Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have seen first-hand what having a Pentecostal preacher in the family (in-law) can do to succesive generations. The man is a perfectly nice, sweet person to everyone but apparently is different at home. His wife even though she is supposed to have so much faith in heaven has taken to her bed in fear of dying, his daughter has had a couple of nervous breakdowns and his granddaughter has been a stripper hooked on coke.
That being said, my grandmother was a Pentecostal of a less-evangelical wing of the church and was perfect as far as I am concerned. She did not wear make-up, jewelry, cut her hair or wear 'costly array' as does Mrs. Palin.
I think most people would agree that it is much better for a minor in school to be abstinent, but we have to be realistic and teach sex education -- including the fact that some people are gay. Gay people are also paying tax dollars to educate kids.
I am certainly going to give Mrs. Palin a chance and listen to her speech tonight. I hope this experience has taught her some humility and tolerance when dealing with legislation affecting 'the private lives' of all Americans.
VN, I think we all get it, but you're just way off topic in this thread. Why not start a new one in which you discuss your position relating schools to socialism? You're continuously harping on this one thing that really has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
VN, I think we all get it, but you're just way off topic in this thread. Why not start a new one in which you discuss your position relating schools to socialism? You're continuously harping on this one thing that really has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
I'll admit that I tend to go off topic. In fact, I even apologized for that a few pages ago. However, this thread was created to demonstrate the hypocrisy and mixed values of the GOP's socially conservative/religious wing ... and I'm simply using a range of topics (including schools) to prove my point.
I've seen hypocrisy rampant on this thread by some who define themselves as "conservative Christians". They say we should mind our own business about private matters like the Palin issue ... but the fact is that they don't mind their own business about other private matters such as abortion, marriage, or sex. They correctly say that there should be less government in our lives, but they want more protection for the "unborn", and more laws that pertain to "their" viewpoints. They correctly preach less taxation, but they seem to favor keeping the public schools in tact. That's one of the main reasons I'm no longer a Republican. They're just as bad as the Dems as far as big government, and flip flopping on issues.
If McCain selected his own wife Cindy McCain for VP the party faithful would be defending his choice. But I don’t think he selected Palin just to please the republican base. He selected her because he desperately needs at least part of those 18 million Clinton female supporters. Talk about poor judgment. And this being purely political motive, its showing us that all this “Country before party” is nothing but another empty republican slogan.
About the scandal regarding Palin’s 17 year old daughter. I would agree that it is a private matter and should be off limit. Except that in Polin’s case there is so much contradiction between what she stands for and what happened to her daughter and thousands and thousands teenager single mothers. She is against sex education in schools, she is against public funding to help those teenager single mothers. Not every one of them is a daughter of the Governor of Alaska. She is for banning some books that were morally objectionable to her. And after all one of things she brings to this ticket is her talk about family values and moral values. So people are talking.
I think we are looking at the result of Christian family values more than anything else. If the only option is to practice abstinance with no discussion of birth control, the end result can be a pregnant teen. The bastard child will be welcomed as one of God's children and mother can remain unwed. Today, this seems more acceptable and common place, while 30 years ago, you could either have a "shot gun wedding" or the young woman would be sent to a home for unwed mothers. Like it or not, times have changed.
Bristol Palin's pregnancy is just proof that sex ed in schools doesn't always work. That doesn't mean I am against teaching it in schools--but it is what it is.
You have just given us the best possible illustration of why so many posts on this board are wrong wrong wrong. Bristol Palin, no matter what she did, is NOT PROOF OF ANYTHING
News Flash. Everybody already knew that there is NOTHING that ALWAYS WORKS, without your illuminating anecdote of something that, in one case, did not yield the desired result.
You have just given us the best possible illustration of why so many posts on this board are wrong wrong wrong. Bristol Palin, no matter what she did, is NOT PROOF OF ANYTHING
News Flash. Everybody already knew that there is NOTHING that ALWAYS WORKS, without your illuminating anecdote of something that, in one case, did not yield the desired result.
It is proof of one huge factor: social conservatives who run for public office should keep quiet about social issues/private matters. They have a right to their opinions ... but they shouldn't be including things like abortion, marriage, family values or abstinence education in their campaigns, when it's obvious that many of them need to clean up their own private lives.
It is proof of one huge factor: social conservatives who run for public office should keep quiet about social issues/private matters. They have a right to their opinions ... but they shouldn't be including things like abortion, marriage, family values or abstinence education in their campaigns, when it's obvious that many of them need to clean up their own private lives.
No, they shouldn't keep quiet. Anyone seeking public office as a legislator has a right and an obligation to make himelf aware of social issues opon which there might be legislative regulation (which includes all of the above except family values). And are further obliged to apprise the voters of their policy position on those topics. At the same time, as conservators of the commonweal, they are obliged to become familiar with the issues through more valid inspection than a single anecdotal incident. And THAT was my point.
Just in case you are thinking "You cannot legislate morality", well, that may be true. But you can and must legislate civil marriage, and regulate the curriculum in public schools. Most conservatives do not share your view that it the law ignores abortions, they will go away.
I don't believe that private matters such as marriage, sexual orientation, or abortion should be part of a political campaign.
From the bottom of my heart I thank you (and rep you) my friend! This is such a refreshing voice of reason to behold on an otherwise nut job-oriented forum!
Ironically, I can't believe that I'm the one being the moralist on this topic. Normally, I would agree that it's a private matter. However, a teenage girl who becomes pregnant and decides to keep the baby is an enormous burden on the taxpayers in many ways. You know as well as I do that the vast majority of young girls who have babies can't afford the upbringing, the health care, or the education of their "choice" on their own terms. It is the taxpayers (you & me) who end up bearing the cost.
A good mother and somebody who truly has high moral values wouldn't keep having children, and then stick them in day care & subsidized public schools while she goes off to work. I believe Palin is a conservative Republican in name only. It used to be that a true conservative would practice some restraint, and be a little more fiscally responsible. Some 40 years ago, the Republican platform focussed chiefly on reducing wasteful spending & getting the government out of our lives. Moreover, the same Republican party some 40 years ago DIDN'T include issues like abortion or marriage as part of their campaign like they do now!
first off, I disagree with you about being a taxpayers burden. This is not true. I have known alot of young women who have children early and are able to support them. no, they are nto able to drive around in fancy cars like you do, eat out everyday or anything else that a young person does for that matter. If anything the average young person without a child is more of a burden on the taxpayers in this way: speeding tickets, jail, more than likely is able to go to college because of no kids so taxes are paid there for grants, i could go on. Second of all Palin's daughter is more than likely living off of her parents support than us taxpayers. If you are so worried about what we tax payers spend our money on the you should be pretty concerned about illegal immigration. You need to focus more on Palin rather than her daughters growing up years and moral values. kids grow up and become different from their parents, its the facts of life. Now focus on the real issues at hand
Last edited by okie333; 09-03-2008 at 10:51 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
