Palin's baby her own - but, daughter pregnant at 17.

Page 39 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: Genx87
At this point unless you live in sub sahara africa in a hut. You know about contraceptives. If you choose to not use it. It doesnt matter what is taught in our public educational system.

Well, on this very board I've seen abstinence only supporters try to pull the legs out from under contraceptives because they aren't 100% effective, 100% of the time. This is used as an argument for not teaching safe sex practices and instead focus on abstinence.

This same doubt has been planted in the minds of those who received the updated version of sex ed in schools, and couple that with a healthy dose of misinformation in many areas has led to a dramatic drop in the use of condoms.

I dont know if that is 100% fact what you just said. In the Gay community there is a dramatic rise in STD's due to a lack of use in condoms. Does that mean public eduction(within schools and within other mediums) failed to teach people about the consequences of their actions? Perhaps but what % of the blame is laid on the individual making the decision to not use protection?

Just fyi I dont believe in abstinece only education. But I do think it needs to be brought up rather forcefully within the discussion as the only fail safe way to not get pregnant or most STD's.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Robor
You don't see the hypocrisy in preaching abstinence over sex-ed when your own daughter is not only having sex but pregnant?

As far as your question, duh. Teach abstinence *and* educate so if/when they do have sex they know the consequences and are prepared. Pregnancy isn't the only concern with sexual activity.

Oh jesus really? How is it hypocritical of Palin her daughter made a decision that will change the rest of her life?

Is Gore a hypcrite because his son has been busted going 100 mph with drugs in his car yet he is for drug laws?

You are calling somebody a hypocrit based on another persons actions. It defies all logic.
It is hypocritical because abstinence is what Palin supports and stated on record would propose as policy and the very proof it doesn't work is in her own family. I'm not saying sex-ed would have prevented this situation - from what I read the school did have some form of it? My point is it's better to educate than simply say, 'Don't do it until you're married'.

Al Gore is not running for P/VP.

Originally posted by: Genx87
Just fyi I dont believe in abstinece only education. But I do think it needs to be brought up rather forcefully within the discussion as the only fail safe way to not get pregnant or most STD's.

I agree 100%. :thumbsup:
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: Genx87
At this point unless you live in sub sahara africa in a hut. You know about contraceptives. If you choose to not use it. It doesnt matter what is taught in our public educational system.

Well, on this very board I've seen abstinence only supporters try to pull the legs out from under contraceptives because they aren't 100% effective, 100% of the time. This is used as an argument for not teaching safe sex practices and instead focus on abstinence.

This same doubt has been planted in the minds of those who received the updated version of sex ed in schools, and couple that with a healthy dose of misinformation in many areas has led to a dramatic drop in the use of condoms.

I dont know if that is 100% fact what you just said. In the Gay community there is a dramatic rise in STD's due to a lack of use in condoms. Does that mean public eduction(within schools and within other mediums) failed to teach people about the consequences of their actions? Perhaps but what % of the blame is laid on the individual making the decision to not use protection?

Just fyi I dont believe in abstinece only education. But I do think it needs to be brought up rather forcefully within the discussion as the only fail safe way to not get pregnant or most STD's.

I don't know for certain the answer to that question.

But yes HIV is coming back in a big, big way. The media is only now starting to take notice.

But what I do know is that the sex education that you and I received was far superior to what they are teaching now, especially in certain states like FL.

Edit: In FL they are only allowed to talk about condoms in order to relay that they aren't 100% effective, no other discussion is allowed or the school loses fed funding.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Robor
You don't see the hypocrisy in preaching abstinence over sex-ed when your own daughter is not only having sex but pregnant?

As far as your question, duh. Teach abstinence *and* educate so if/when they do have sex they know the consequences and are prepared. Pregnancy isn't the only concern with sexual activity.

Oh jesus really? How is it hypocritical of Palin her daughter made a decision that will change the rest of her life?

Is Gore a hypcrite because his son has been busted going 100 mph with drugs in his car yet he is for drug laws?

You are calling somebody a hypocrit based on another persons actions. It defies all logic.
It is hypocritical because abstinence is what Palin supports and stated on record would propose as policy and the very proof it doesn't work is in her own family. I'm not saying sex-ed would have prevented this situation - from what I read the school did have some form of it? My point is it's better to educate than simply say, 'Don't do it until you're married'.

Al Gore is not running for P/VP.

But that still doesnt make her a hypocrite. It puts egg on her face that her own kid didnt follow her instructions. But in no way does it make her a hypcrite.

The gore reference had nothing to do with who was running but to point out how silly your argument is that Palin is a hypocrit because of somebody elses actions. Al Gore is against drugs yet his son was in possession of them. So Al Gore is suddenly a hypocrite? Sorry I dont like Al but dont see how he is a hypocrite over his son's actions.

Lay the blame where it is deserved.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,750
2,335
126
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Robor
I love the reaction from the conservatives. If this was one of Obama's daughters who was pregnant the moral right would be all over him for it.

And that would be pretty stupid and ignorant wouldn't it?

That depends. Is Palin a strict religious conservative who prefers teaching abstinence over sex-ed in schools?

What does that have to do with anything? If your parents teach you about safe sex, but you ignore their advice and knock some girl up, does that mean that your parents shouldn't have taught you about safe sex?

?
You don't see the hypocrisy in preaching abstinence over sex-ed when your own daughter is not only having sex but pregnant?

As far as your question, duh. Teach abstinence *and* educate so if/when they do have sex they know the consequences and are prepared. Pregnancy isn't the only concern with sexual activity.

My parents taught me about safe sex (my Mom even worked for Planned Parenthood), I knocked up my girlfriend (now my wife) when I was 19 because we didn't use a condom. Would you call my parents hypocrits? This is the EXACT same thing btw.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,750
2,335
126
Originally posted by: shira

I guess you're not very familiar with the concept of irony.

The religious right is all caught up in how "pro-family" they are. Well, what it all adds up to is that all their bibles and all their morality and all their talk of the love of God don't amount to a hill of beans when it comes to the success of their marriages and the behavior of their kids. And yet - with absolutely nothing objective to show for their belief system, except the based-on-exactly-nothing self-satisfied smugness that their beliefs are right - STILL they want to impose their quaint, 18th-century reality on the rest of us.

Excuse my while I laugh at them.

I was taught about safe sex but I still knocked up my gf when I was 19, OMG stop teaching kids to use condoms it obviously doesn't work!!!!?!?!?!? You people aren't this stupid.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Robor
You don't see the hypocrisy in preaching abstinence over sex-ed when your own daughter is not only having sex but pregnant?

As far as your question, duh. Teach abstinence *and* educate so if/when they do have sex they know the consequences and are prepared. Pregnancy isn't the only concern with sexual activity.

Oh jesus really? How is it hypocritical of Palin her daughter made a decision that will change the rest of her life?

Is Gore a hypcrite because his son has been busted going 100 mph with drugs in his car yet he is for drug laws?

You are calling somebody a hypocrit based on another persons actions. It defies all logic.
It is hypocritical because abstinence is what Palin supports and stated on record would propose as policy and the very proof it doesn't work is in her own family. I'm not saying sex-ed would have prevented this situation - from what I read the school did have some form of it? My point is it's better to educate than simply say, 'Don't do it until you're married'.

Al Gore is not running for P/VP.

But that still doesnt make her a hypocrite. It puts egg on her face that her own kid didnt follow her instructions. But in no way does it make her a hypcrite.

The gore reference had nothing to do with who was running but to point out how silly your argument is that Palin is a hypocrit because of somebody elses actions. Al Gore is against drugs yet his son was in possession of them. So Al Gore is suddenly a hypocrite? Sorry I dont like Al but dont see how he is a hypocrite over his son's actions.

Lay the blame where it is deserved.

Ok, I'll concede that 'hypocrite' might be the wrong word but it doesn't excuse her pushing an abstinence-only policy. Less education on this subject is not the answer.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,750
2,335
126
Originally posted by: Robor


Ok, I'll concede that 'hypocrite' might be the wrong word but it doesn't excuse her pushing an abstinence-only policy. Less education on this subject is not the answer.

I'll agree with you there, abstinence-ONLY is stupid, although it should be included in sex ed.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: Robor

Ok, I'll concede that 'hypocrite' might be the wrong word but it doesn't excuse her pushing an abstinence-only policy. Less education on this subject is not the answer.

Thank you.

Now I have to admit that does trouble me about her. She is definately an old school conservative on some matters.
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Robor

Ok, I'll concede that 'hypocrite' might be the wrong word but it doesn't excuse her pushing an abstinence-only policy. Less education on this subject is not the answer.

Thank you.

Now I have to admit that does trouble me about her. She is definately an old school conservative on some matters.

I'm not a fan of abstinence only either, but lets face it here. This is faux outrage by the left. There has been abstinence only funding for a while now and there weren't any pitchforks until this whole pregnant daughter thing. They needed something negative and get media time for, and they got it.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
Originally posted by: JD50
I'll agree with you there, abstinence-ONLY is stupid, although it should be included in sex ed.

Yes. I was absolutely shocked when I got to college to find bags of condoms in the common areas on every single floor in every single dorm. These things were getting refilled every couple days. I had never been exposed to that in high school; sure, we learned about proper condom use, but the school wasn't throwing them at us for free. Now that I think about it, it's just good business sense for the school; after all, if a young girl gets pregnant, she may well drop out to focus on raising her baby, and that means less money coming in for the school. But the simple fact was the school provided all these resources and I didn't hear of a single person getting pregnant in my four years there (some scares, but no actual unplanned pregnancies).

Abstinence only education does not work. I'd argue that simply telling kids about condoms or other contraceptives doesn't do much either. Hand them out. Give them away free. "Oh my God, that will only encourage sex!" Teenage boys will encourage sex too; wouldn't it be better if they used some protection to prevent unplanned pregnancies and the spread of STDs? It seems like it would relieve some financial burden on the state. Make contraception publicly available to people who are likely to have sex and unlikely to buy it on their own; it benefits society as a whole.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,586
50,771
136
Originally posted by: TechAZ
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Robor

Ok, I'll concede that 'hypocrite' might be the wrong word but it doesn't excuse her pushing an abstinence-only policy. Less education on this subject is not the answer.

Thank you.

Now I have to admit that does trouble me about her. She is definately an old school conservative on some matters.

I'm not a fan of abstinence only either, but lets face it here. This is faux outrage by the left. There has been abstinence only funding for a while now and there weren't any pitchforks until this whole pregnant daughter thing. They needed something negative and get media time for, and they got it.

What are you talking about? People have been saying what a horrible idea abstinence only education is for years. We had a big long thread about it maybe 2 months ago.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,161
136
The GOP just needs to come off their high horse and act like a political party instead of a religious organization.
Maybe that is why such a thing as separation of church and state exists in the first place.
And to put some distance between right wing nut fundies taking over what was once a legit political party with their right wing fundie ideas and hypocrisy.

The average republican house hold has just as many Gay family members, just as many underage PG children, just as many substance abusers as your typical democratic household.

So why pretend that is not the case?

Let Gays legally marry? who really cares.
Teach birth control in school, when kids become sexually aware.
Put condom vending machines in school restrooms.
Accept there is a thing as man made global warming.

Start acting like a political party and not a religious organization above reproach.

Because until they do, they will have to suffer more and more hypocrisy.
 

TheSlamma

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
7,625
5
81
Being religion promotes overpopulation to help keep their donation pots filled I think abstinence education is working out exactly like they want it to.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,750
2,335
126
Originally posted by: sportage
The GOP just needs to come off their high horse and act like a political party instead of a religious organization.
Maybe that is why such a thing as separation of church and state exists in the first place.
And to put some distance between right wing nut fundies taking over what was once a legit political party with their right wing fundie ideas and hypocrisy.

The average republican house hold has just as many Gay family members, just as many underage PG children, just as many substance abusers as your typical democratic household.

So why pretend that is not the case?

Let Gays legally marry? who really cares.
Teach birth control in school, when kids become sexually aware.
Put condom vending machines in school restrooms.
Accept there is a thing as man made global warming.

Start acting like a political party and not a religious organization above reproach.

Because until they do, they will have to suffer more and more hypocrisy.

Once again, there is no hypocrisy going on here. Robor admitted it, why can't you?
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: lupi
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: lupi
It's nice to see Capt anti-America leading this ridiculous charge. From the campaign of let's not have our kids punished with a child comes the blown up in their face Palin is covering for childs pregnacy. Then the move on with the story modified so they don't look like the complete dumbass they are. If this was a religious right hypocrisy story like so many of you idiots are having wet dreams of (BTW, it was oh so nice to hear at least 2 prominant dems mention that the hurricane hitting NO on the opening day of the rep convention was a sign that god favored them), then it would be about the girl aborting the baby. Wow, news story at 11, american female verifies that human reproduction still occurs, stay tuned for further breaking news. If she was young enough that Chris Hanson would be walking in to the dad asking him to have a seat, that's a news story. This, not so much.

So it sounds like you're comfortable with the left's handling of this issue. Glad to hear that.

Yep. And JP thinks US soliders are honorable people doing an honorable job and travels to the airport to cheer their return home.

I don't know about the going-to-the-airport stuff, but I'm sure you're right that jpeyton respects and supports our soldiers. Glad to see you acknowledge JP's humanity.

:D
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: jonks
I'm not reading 47 pages. I'll just say I think it's irrelevent to her qualifications for VP (which she isn't qualified for anyway) except that it might piss of people in her own party. As to laying off of other people's daughters, half the country apparently wants to vote for the guy who thought this was a good idea:

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno.?
? Sen. John McCain, speaking to a Republican dinner, June 1998.

Heh you sure that wasnt Rush Limbaugh?

yep.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/f...F932A15755C0A96E958260

But hey, he apologized, so it's cool.

Dems are going to be hitting the 'temperment' button a lot in the coming months. Bet this story makes a resurgence, at least on the blog level, and probably on KO and other lefty shows. Then they'll transition to his comment about "gooks." The president is our #1 diplomat and world representative...it doesn't exactly scream prudence and discretion.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,500
6
81
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: shira

I guess you're not very familiar with the concept of irony.

The religious right is all caught up in how "pro-family" they are. Well, what it all adds up to is that all their bibles and all their morality and all their talk of the love of God don't amount to a hill of beans when it comes to the success of their marriages and the behavior of their kids. And yet - with absolutely nothing objective to show for their belief system, except the based-on-exactly-nothing self-satisfied smugness that their beliefs are right - STILL they want to impose their quaint, 18th-century reality on the rest of us.

Excuse my while I laugh at them.

I was taught about safe sex but I still knocked up my gf when I was 19, OMG stop teaching kids to use condoms it obviously doesn't work!!!!?!?!?!? You people aren't this stupid.
Of course not. There will always be teen pregnancies regardless of how well-prepared kids are. The difference is choice. Stress abstinence, of course. But don't deprive kids of additional information. And if some parents don't want their kids to learn about contraception, let them opt out of that portion of the course.

It's the difference between acting as if you've got all the answers for everyone, and knowing that there isn't a single right answer.

And, frankly, it gets old pretty fast when these true believers characterize everything as gifts or challenges from God. Don't mess around before marriage. But if you do and get preggers, it's a blessing from God. Do these loonies realize how ridiculous they sound? If God is such a meddler in human affairs, what the fvck is this "free will" stuff? Does God just sort of randomly meddle? Is it impossible to know his "mysterious ways?" How come we have to pray to God for miracles? Doesn't God know everything we want before we utter a word? Before we even think it? Or is it that God is just so distracted with a trillion details we've got to get his attention by praying? Why does God need to even see us making the effort - He either knows we really believe or that we don't. So what's with all the fervency? Why force us into a kabuki dance?

If God wants devotion and belief, why doesn't he just come on down from his throne and perform a few undeniable, stupendous miracles for all the world to see? Why is "blind faith" considered such a virtue when it comes to Christianity, when in every other aspect of life, operating without getting a little confirmation would be considered gross negligence? Come to think of it, why doesn't God just plant belief in our little brains?

And how come a person's reason for believing doesn't matter? I mean, if someone believes because that'll get them the goods, isn't that disreputable? Why isn't believing for no reason other than that the belief justifies itself - with no selfish motives at all - the only valid reason for believing? And if I, recognizing that it's disreputable to believe in order to get something in return, refuse to believe unless I can hold that belief for "pure" reasons", end up NOT believing, how come I'm punished for taking the high road?

Sorry for the rant and for seeming so intolerant. I'm really not - I'm comfortable with other people getting comfort however they can in this bitter world. But why the need to impose all this stuff on others?
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,500
6
81
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
Originally posted by: JD50
I'll agree with you there, abstinence-ONLY is stupid, although it should be included in sex ed.

Yes. I was absolutely shocked when I got to college to find bags of condoms in the common areas on every single floor in every single dorm. These things were getting refilled every couple days. I had never been exposed to that in high school; sure, we learned about proper condom use, but the school wasn't throwing them at us for free. Now that I think about it, it's just good business sense for the school; after all, if a young girl gets pregnant, she may well drop out to focus on raising her baby, and that means less money coming in for the school. But the simple fact was the school provided all these resources and I didn't hear of a single person getting pregnant in my four years there (some scares, but no actual unplanned pregnancies).

Abstinence only education does not work. I'd argue that simply telling kids about condoms or other contraceptives doesn't do much either. Hand them out. Give them away free. "Oh my God, that will only encourage sex!" Teenage boys will encourage sex too; wouldn't it be better if they used some protection to prevent unplanned pregnancies and the spread of STDs? It seems like it would relieve some financial burden on the state. Make contraception publicly available to people who are likely to have sex and unlikely to buy it on their own; it benefits society as a whole.

I'd also teach teenage girls about the psychological ploys boys use to get in their pants, and how to resists those ploys. And although I was never fortunate enough to be in a position where a girl tried to seduce me, I guess boys should be taught how to resist, too.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: TechAZ
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Robor

Ok, I'll concede that 'hypocrite' might be the wrong word but it doesn't excuse her pushing an abstinence-only policy. Less education on this subject is not the answer.

Thank you.

Now I have to admit that does trouble me about her. She is definately an old school conservative on some matters.

I'm not a fan of abstinence only either, but lets face it here. This is faux outrage by the left. There has been abstinence only funding for a while now and there weren't any pitchforks until this whole pregnant daughter thing. They needed something negative and get media time for, and they got it.

The left has always stood against absinence-only education. Just because it hasn't had any recent new conflict and stories doesn't mean the left changed position.

That's how news works. If her big issue were prayer in school, you would be seeing the debate about that, not because the left has suddenly opposed just because of her.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: JD50

I was taught about safe sex but I still knocked up my gf when I was 19, OMG stop teaching kids to use condoms it obviously doesn't work!!!!?!?!?!? You people aren't this stupid.


Your logic is wrong. Sex Ed *increases the chances overall* for students to avoid teen prgnancy.

The fact that it doesn't work for some, even the fact that it might make some get pregnanct who wouldn't have by getting them interested in sex, doesn't change that.

The argument isn't 'ban abstinence only education because one student gets pregnant'. The argument is 'ban abstinence only education' because overall it doesn't work as well'.
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: JD50

I was taught about safe sex but I still knocked up my gf when I was 19, OMG stop teaching kids to use condoms it obviously doesn't work!!!!?!?!?!? You people aren't this stupid.


Your logic is wrong. Sex Ed *increases the chances overall* for students to avoid teen prgnancy.

The fact that it doesn't work for some, even the fact that it might make some get pregnanct who wouldn't have by getting them interested in sex, doesn't change that.

The argument isn't 'ban abstinence only education because one student gets pregnant'. The argument is 'ban abstinence only education' because overall it doesn't work as well'.

Even the thought of the word "pregnancy" makes your mind so scared and jumbled that you mistype it each time you try.. I feel your pain brother
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
Originally posted by: Farang
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: JD50

I was taught about safe sex but I still knocked up my gf when I was 19, OMG stop teaching kids to use condoms it obviously doesn't work!!!!?!?!?!? You people aren't this stupid.


Your logic is wrong. Sex Ed *increases the chances overall* for students to avoid teen prgnancy.

The fact that it doesn't work for some, even the fact that it might make some get pregnanct who wouldn't have by getting them interested in sex, doesn't change that.

The argument isn't 'ban abstinence only education because one student gets pregnant'. The argument is 'ban abstinence only education' because overall it doesn't work as well'.

Even the thought of the word "pregnancy" makes your mind so scared and jumbled that you mistype it each time you try.. I feel your pain brother

It's cause only Rpublicnas get pregnant. Repulbpicans... Repubiclan... Not us.