Who Knew About Bristol’s Pregnancy? Apparently Everyone in Wasilla
September 1st, 2008 at 05:22pm Kevin Patrick
This will likely be my only post on this subject, since a) The McCain campaign asks us to respect the family’s privacy, and b) The Obama campaign’s respectful comment says the story should end right there.
But Time Magazine has a good write up that addresses the situation while also providing unique insights into life in Wasilla:
So his name is Levi.
That’s about the only thing that I didn’t know about Bristol Palin’s pregnancy. The rest of the details I picked up almost without trying, while talking about other things with townsfolk — some who know the governor and her family well, some who don’t. It was, more or less, an open secret. And everyone was saying the same thing: the governor’s 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, the father is her boyfriend, and it’s really nobody’s business beyond that.
That kind of says it all for me on this subject.
However, when combined with the release that Todd Palin had a DUI 20+ years ago, one other thing stuck me today. And I have to credit Mark Noonan for planting this seed in a comment he made under my post about the Palins versus the Obamas personal finances:
What is interesting is how very middle class it all is - they are a bit better off than I am, but not that much, and as they’ve got five kids to look after, their net discretionary spending might be less.
Governor Palin and her husband are of us - we, the average Americans who do the work and pay the bills of this country.
And with all of the news today, I can’t help but see how how much more relatable the Palins seem to me today with the similar trials and tribulations akin to middle America than most political families we’ve all “met” on the national stage.
(Note: earlier I used “normal” instead of “relatable” at the end of the original post. Relatable is the right word in this context)
Entry Filed under: Social Issues
90 Comments
1. bongoman | September 1st, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Jeez, that’s one way of sugar coating the VP mess that the GOP now finds itself in.
A woman who advocates no-sex-before-marriage-abstinence-only sex “education” and her own daughter is a poster child for how this fails.
If this was a Democrat family we’d hear no end of crap about how the mother had put her career first instead of giving her energies to the family.
You can spin this as much as you like how it makes the Pailin’s seem so ‘ordinary’ but I bet you weren’t saying that about Jamie Lyn Spears. No, no that was all the mother’s fault wasn’t it?
But now teenage unprotected sex is a virtue? Or is it just different ’cause she’s a GOP candidate?
2. jayhay | September 1st, 2008 at 5:59 pm
I’m sure if the Obama’s 17 year-old daughter was pregnant y’all would be crooning about how “just like us” it all was… Oh yeah, that’d be happening! Definitely!
3. Catfish | September 1st, 2008 at 6:12 pm
I do think its a very different reaction from what would have been happening if it was a Dem. child, but I do agree respect how the Palin family is dealing with it.
With respect to that other rumor that we’re not allowed to talk about on this site or daddy will take our keyboard away, one thing no kos bloggers seemed to mention was how cool of a mom this is if she was in fact covering it up. Instead of showing her daughter publicly as a bad seed who makes poor decisions, she risked her career as governor on protecting her daughter. If that rumor was true (which I dont think it is….) i think it would make me like her more, not less.
So in review, a non-issue on both counts. Still not a great veep choice for many other reasons.
4. jayhay | September 1st, 2008 at 6:20 pm
I saw the McCain campaign announced that Bristol had made the choice herself to keep the baby, she was not influenced by others. But wait, I didn’t think there WAS a choice…
And I know that McCain has said in the past that concerning his daughter in that situation the decision would be her choice, a family matter.
So since choice is OK for the Pres and VP candidate’s families, could one of the faithful explain why it’s not okay for the rest of us?
5. Timestar | September 1st, 2008 at 6:26 pm
So since choice is OK for the Pres and VP candidate’s families, could one of the faithful explain why it’s not okay for the rest of us?
4. jayhay | September 1st, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Answer to that one is simple; conservatism the movement of and for hypocrites.
6. LiberalMind | September 1st, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Well it was just A-OK with the right wing to scream about Obama’s half brother living in a shack in Kenya to try to score political points on that…..
Had this been Chelsea Clinton, who McCain once said was “ugly” you would have seen an hour long segment on FOX News about the lack of “family values” in the DNC.
7. ezineaerticles » Bl&hellip | September 1st, 2008 at 6:37 pm
[...] Original post by Kevin Patrick [...]
8. LiberalMind | September 1st, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Another thing:
While the liberals and progressives have made great progress in fighting religious intolerance and “God” based bigotry, these same religious folks have made no progress in reversing their hypocrisy.
9. Chuckg | September 1st, 2008 at 6:49 pm
“But wait, I didn’t think there WAS a choice…”
Of course there’s a choice. Keep the child or give him/her up for adoption.
10. RW Austin | September 1st, 2008 at 6:52 pm
It is not ok to go after Chelsea Clinton, the Bush twins or Bristol Palin. In fact, it has never been ok to go after the minor family members of those running for office.
I find it disgraceful that anyone would think children are fair game. I will say this though…….this young lady will have a lot on her hands in the coming days and months. Thank God she apparently has a loving family who is ready to help her.
As for the KosNuts who love tearing into any Republican, no matter age, sex, religion, or sexual orientation, they are the ones who should be chastised and they have shown themselves to be less than human.
11. Nate | September 1st, 2008 at 6:52 pm
it’s an issue because palin is on public record of supporting abstinence-only sex education and *not* supporting inclusive sex education in schools.
http://eagleforumalaska.blogspot.com/2006/07/2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html
looks like abstinence-only continues *not* to work.
so, palin’s public policies make this an issue because of failure of those policies. condoms or other birth control might have helped both prevent pregnancy and disease considering sex was happening anyway.
12. RW Austin | September 1st, 2008 at 6:53 pm
And one other thing this Bristol Palin issue has brought to light……we are all imperfect which is why we all need Jesus Christ in our lives.
13. RW Austin | September 1st, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Nate
You are disgraceful. DO NOT use this 17 year old as an example that abstinence education does not work. In fact, it proves the point. Had she not been having sex, she would not have gotten pregnant. It is pretty easy to figure out.
And one other thing, remember Barak Obummer’s mother gave birth to him at 18. Not much difference.
14. New Conservative | September 1st, 2008 at 6:58 pm
I guess anyone who sets high standards for themselves eventually becomes a hypocrit. Liberals don’t have standards. That way they never become hypocrits.
http://thenewconservatives.blogspot.com/
15. Nate | September 1st, 2008 at 7:00 pm
problem is kids do have sex. to not educate them on how to protect themselves from both pregnancy and disease is immoral and unfair to the kids.
16. LiberalMind | September 1st, 2008 at 7:08 pm
New Conservative:
No, you are wrong.
Liberals believe in freedom of and from religion. We choose to behave responsibly according to the laws of the land and leave other personal moral issues to one’s own discretion.
It is the true path of freedom and responsibility, to first choose the correct moral path and leaves others free to determine their own.
This Palin issue merely ends the ruse that of the Republicans claiming to have “family values” while the rest of are unrepentant sinners
17. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 7:39 pm
It is the true path of freedom and responsibility, to first choose the correct moral path and leaves others free to determine their own. - liberalmind
LiberalMind,
Explain morality absent religion.
Without the compass of God, who’s to say morality even exists?
If you truly want to be free from religion, or belief, then why do you impose others to choose the “correct morality”?
It just doesn’t make sense.
18. coulterfan | September 1st, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Again, just proof that abstinence-only sex ed DOES NOT WORK!
And, BTW, I keep hearing this talking point about Palin “having more executive experience than Barack Obama”. Okay. . . if that is true then she ALSO has more “executive experience” than John McCain!
After all, he’s only been a US Senator (and a member of the house), he’s never been in an executive role.
I think the McCain-Palin ticket, then, is backwards! SHE should be on top of the ticket!
19. LiberalMind | September 1st, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Neocon:
It is not clear that morality comes from belief in God.
I have met plenty of atheists who are generous, kind and honest.
I have met plenty of Christians who act in ways that are so obviously against the teachings of Christ I wonder why they even call themselves followers of Jesus.
We can look at historical figures who found morality without clinging to religion and plenty of others who have justified untold immoral acts in the name of some “God.”
World War One and Two were fought between nations all claiming to be Christian.
One person claims their moral compass instructs them to fly planes into buildings while another claims that God sends hurricanes to punish a city for hosting a parade.
On balance, belief in “God” has caused more intolerance, death, destruction and oppression than any other system man has ever devised.
For me personally, I find the various Christian religions abhorrent, so far from the teachings of Christ, so hypocritical, so destructive and so immoral.
Some of you here would agree with me if narrowly applied to Mormonism, Catholicism or any other denomination that does not meet your doctrinal views.
Morality has progressed largely when belief in deities and Gods have receded from the social realm.
Here is a good example:
The First Amendment to the Constitution is clearly in conflict with the first four of the Ten Commandments.
Which do you uphold?
20. Mark Noonan | September 1st, 2008 at 8:14 pm
And you liberals continue to try and score political points off the issue.
Really people, there is such a thing as life outside of politics. The young Palin messed up - shouldn’t have done what she did, and now she’s taking it like an adult; she’ll pay the price for her error, but she’ll also be the better person for having accepted responsibility for her actions and choosing life…contrast this to the advice of some who say, “use birth control, and if it fails, kill the child”.
Had you on the left not gone about bearing false witness (which, by the way, is a much worse sin than pre-marital sex) and engaging in scurrilous gossip, none of this would come out and the Palins would be able to deal with this as a family, in private. Proud of yourselves, liberals?
21. bongoman | September 1st, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Except that kids that are taught about sex tend to get pregnant less than those who are told to just “don’t do it”. The point stands - abstinence-only is a poor choice when it comes to teaching kids about sex. If you are concerned about teenage pregnancy, then you don’t just tell kids to say no.
But McCain’s choice, meant to appease the ‘family values’ religious base, has backfired. The best spin is at least she didn’t have an abortion.
22. kimberly4victory | September 1st, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Keep it up libtards … the clinton supporters are watching you:
http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?p=330113#post330113
23. LiberalMind | September 1st, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Mark:
I am proud of Barack Obama that he implored the right wing press to leave the Palin family alone.
In fact, back in June he said that his family is off limits, which he intended to apply to all children of candidates.
And who tried to score points with Obama’s half-brother?
24. bongoman | September 1st, 2008 at 8:19 pm
So why have you left comments here undeleted that make reference to the Larry Sinclair accusations? The terrorist fist bump gossip? The Whitey tape?
All scurrilous.
25. coulterfan | September 1st, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Why is it that if an inner-city, minority 17-year old was pregnant, that it is a moral (for the child as well as the parents) failing due to liberalism? But if a rightwinger’s daughter gets pregnant, it is a “private family matter”.
Isn’t underage pregnancy of an unwed teen a SOCIAL issue? Isn’t it in societies best interest to REDUCE the incidence of teen pregnancies? Why can’t we have a conversation about what the best method of reducing teen pregnancies is?
26. LiberalMind | September 1st, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Coutlerfan:
Until the mountain of right wing hypocrisy is leveled, their will be no meaningful conversation.
27. yekepyt | September 1st, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Mark Noonan, who makes a career out of telling lies, fabricating stories, and promoting distortions, is now bloviating with misplaced authority that one sin (his personal favorite, bearing false witness) is worse than another (premarital sex, which I’d venture to say he’s never successfully committed).
This is almost as ironic as other posters, who spell and punctuate at a third grade level, blathering on about how Barack Obama is where he is because of affirmative action.
Too much.
28. bongoman | September 1st, 2008 at 8:31 pm
It sucks that Bristol has been dragged into this. But it ain’t the dirty liberals fault Mark.
You have a woman standing for VP who advocates that contraception and sex outside of marriage is bad, that abstinence-only sex ed is a good thing. McCain picked her because she appeals to the religious GOPers in a way that he can’t.
What would the right blogosphere be saying right now if this was an Obama child in this position?
What would Michelle Malkin have to say about that I wonder?
Can we talk about Ted Stevens now?
29. LiberalMind | September 1st, 2008 at 8:33 pm
It’s amusing that Mark Noonan has overturned 2000 years of religious debate and finally concluded that sins can be ranked in seriousness.
I will contact the Pope immediately.
I will convene a hearing with the leaders of the Protestant denominations and delight them with this great theological insight.
30. IndyFromCalifornia | September 1st, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Regarding the points made in #25 and #26, Colbert King had an interesting column in today’s Washington Post, titled “A Story Palin Should Tell.”
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2008/09/a_story_palin_should_tell.html
31. Mark Noonan | September 1st, 2008 at 8:47 pm
bongo,
In your opinion, had Bristol Palin been instructed on condom use in public school would she be more likely, less likely or just as likely to engage in pre-marital sex?
As with coulter, you are entirely missing the point of the conservative critique, opting instead to run with an absurd, leftwing charicatrure of what we’re on about. We are not opposed to sex education in school - we are opposed, however, to schools providing brith control, schools providing abortion referrals, schools giving explicit instructions on how to engage in sexual acts, schools teaching that homosexuality and heterosexuality are morally the same. You see, its not about us trying to ban fun or ignore the realities of hot-blooded teenagers, its about our desire that parents shall have the decision in what schools teach and do and that children be instructed primarily in the necessity of waiting until marriage - or, at least, adulthood - before engaging in sexual activity.
When we say that the illegitimacy rates in inner city America is a failure of liberalism what we mean is that liberalism has set the stage. Via welfare, via explicit sex education, via de-stigmatization of illegitimacy, etc, etc, etc…by doing this, liberalism set up a system where illegitimacy would change from the odd to the norm, and in the African-American community - where liberalism has the most unchallenged sway - this is precisely what has happened. We’re not actually blaming the girls so much as blaming a system which an idiot could see would be counter-productive, but which liberals continue to assert will make things better.
32. coulterfan | September 1st, 2008 at 8:49 pm
VERY good article, IndyFromCalifornia. Perhaps Bristol’s pregnancy will cause the rightwingers to re-think their views on teen pregnancies and how it’s a “moral failing” for the parents, the daughters, or both.
Not to mention, hopefully we can finally have a discussion about how to PREVENT teen pregnancies- rather than all the accusations and hyperbole surrounding abortion.
As Obama said, “We may not agree on abortion, but surely we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country.”
When is the last time the Republicans seriously mentioned REDUCING teen pregnancies, rather than focus their fury on abortion? Maybe this will help change the discusstion. In fact, maybe Palin herself will re-think her stance on Abstinence-Only Sex Ed? It could happen, couldn’t it?
33. Mark Noonan | September 1st, 2008 at 9:00 pm
liberal,
There’s always been a “ranking”, as it were, of sin…not all of them are as serious as others, and carnal sins are generally less important than more directly spiritual sins.
Like this - adultery is condemned in the Ten Commandments and, by extension, any sexual relations outside of marriage…but why does it mention “adultery” specifically? Because the spouse who cheats is not just having sex outside of marriage, but also betraying a trust. See how it works? When Bristol went and had pre-marital sex she sinned; but when the left went about lying about who was the mother of Governor Palin’s baby, that was bearing false witness, which is specifically condemned in the Ten Commandments. You’re going to find yourself in far more trouble for the lies you tell than for the sex you have.
34. coulterfan | September 1st, 2008 at 9:01 pm
>>When we say that the illegitimacy rates in inner city America is a failure of liberalism what we mean is that liberalism has set the stage. Via welfare, via explicit sex education, via de-stigmatization of illegitimacy, etc, etc, etc…by doing this, liberalism set up a system where illegitimacy would change from the odd to the norm, and in the African-American community - where liberalism has the most unchallenged sway - this is precisely what has happened. <<
Funny though, Mark, that teen pregnancy rates are the highest in RED (ie ‘Conservative’) states- ESPECIALLY those which teach abstinence-only sex ed!
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/2006/09/12/USTPstats.pdf
Highest rates are :
Washington DC (Blue state), Arizona (Red), Mississippi (Red), Nevada (Red), Texas (Red) and New Mexico (Red)
Actually, some of those are current toss-up states, but all deal with high poverty rates and ‘conservative’ sex ed (except DC)
Lowest rates:
Vermont (Blue), New Hampshire (Blue), Minnesota (Blue), North Dakota (toss-up)
There are also MANY studies which indicate teaching kids about condom use DECREASES teen pregnancies. While Abstinence-only sex ed does nothing to reduce teen sex, it only leads to increased oral sex, increased anal sex, pregnancies, and reduced usage of birth control (duh!!!).
If you can blame African American parents for their kids pregnancies, Mark. . . can’t you blame Bristol’s parents for HER pregnancy?
35. Mark Noonan | September 1st, 2008 at 9:01 pm
coulter,
Agreed, but we won’t lower teen pregnancy by teaching them how to use condoms, nor by providing for federally funded abortion on demand.
36. Faceplant | September 1st, 2008 at 9:03 pm
“In your opinion, had Bristol Palin been instructed on condom use in public school would she be more likely, less likely or just as likely to engage in pre-marital sex?”
Can you tell me whether it would have increased or decreased her chances of getting pregnant?
I’ve never been able to understand how Republicans could possibly reconcile their disdain for “welfare moms”, and there hatred for welfare programs, with their opposition to actual sex education with an emphasis on contraception, which has been proven to decrease unwanted pregnancies?
What exactly is the goal of the abstinance only education crowd? Is it to reduce unwanted pregnancies or not?
It would seem to me, if you were really concerned about abortion rates, and “welfare moms”, it would be completely counterproductive to use abstinance only methods.
37. dickvee | September 1st, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Ever notice when there is a chance of killing babies, the liberals jump in to pontificate. The knock kneed women feminists got their tubes intertwined because a nice young girl got pregnant and will do the honorable thing of getting married and keep the kid. Dems would shoot the boyfriend and wait to have a partial birth abortion. And name the fetus OBAMA at the burial. Makes me sick how they play on this, but it will be a gigantic boomerang and Obama knows it too. But he can’t stop the nuts he emboldened now. Even on here the raving mad lunatics go after the girl. Its only beginning people…and once the electorate sees how disgraceful they are, it will be a landslide. Fun to watch libs twist with their conflicting and often abhorrent views of mankind. Bongoman makes moral equivalencies…you do that after fathering many children and then aborting them. Bristol’s going to marry and have her child. I know plenty of dems that got married and had a kid a few months later….I’ll be sending them your write ups and belittling their screwball party. McCain voters they shall become… Thanks man!!
38. neil | September 1st, 2008 at 9:06 pm
He that is without sin cast the first stone. young Bristow Palin has made a mistake and will have to live with it. I am proud of the Palin family to own up to the sin/mistake and deal with it graciously. You left wingers could learn a lot from the Palins. Have you ever heard “blessed are the merciful for they will be shown mercy”?
39. coulterfan | September 1st, 2008 at 9:12 pm
>> but we won’t lower teen pregnancy by teaching them how to use condoms,<<
Mark, in fact the OPPOSITE is true. Teen pregnancies (and abortions) ARE lowered by children knowing how to use condoms and making them more available.
If you REALLY want to reduce abortions, contraceptives are the only way to do so- as Palin’s sexually active daughter demonstrates. Children WILL experiment, but if they have access to condoms, birth control pills, etc, the chance of them getting pregnant is much reduced.
40. Faceplant | September 1st, 2008 at 9:13 pm
“Agreed, but we won’t lower teen pregnancy by teaching them how to use condoms…”
Far be it from me to introduce an actual study (we all know how fundies like Marky disdain actual science), but based on this most recent study it doesn’t look like you have the slightest clue what you are talking about.
“Comprehensive Sex Education Might Reduce Teen Pregnancies, Study Suggests”
There has never been ANY evidence that abstinence only education does anything to reduce unintended pregnancies.
So I ask again, what is the goal of abstinence only education. It certainly isn’t preventing unintended pregnancies.
41. Jeremiah | September 1st, 2008 at 9:15 pm
It sucks that Bristol has been dragged into this.
It sure does, bongoman, and is why you should be demanding the Daily Kos to be burned down. THEY are the instigators and hatemongers.
What would we think of Michelle Obama if her child had become pregnant through a pre-marital affair?
Well, obviously, there would be no problem as far as the left is concerned, as they are who we can thank for the increase in STDs as a result of the failed liberal education system.
There are many parents that I know that are suffering with their children because of the liberal education system.
See, although Conservatives are on the right thinking, our children hear something else at school, and it’s destroying this country.
Markos Moulitsas and all his followers…, God have mercy on those pitiful souls. They’ve got a lot to answer for.
Obama said if anybody done like the Daily Kos has done worked for him, he would have them fired.
He should have the Daily Kos fired, because he spoke at their Convention. And they work for him, by sprewing out as much hate as they can to get him elected.
They’re evil spirits controlling the Daily Kos … nothing but a puke hole that place is!
42. RW Austin | September 1st, 2008 at 9:16 pm
I thought schools were supposed to teach reading, writing, arithmetic, science, etc.
Why are they teaching sex education? If schools could handle the core issues and educate our kids where they are able to succeed in a competitive world then perhaps I would trust a school to teach a child about sex education.
In the meantime, I will do like the Palins did. I will teach my children that abstinence is a sure bet against STD’s and pregnancy. I will also teach them that if they get pregnant, come talk to me and we will handle this as a family. We will welcome the child into a loving family and will provide for the child accordingly.
I will never, EVER, instruct nor encourage my daughter or my son to run out and find the first abortion rod they can, and thus end a precious life.
Morals, ethics, responsibility………they don’t end after a mistake.
43. LiberalMind | September 1st, 2008 at 9:19 pm
What I see is that the right wingers here are calling Bristol’s pregnancy a “sin”, a “mistake” a “moral failing” and so on.
We Liberals are making no such negative judgments.
We are calling into question the hypocrisy that only us amoral liberals have children out of wedlock or engage in premarital sex, (which by the way is very fun when done responsibly)
44. LiberalMind | September 1st, 2008 at 9:21 pm
Jeremiah :
OK, I see the real sin was exposing the sin.
I thought you Christians were all about CONFESSING your sins.
45. Faceplant | September 1st, 2008 at 9:26 pm
I notice it’s predominantly the Republicans on the board that are trying to turn this into a discussion about abortion.
Not suprising due to the fact that they can’t possibly defend their advocacy for abstinence only education. Personally if it was my child I probably wouldn’t want her to have an abortion either. Kudos for being willing AND ABLE to take on the responsibility.
But this was never about abortion. The social conservatives want to turn it into a discussion about abortion because they can’t win the “abstinence only” debate.
46. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 9:33 pm
The First Amendment to the Constitution is clearly in conflict with the first four of the Ten Commandments. - Liberal
Really? How is congress’s mandate to not make laws that respect an establishing a certain religion in conflict with the following commandments?
I am the Lord your God
You shall have no other gods
You shall not make for yourself an idol
You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God
These were not mandates of a society, they are commandments to the individual. That’s is why our fore fathers wanted the government to not mandate a certain religion prefering the free will of man.
Secondly, if not for Gods commandments, what is morality? Show me the secular code of morals that you deem others can choose the correct ones.
Where are the secular code of morals?
47. Faceplant | September 1st, 2008 at 9:39 pm
The idea that you must be a christian, or you must believe in god in order to believe in morality is such a joke.
Unless you are willing say that atheists believe it’s alright to kill someone.
48. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Reality,
In the absence of not wanting to waste the time to refute your litany of drivel, I encourage you to votte for Obama. He will take care of all of your boo and tuck you in at night, which is obviously what you need.
Secondly, I don’t want any one of your low level of intelligence, susceptibility to propaganda, and slavish devotion to one with empty promises to be in my camp.
You are the perfect Obama supporter.
49. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Face,
Where’s the secualr code of ethics that says it’s not right to kill?
That must exist somewhere, right? Otherwise your argument is a joke.
50. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 9:45 pm
What are seculars and athiests guided by? Where is the secular code of morals that instructs them that killing is not acceptable?
That adultery is not acceptable?
Are these morals just intuitive?
51. LiberalMind | September 1st, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Neocon:
I am glad you asked.
Let’s look at the Commandments as you posted them:
I am the Lord your God
You shall have no other gods
You shall not make for yourself an idol
You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God
The First allows me have any god I want or no god at all or many gods.
The First allows me to make any graven image I want, however blasphemous
The First allows me to use any religion’s god in any way I choose.
The First also allows me to proclaim in any place that there is no God at all, clearly in opposition to the First Comandment.
So Neocon I’ll take that to mean you believe in the Ten and not the First.
52. Jeremiah | September 1st, 2008 at 9:51 pm
LiberalMind,
It’s not just confessing, but knowing Jesus Christ in a personal way, asking for His Salvation. That’s on a personal level.
The problem with our country, however, is that liberals want more sin, and they coerce children who attend the public school system to engage in sin. Liberals ENCOURAGE death, so to speak. and they don’t care about the live they destroy in the process. Liberalism destroys people through teaching future generations how they can live their lives … it is a doctrine of devils, in better terms.
As liberalism is constantly changing to meet the needs of those who want to cause discord, death and destruction.
So they teach children to harbor this hatred for the traditional Christian standing of America, and instead to love the worldly sinful things that cause pain and suffering.
It is the worst mistake any parent could ever do to let their children attend a public school system, for they will ruin your children, thereby, ruining America’s future.
Another of the problems is…
There are a lot of good people who post on the internet, but there are also a lot of evil demonic filled people who post sexually explicit pictures to the internet (a demonic force of our time), which is one of the great problems that America is having with their children too, not to mention access to filth on the internet in high schools and colleges, which is another thing that America needs to consider about putting the whammy on.
53. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Liberal,
You said that the first four of the ten commandments were in conflict with the first amendment and then you proceed to put forth an example where YOU had the choice.
And that’s exactly right. You have free will and can choose what you want. The first amendment also gives you that right, therefore your assertion is flat out false.
Cab you understand that?
Secondly, where is the athiest code of morals? How do they know what is right and what is wrong? What is their moral compass?
54. Faceplant | September 1st, 2008 at 10:03 pm
“Where’s the secualr code of ethics that says it’s not right to kill?
That must exist somewhere, right? Otherwise your argument is a joke.”
In other words you aren’t willing to say that secularists think murdering people is okay.
While we are on the topic, I’m not quite sure where morals come from. Some are taught by to you by your parents, some come from being molded by society, and some come from your inner concience. In other words, I don’t need a written code of morals to tell me whats right and what’s wrong.
And if the ten commandments are the origin of morality, why was it considered wrong to kill someone, or to cheat on your wife, or to steal BEFORE the commandments were ever written.
The earliest laws against murder appeared in the sumerian civilization around 2100 BC, a full 600 years before the exodus. Messopotamian civilizations also had laws against stealing, slander, adultery etc…
What written code of ethics did they draw from?
55. Faceplant | September 1st, 2008 at 10:09 pm
And before the idiots start decrying my atheism, I actually consider myself a christian. Certainly not a fundamentalist Christian, and not a practicing one. I do believe in god, and I do believe Jesus was the son of God.
56. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 10:12 pm
While we are on the topic, I’m not quite sure where morals come from. - Faced
If you are unsure on this issue, then how can you possibly dismiss the much larger notion of God.It just doesn;t make sense to be unsure of a minor issue, yet be convinced about a larger issue.
Secondly, God pre-dates 2100 BC and the Bible. Just FYI. And spitituality and the morals that stem from seeking the Higher Power also pre-date 2100 BC. Hard to believe I had to explain that.
57. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Face,
Good for you. I am far from a holy roller, and I don’t judge others morality, leaving that to God. But there’s no doubt in my mind that Jesus was the Son of God and he brought the Word for all of us to listen to.
If we would just follow Jesus’s lead, the world would be better off.
58. kimberly4victory | September 1st, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Mark: This is a private family matter. I wish you would stop posting thread on this subject. Thank you.
Palin is more qualified than your #1, The One, and yes, physical proximity of Alaska to Russia most definitely counts.
Alaska is the first line of defense in our missile interceptor defense system. The 49th Missile Defense Battalion of the Alaska National Guard is
the unit that protects the entire nation from ballistic missile attacks.
It’s on permanent active duty, unlike other Guard units.
As governor of Alaska, Palin is briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counterterrorism. Her exposure to classified
material may rival even Biden’s.
She’s also the commander in chief of the Alaska State Defense Force (ASDF), a federally recognized militia incorporated into Homeland Security’s counterterrorism plans.
Palin is privy to military and intelligence secrets that are vital to the entire country’s defense. Given Alaska’s proximity to Russia, she may have
security clearances we don’t even know about.
Not only that, if you compare Palin’s experience/accomplishments to Obama’s, there’s a stark difference. Your #1 doesn’t even compare.
Liberals are scared to death of Palin. How do I know this? Look at all their posts. She’s excited the base like no one has ever before. Clinton supporters are either going to vote for her, not vote, or write in Hillary Clinton. Hell has no fury like a woman scorned. Middle America, even moderate/Reagan Democrats are going to vote for her because she is like them.
The liberal media is also freaking out. She’s not an elitist like them. She’s an unknown. She hasn’t been on Meet the Press. Such a travesty!
The Obama camp wasn’t even prepared when McCain picked her, so how can they prepared for any surprise.
POW/WOW ‘08!!
59. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Liberal,
Let me state this so even you can understand. God created you, and God gave you free will.
It wasn’t the first amendment that gave you that free will.
Got it?
60. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Kimberly,
You are one sharp lady. Glad to have you on the team.
61. kimberly4victory | September 1st, 2008 at 10:26 pm
As Governor of Alaska, Governor Palin presides over a $6.6 billion budget and thousands of state employees.
She is the only governor in America that shares a border with Russia and Canada, which requires some foreign policy experience given the thawing of the Arctic Ice and the current race by the U.S., Canada, and Russia to claim the now available oil and gas deposits.
Because Alaska is a vital energy producing state, Governor Palin quickly has earned her stripes in advancing an energy agenda that helps free the U.S. from its dependence on foreign oil.
She spurred the development of a new pipeline from Alaska to the continental United States.
As Governor, she traveled to the Middle East to gain a better perspective on the issues there and to support America’s troops in Iraq, including her oldest son.
As the CEO of Wasilla and Alaska, there was/is no decision above Governor Palin’s pay grade.
As with all mayors and governors, she knows the buck always stops with her and that she was/is ultimately accountable to the voters for results.
62. kimberly4victory | September 1st, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Senator Obama spent 3 years practicing law as a civil right lawyers and part-time law professor. He did not manage a budget or employees in either position.
Next, Senator Obama was elected to the Illinois State Senate in 1996 to represent the south side of Chicago. At most, Senator Obama oversaw a handful of staffers and a small office budget.
As a state senator, Senator Obama focused his time and attention on social welfare issues.
In eight years, Senator Obama famously voted “present” 130 times, or over sixteen times per year. A “present” vote was an attempt by the caster to escape accountability on a particular piece of legislation or issue.
In 2000, Senator Obama ran for the U.S. House of Representatives. In a two-way primary, he lost by a 2 to 1 margin.
In 2004, Senator Obama ran for the U.S. Senate, and won. Just as with the Illinois State Senate, Senator Obama oversees a handful of staff and a small office budget.
In his three and a half years in the U.S. Senate, based on the lack of accomplishments listed during the Democrat National Convention, Senator Obama hasn’t done much.
Given that he has spent the last year and a half campaigning for the presidency, such a lack of outcomes isn’t that surprising.
Senator Obama has toured foreign countries, including the Middle East.
63. Kahn | September 1st, 2008 at 10:30 pm
Liberals - read your posts. Going after children now? Children?
We are surely heading towards a civil war at this rate. Better rethink your positions on gun ownership. You’re going to need some.
64. Jeremiah | September 1st, 2008 at 10:33 pm
Faceplant,
You need to study more, and open your mind to the Word of the Living God of Creation.
It goes all the way back to Adam and Eve. We had no problems until Adam fell, at the Tree of Knowledge, now we ask ourselves all these different questions. What is it? What am I? How shall I be it? Physically separated from the external realities that surround us…which is to say the Spirit is what gives us the awareness to comprehend outside the lower creation which are still attached to the permanent genetic makeup that God had endowed them with, and so on… Whereas, in the beginning at the start, we had no need of our larger purpose because God was with us, because we were perfect. Created in the image of our Creator God and with a choice, to either serve Him or serve Satan, and so Adam and Eve chose Satan, much the same as millions have done and continue to do.
Murder first originated with Cain if you remember, and so God marked him as the bearer of that particular sin, and is why God stated in Genesis 9:6 ‘Whosoever sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed.’
That means He demands anyone who murderers another person to receive the death penalty as a future deterrent to the same sin, and likewise other sins.
All in all, morality originated with Adam and Eve in the Garden.
65. kimberly4victory | September 1st, 2008 at 10:37 pm
Thank you Neocon. I cannot wait until Palin’s speech at the convention and the debate with Biden. Liberals jaws are going to drop to the floor.
Also, all this crap liberals (especially dailykos) and the media are pushing is not sitting well with Middle Americans … they’re in for a huge surprise … I know it.
Carville held up a photo of the City Hall in Wasilla and was laughing. Uh, Jimmy, people who live in small towns like that DO HAVE TVS and THEY VOTE. I’m telling you … they are shooting themselves in the foot.
66. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 10:40 pm
They can’t help themselves Kimberly. They truly have a fundamental disdain for middle America, despite their continued claims to support us.
67. kimberly4victory | September 1st, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Oops, I forgot one …
Obama was on the Board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge with Bill Ayres.
Silly me.
68. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 10:43 pm
I am still waiting for that secular code of morals. How do athiests know is deemed as right and what is deemed as wrong?
Truth is, they adhere to God’s commandments whether they accept it or not.
69. jake | September 1st, 2008 at 10:49 pm
i thought we all decided that jeremiah was a waste of a post a long time ago. Such self-righteousness on this blog. How can you preach family values when you are leaving your 5 month year old child and your pregnant daughter back in alaska for the presidency. It is the equivalent of edwards cheating on his wife. Don’t tell me the father can do what the mother can do to raise the child because that is not going to happen. When my wife gave birth 6 months ago she wanted her mother in the room because she went through the same thing.
It is also the empitome of conservative values that her daughter got pregnant no matter how you spin it. She was taught not to have sex which is not the right thing to teach. It;s more important to protect. You blow hards are too dumb to see that. Palin’s strongest values is pointless now. I don’t have to convince you because you are going to vote mcain no matter what but the indepedents are going to eat it up and spit her out.
70. Kahn | September 1st, 2008 at 10:54 pm
jake,
What an asshole you are. Playing with the life of a minor family member of a political candidate. Really -
But if you think that this will work for, whatever. It is energizing us more than you can possibly imagine. Its war you want? OK - done.
71. Jeremiah | September 1st, 2008 at 10:57 pm
She was taught not to have sex which is not the right thing to teach.
No, jake, it is the right thing, she just did not heed her mother’s sound advice.
Did her daughter go to public school? If so, there’s a good chance she’s hearing things that are different from what her mother teaches her, as the public school system encourages children to experiment outside marriage.
But who do they call to when they get a deadly sexually transmitted disease?
72. Ken | September 1st, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Neocon… for a secular Code of Morals… Right is what they do, Wrong is what someone/everyone else does. By not having an authority higher than themselves, they create a system of codes that have no foundation that changes almost daily.
73. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 11:00 pm
jake has no idea what he is up against and his completely distorted views of conservatism are borne from a life of lapping up the empty rhetoric of those he deems enlightened.
Fact is, middle America identifies with Palin and not the people like the inidignant, ignorant and self righteous jake.
Jake, just scurry off and vote for someone who promises to take care of you, because obviously you need someone to watch after you. With that level of intelligence, you could hurt yourself.
74. neocon | September 1st, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Ken,
Well said.
75. What? | September 1st, 2008 at 11:33 pm
Mark writes:
“When we say that the illegitimacy rates in inner city America is a failure of liberalism what we mean is that liberalism has set the stage. Via welfare, via explicit sex education, via de-stigmatization of illegitimacy, etc, etc, etc…
First, don’t call any child illegitimate.
Second, are you asking us to stigmatize this Palin girl?
Third, you admit that teenagers are going to have sex yet you are against against giving them access to birth control and instructions on how to use it. You are not dealing with the reality you admit exists.
Fourth, are you suggesting we not give welfare to poor people?
Fifth, what is the connection between giving a person housing and food stamps and pre-marital sex?
Lastly, the stigma you long for is the very stigma that push women to get abortions. Having grown up in an affluent suburb, it was unthinkable to have a child as a teenager. Thus the easy solution was abortion. Those who did have the child were castigated by people like you who held themselves morally irrapproachable.
More importantly, however, such abortions were rare occurences because those of us who had sex understood the consequences and used birth control. We learned, for example, that the withdrawal method does not work. We learned that double bagging is a bad idea.
We also knew that we could not raise a child and that having a child would keep us from our goals. This is the knowledge that is lacking in lower class communities where the teenage pregnancy rate is high.
Instilling this knowledge only comes by building better schools and stronger communities thus creating real opportunity. Giving a person an obtainable future goal makes them less likely to make foolish choices in the present. We must also arm our teenagers with a working knowledge of sex so that they know what is foolish.
76. Kahn | September 1st, 2008 at 11:36 pm
What? She’s 17, she’s not running. Leaver her alone.
Get it? You look like viscous turds. hell, your ARE viscous turds.
77. Jeremiah | September 1st, 2008 at 11:50 pm
We also knew that we could not raise a child and that having a child would keep us from our goals.
What?,
That’s what abstinence is for. Not abortion.
Can’t you see?
78. rightlane | September 2nd, 2008 at 12:13 am
You libs take the cake. None of you must have kids or you know they get into trouble and all you can do is support them the best you know how. Especially teenagers. It doesn’t mater if they come from a good home or a bad one. Kid will be kids. It’s all part of the learning process. Most grow up to be fine productive adults and rest become Donks.
79. Nate | September 2nd, 2008 at 12:16 am
neo, here’s a book — not about atheism (or secular morals), rather, it’s about Ethical Humanism, and it might respond to some of your questions about how ethical beliefs come about outside the context of the 10 commandments.
You might borrow from your local library and take a read (i’m putting an amazon link in too in case your library doesn’t have it — used copies are a couple of dollars):
Ethics As A Religion by David Saville Muzzey
http://www.amazon.com/Ethics-religion-David-Saville-Muzzey/dp/B0007DL76G
A bit more about ethical culture:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_Culture
there are many ethical societies (meeting houses — you can look them up on the web)
80. Jeremiah | September 2nd, 2008 at 1:22 am
Steinerla,
You’re thinking of “neutrality” which has been one of the greater shortcomings of our society today.
Yes, God gives us a choice of whether to serve Him or not. God Himself, however, is not “neutral” … and it showed through the Godly lives that our Founding Fathers lived, teaching and raising their children the Word of God.
The same goes for today, only the Christian people must endure the persecution of our government that forbids us from partaking of prayer and God’s Word in school and many public places, of which we can thank the “giver of rights” the ACLU…
The ACLU does not represent me, I don’t care what anyone says.
God gives me my rights, and His Word says that we are to rear children in the way that they should go. Hopefully people will take notice and move their children out of public schools and vote for people who will uphold God’s standard.
81. What? | September 2nd, 2008 at 1:43 am
Neocon,
Mark believes liberals have increased the abortion rate “via de-stigmatization of illegitimacy.”
My question was thus legitimate. Does Mark wants us to stigmatize the Palin girl and those like her to lower the teenage birth rate? I am opposed to it. Please read more carefully.
82. What? | September 2nd, 2008 at 1:44 am
Sorry, that should read “teenage pregnancy rate”, not “abortion rate.”
83. What? | September 2nd, 2008 at 2:00 am
Jeremiah writes,
“What?,
That’s what abstinence is for. Not abortion.
Can’t you see?”
Right,
Abstinence training worked really well in the Palin family. Jeremiah, I know you don’t get out much so I am going to give you a run down on what is going on outside your door.
Teenagers are having sex. No matter how many times you tell them not to, they are still going to do it and some will get knocked up. The ones who got knocked up in my high school also were members of the Christian Youth Group. Again, abstinence training worked real well there.
Giving these teenagers access to birth control will lower the number or pregnancies and will lower the number of abortions. Simply saying nothing about sex will result in more abortions.
100% abstinence is a fairytale. Teaching it as an option is acceptable. Teaching it without supplying further information about birth control is simply hoping nothing will go wrong. It is placing your faith in the horny teenagers will resist their biological urges.
To analogize,
Say I gave you a loaded gun. Say you also have a strong urge to use that gun but to not harm anyone with it. Now say I also did not explain to you how to use that gun. Am I being smart?
Now, that gun is a penis/vagina. Some teenagers are going to use whichever of the two they possess. None of them want to harm anyone. Isn’t our responsibility to explain how they can prevent such harm instead of simply telling them not to use the gun?
84. Jeremiah | September 2nd, 2008 at 2:24 am
Say I gave you a loaded gun. Say you also have a strong urge to use that gun but to not harm anyone with it. Now say I also did not explain to you how to use that gun. Am I being smart?
Ok, let’s turn the tables a bit…I’ll let you follow my logic for a bit…
Let’s say I took the notion to tell you about Hell - A place of awful place of torment, where you flesh is constantly burning day and night for eternity.
There’s several scenarios that could take place here:
1. What if I decided not to tell you, forsaking not only your soul, but condemning my own for not telling you. Was that smart?
2. I do my part, and tell you, and it is up to you, and you decide it is all a “fairy” tale. Were you very smart?
Hell is real, my friend, as real as real can be! Nothing but death and anguish, and no way out…too late, too late, the judgment has been set!
But you know what? Jesus loves you, and He doesn’t want to see you go there!
Abstinence may be a thing of the past, but the horrors of disobedience will become a first hand, everlasting reality on judgment day!
Wake up, before it’s too late!
85. Catfish | September 2nd, 2008 at 5:50 am
JEremiah, I respect your faith, but as political policy…..which is what we are talking about……kids WILL have sex. End of story, no argument. Right or wrong it IS happening.
How therefore, can we deal with that problem? Providing birth control options and educations helps limit teen pregnancy (studies have shown this) and therefore limit abortion. If abortion is the be all and end all and you cant be catholic and pro life, or a term u like to use ur a CINO if you support choice, then wouldnt you of all people be clamoring for birth control education?!?! It will reduce abortion, the so called greatest sin of our era, and yet you are against this!?!?!?!?
God wants the abortions more than he wants condoms? is that what you believe??
Im not saying its right, but it is the truth……..
86. What? | September 2nd, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Jeremiah,
Who goes to heaven?
Will I go to heaven? I have had protected pre-marital sex.
Will a Hindu go to heaven? How about a Muslim? I ask because you seem to have the inside track on who gets in and who does not.
Assuming there is a heaven and a hell, don’t you think God uses a more holistic sorting process than you are suggesting?
Isn’t the ultimate question whether a person is genuinely good?
87. Jeremiah | September 3rd, 2008 at 12:44 am
Who goes to heaven?
What?,
All who accept Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior and do His will.
Jesus said, ‘It’s not My will that any should perish, but that all would come to repentance.’
That ‘all’ should come to repentance, meaning that we are to ask for forgiveness and abstain from sinning any longer.
Will I go to heaven?
If you are living in sin, then no, for no person can go to heaven with sin in their life. Therefore, turn from your wicked ways and be saved.
Can a Muslim go to heaven? No, for ‘No man cometh unto the Father except through Jesus Christ the Lord.’ There is no other way. Thus, every knee wil bow before the Son of God at His second and final returning.
So, you see, it’s very important that we give children the opportunity to hear the truth, their hope, which they do not get in the public schools, but instead, are encouraged to engage in pre-marital sex.
We need to teach children in school that abstinence until marriage is the only tried and proven method to ensure that no unwanted pregnancies and STDs occur………it won’t matter if they don’t listen, but at least they were given the truth, and after the truth is given them, then it is between them, their parents, and God.
As a reward, you have not only cut down on STDs and unwanted pregnancies, but you have saved many lost souls from going to an eternal suffering of fire, the ultimate goal. This side is just temporary, my friend, but the other is FOR EVER. Never ending, if only you could see and hear the suffering that is in that awful place, you would gladly take up your cross to follow Jesus. So many hear the gospel and continue to reject it each time they are told, many are into witchcraft and idol worship, many people have gone their because they harbored a grudge all their lives, still others have gone their because they just simply loved all the nice material things that the world has to offer, some had gone after the lusts of their heart … Hell is filled with millions of these kinds of people, and many more going … so, you see, it is not the flesh and blood that we wrestle with, but the temptation that the flesh and blood offer through the actions of those controlled by Satan’s angels, which are everywhere. Satan presents some temptation it matters not where you go, whether to a bank, grocery store, a whore house, strip clubs, anywhere where satan rules peoples lives.
A lot of these are good people, but it is demonstrably incumbent through the Body of Believers that we reach out to these folks of wickedness in high places, that we warn them of the risk that they take by living in their condition.
That’s why it is said,
‘Wake up, O sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.’
:)
88. Jeremiah | September 3rd, 2008 at 12:55 am
WhiskerFish,
Birth Control education is what children get now in high school and college, they go at great lengths to teach children how to use contraceptives, and it has proven to be a disaster.
By outlawing abortion, they will get the picture.
Marriage, my friend, between one man and one woman for life.
89. What? | September 3rd, 2008 at 3:15 am
Jeremiah,
Do you ever question the fairness of the system God has created?
According to you, He offers salvation but chooses to give us urges that prevent us from reaching that salvation. On top of that, He allows the creation of other false religions which assure we are doomed to Hell.
Thus, under your belief, He has set the game up so the vast majority of people will go to Hell.
What is most distressing is the pettiness of it all. A person who worships another diety is doomed to a life time of Hell even if he leads a good life. Is God really so petty as to deny this person entry in to heaven because he refused to worship Him?
Lastly, is our purpose merely to worship Him? Why does God want us to devote our lives to worshiping Him at all?
90. believe | September 5th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
I attended Catholic school eighteen years ago and they taught sex education in sixth, seventh and eighth grade (not by the nuns by the way). Not abstinence, but education. The idea was, the more informed we were, the more responsible we would be. When I transferred to public school, I noted that girls at the Catholic school were WAY more promiscuous than those at public school. Go figure. Today, WAY more kids are doing things earlier than we did back then. Teach today’s youth about the diseases, teach them to avoid pregnancy by using birth control responsibly. Teach them about the value of waiting until you find the right person. And figure out why young people feel so bored, lost, unloved and untouched in life (by their FAMILIES) that they are turning to sex when they are far too young. Lastly, how about more research on birth control for all ages and both genders? And how about teaching guys to be more responsible when the girl/woman gets pregnant? No one ever talks about the fathers. People demonize women for abortion, never acknowledging the father’s role. I know many, many educated white women who *only* made that decision because the guys refused to accept any role in raising or even helping with a child (in even long term relationships). Birth control sometimes fails. Faced with loss of their job, loss of relationship, severe judgment and no support from family, some women end up in a really bad place. I wish there were never abortions. But I also am sane enough to seek out answers to the problem from the start, not the finish. Education, better birth control, more personal responsibility. May every child be born into a loving home to financially and emotionally stable parents.