to resort to name calling and generalizations. (Continued…)
Post a Comment