Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 33 to 40 of 41

Thread: So flame away but I've got to say it.

  1. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    933

    Re: So flame away but I've got to say it.

    Well this may or may not be a flame but I applaud her for not making her daughter murder her unborn child. Teens make mistakes and shes owning up to hers. Her daughter is not running for VP so should have nothing to do with the whole war on politics but sadly she is.

    Now as far as instilling values in my children NO ONE on television does that. Its my job as their mother. When Zoey 101 became pregnant the show was not shown in my home and my children were explained why and they were told it was a very bad thing to do "have a baby as a baby" and we don't care to even support the show. My children look up to me they don't need to look up to the possible VP's daughter.

  2. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    747

    Re: So flame away but I've got to say it.

    I am not sure what is wrong with having an individual who is more representative of the public in public offfice. I believe she will better understand the American experience rather than the host of congressmen/Senators who are all devoid of understanding all our plight...not just the "working class". fact is, th TRUELY rich wont pay much in the way of taxes anyway...250K these days IS middle class.

  3. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    747

    Re: So flame away but I've got to say it.

    Just because a kid is pregnant, doesn;t mean that the family doesn;t provide a message of family values or absinence. Kids ignore parents...its the way it is. What is indded hypocritical is the likes of John Edwards who is talking of "family morals" and he is actually cheating on his wife...blaming a woman like Palin for her daughters actions is not even in the same ball park. That said, family values and morality is something to aim toward, its not an absolute. We all try our best, but I believe most of us err. fact is that family values is about supporting the BEST option for families and the repubs have policies that support that over the dems. What constitutes the BEST family option for dems? A mom and dad? A single Mom? Two gay people? Dem polices promote all of the above whereas repubs believe the BEST (not only) option is a Mom and Dad, female and male....democrats believe anything goes...look at the effect the lack of male influence on the black community has had? Truthfully look at it...then assess what family vaules are really about.

  4. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    14,676

    Post Re: So flame away but I've got to say it.

    Attacking Palin on family values because her daughter is pregnant is ludicrous. Just because her daughter is pregnant, doesn't mean that Palin doesn't believe in family values. Would people be throwing stones at her if one of her kids was gay? Or a drug addict?
    Haven't we, as a society, moved away from attaching stigma to such things?
    And since when is someone's parenting judged by the actions of their child?
    People who are and have been exceptionally good parents have kids who make mistakes. That's life.

  5. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    9,507

    Post Re: So flame away but I've got to say it.

    But Palin isn't being criticized because her daughter is pregnant. She's being rightfully questioned on why she wouldn't allow other girls to have the same choice that her own daughter has.
    A woman who not only flaunts her mothering experience as qualifications for a job.........but is also on record as insisting that teens who are raped should have to bear the babies of their rapists............shouldn't have any problem with questions about it......should she?

  6. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Posts
    1,947

    Post Re: So flame away but I've got to say it.

    Quote Originally Posted by reines View Post
    But Palin isn't being criticized because her daughter is pregnant. She's being rightfully questioned on why she wouldn't allow other girls to have the same choice that her own daughter has.
    A woman who not only flaunts her mothering experience as qualifications for a job.........but is also on record as insisting that teens who are raped should have to bear the babies of their rapists............shouldn't have any problem with questions about it......should she?
    Oh the entire thread is directed at the original post, where I criticized she made a choice to accept such a high profile position instead of dealing with some complex family issues and help her daughter through it. I'm now a raging sexist because I have the opinion that, as I've lived the life of a woman who tries to have it all, I do think women can't have it "all" and that sometimes something has to give. That we actually are killing ourselves trying to be superwomen.

    Ought to be interesting to watch her make what will be undoubtedly devastating choices leaving her baby at home and not be around to help her daughter and grand child. But then again, I'm being biased because men do it and nobody questions them (even when they do question Edwards' decision to run instead of being with his wife and kids as she battles cancer)

  7. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    9,507

    Post Re: So flame away but I've got to say it.

    Again, megan, it's the hypocrisy of the Republicans that's up for criticism. I have a personal opinion on Palin choosing to have five children while also choosing a career that guarantees little real time with them- but that's coming from my own personal experience and beliefs.
    It certainly isn't why I would criticize Palin's competence to be VP..........or the wisdom of voting for a 72 year old candidate with health issues with her on the ticket.
    IMO this is all a big smokscreen to keep voters (especially women) from focusing on what really matters- the issues. As long as they can keep the focus on how women are supposedly being insulted by Obama (ridiculous!) or how voting for Palin is supposedly a vote for women's rights and affirmation- they keep voters from actually looking at who's best positioned to actually lead and govern.
    There's two things going on here, IMO. The concerted effort to warp women voter's support onto Palin by trickery and emotional string-pulling..........and the incredible hypocrisy of a party that historically wants women only barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen now rushing to embrace women's rights! The really ironic part is- if the conservative, fundamental religious right had had their way in the past thirty years- Palin wouldn't even have ever been allowed to run for office in the first place.
    Hell- let's go back further- she wouldn't even have been allowed to vote!

  8. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    747

    Post Re: So flame away but I've got to say it.

    Question to the conservative/or Palin supporting ladies here...are you "smoke screened" from the issues? Do you traditionally believe that women should be barefoot and pregnant? Personlly, I would GLADLY compare Palin's resume with Obamas, and even leave off the fact that she is a woman and he's a man.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •