A
male
 ,
anonymous
writes:[Part of a DearCupid series on the forthcoming Nov 08 presidential election]Sarah Palin, John McCain's choice for vice-president, is a strict anti-abortionist, pro-guns and against sex-education.Her 17 year old daughter is now pregnant.Should she be able to tell others that their kids can't have sex-ed? That abstinence-only education is the way forward and the only type of "education" that will be government funded?When government wants to get involved in a person's reproductive rights, does that mean their candidate's waive their right to their own family privacy?Discuss. Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
reader, anonymous, writes (4 September 2008): To be quite honest - and I might be hunted down for this - American politics and electing the new President is just based on propaganda.
The posters, the huge events, the glamour. Hardly any of them (citizens) know about their policies. Heck we don't know about what our Prime Minister stands for, but at least when election time comes it doesn't follow the American lead.
Granted, America is a bigger country than us. But don't you see a pattern when the States are voting for whoe they want to represent their party. If one senator looses one, they win the next. Speeches after speeches begging people to vote them in.
People with the least money, and unable to try and fund this grand events don't seem to make it through.
Along with what the media say - and most of what they say is biast crap - it is just down to propoganda.
Answering your question, if John McCain thinks she is then she is. Surely McCain is one of the smartest men in America. Its his party so he should know whats best for it - and the only one who does. The Republicans voted him in so they obviously agree with something - something they've heard they agree with maybe.
A
female
reader, SirenaBlusera  +, writes (3 September 2008):
 When Rush Limbaugh said that this election is not going to be about which candidate you are "for"... people are either going to vote AGAINST Obama, or AGAINST McCain... one of the few times that he has been right.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (3 September 2008): Just for you Diovan -
http://www.historyworld.co.uk/advert.php?id=888&offset=0&sort=0&l1=Alcohol&l2=
and Sarah might be related to Michael?
...............................
A
female
reader, eyeswideopen  +, writes (3 September 2008):
 Exactly.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (3 September 2008): Sorry who is Sarah Palin, and whats a VP?
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (3 September 2008): Hi Collary,
I agree with you about why I hate doing politics on DC... Uncle Phil mention useless, and Gordon Brown is definately that. But if we were talking about Evil.. well Thatcher and her adopted son Blair would take the first place prize. I remember the 1980's, UK was a really sad place to be, and I for one will never, ever forget or forgive.
Like you say Collary, the guns issue is a no runner in the UK... We are even started to get worried about the police, it was a dreadfull thing when they shot down that innocent Brazillian guy by mistake.. Less guns, not more is the overwhelming view over here, we are now starting to move on to discussing how we can take away knives from our children...
We share the same language as the USA... but customs and culture are so different, that it seems insane sometimes.. Our governement and our culture, promotes and supports sex education. Again abstinence programmes is something we never do... Sorry, but that's the view from the UK.
Roll on November so we can become agony aunts again.... sigh....
...............................
A
female
reader, eyeswideopen +, writes (3 September 2008):
More like "Hamburg".
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (3 September 2008): I think one of the more amusing things is her daughter's name - Bristol. Over here 'Bristols' or 'Bristol Rovers' is a slang term for breasts, so I suppose a bristol is just one of them. The parents could have been so much more expressive if they'd called her 'Baby's Bag Meal'.
Would Paris Hilton have been named 'Frankfurt' if she was born a boy?
...............................
A
female
reader, eyeswideopen +, writes (3 September 2008):
I heard she was in some kind of beauty pageant.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (3 September 2008): . . . . but Sarah Palin IS very good-looking isn't she? If I could, I'd vote for her if she offered to give me a kiss.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (3 September 2008): I thought this site was called 'Dear Cupid" for people with problems and after all, we get politics rammed down our throats from every other quarter. So not really appropriate to answer!
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (3 September 2008): There's nothing to understand. It's just modern conservative politics at work.Don't look for logic. There isn't any.
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (3 September 2008): @cupidguy
"Out of the 4 candidates, Sarah Palin is by far the one closest to what this country (USA) needs from the same old politics. Someone who will reveal corruption, wasteful spending."
Did you know that she campaigned for the "bridge to no-where" before she was against it?
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSN3125537020080901
Did you know that she has campaigned for Alaskan independance in the past, so is hardly committed to the union and everything that makes it great!
I think she's an odd and unsuitable choice for VP.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/03/uselections2008.republicans20082?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront
...............................
A
female
reader, BendychickP  +, writes (3 September 2008):
 I think that no sex-education is farely stupid, and it could lead to many teens getting pregnant, but not necessarily. Just because her teenage daughter is pregnant, doesn't mean it is her fault. You can't really say what is going on in their lives at this time. You shouldn't really judge political candidates on what their children do, because at a certain age, you can't really control what your children do. Besides, just because people say she is against it, doesn't necessarily mean she is. And that may just be her opinion or belief. And also, no offence, but I don't really think this has much to do with relationships, more with politics.
Take care,
Bendy xx
...............................
A
female
reader, xkokox +, writes (3 September 2008):
 The pregnancy of her teenage daughter, Is infact a personal matter and has nothing do with how good of a candidate she is. It's not because her mother didn't look after her enough. Mothers can warn and nag their teenagers as much as they want that doesn't mean they'll listen, I'd know because of all of the times I haven't. It was the daughter's mistake not hers. If I went out and got pregnant right now, I would be to blame, not my mother. And pro-guns is fine it's our constitutional right to bear arms, how would hunting take place? Sex education should not be offered in schools, I'm almost 16 and my parents never talked to me about sex, they just relied on the school system to teach it to me instead of taking the initiative to clarify things for me.
...............................
A
male
reader, Danielepew +, writes (3 September 2008):
 I know about much worse people who are in power now, in several countries. I propose an exchange: you give me your Gordon Brown and Sarah Palin, and I will give you one or two of our guys. Or I might feel generous and will give you the whole ENCHILADA: a combo of all eight of them. Sorry, we don't accept claims after the merchandise has left the premises.
...............................
A
male
reader, Collaroy +, writes (3 September 2008):
 Hi Uncle Phil,
I lived in the U.K for 10 years under Thatcher and Major.. so I dont know about useless but I lived under the most evil and the most boring. That's your point of view Uncle Phil and now I've given you mine. This is why I hate politics on Dc
But I dont like these threads on DC, politics should really be left out of DC.
Most of us outside of the States will see the posters above, posters we all like and think to be lovely people coming out with the "guns are fine" or "government should play little part in the individual's life" and think , hell are these people crazy?
If you own a gun in Australia you are considered a nutcase, in America it is the norm. I prefer the Australian ideology, hardly anyone gets killed by their jealous husband/wives/boyfriends/girlfriends over here - they might get a frying pan in the face in America its a bullet in the head.
And if I may be political , I think anyone who believes in the effectiveness of abstinence only programs seriously needs their head read - teenagers are teenagers they need to know that having sex without protection will end up in pregnancy and should have condoms available to them if they are . Palin's daughter will be fine as she has a wealthy family who will support her , her doting husband to be will get his college education and walk into a job through the old boys network, millions of other young teenagers dont have these privilege and will spend a life of abject misery as single parents- that is the difference between Palin's kind and the real world.
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (3 September 2008): many of the liberal gun-grabbers want you to think that criminals are running around with fully automatic ak47s,when in reality that would require them to register with the BATFE and it would cost at least 8,000 dollars. you could call the police while someone breaks in your house,rapes you and gives you HIV.you need to have a gun to defend yourself on the spot. alot of the anti-gun activist telling you how much homocides occur because of guns and how a fraction of the are in self defence but there not telling you how much lives guns are saving, thats because most of the time you dont even have to shoot the criminal to save yourself... most of the time just the sight of the gun will scare them away. Gun Laws just dissarm lawful owners of firearms not the criminals, a 7 year firearm violation is nothing to them when they murder somebody.
...............................
A
male
reader, Sandman +, writes (2 September 2008):
 Hmmm...
I don't think she makes a good candidate simply because she doesn't know what her potential will entail. She's already said (before being nominated) that she would consider the job of VP (paraphrasing) "...if someone could tell me what the VP does everyday..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=006axc2aELE
Sooooo....she doesn't know what a VP does but is on the ticket to be the VP? Scary. But hey, to her credit, and McCain's, neither one has been President or Vice President - so does that make them bad candidates? I don't know.
As to the teenage pregnancy thing. The fact that her teenage daughter is pregnant has nothing to do with abstinence only education and comprehensive sex education - TEENS WILL BE TEENS! Some will have sex and some won't. It's just what it is. Parents need to take a step in this right direction and start teaching their children about sex before the world does.
I don't think government needs to be in the bedrooms of its citizens. What happens in the bedroom is private between consenting adults. We do need to protect our children, but we need to leave the front line of protection to the parents; not liberals - not conservatives. But the parents.
Hope this helps.
...............................
A
female
reader, dearkelja +, writes (2 September 2008):
 Yes..she is as qualified as most and more qualified than many. To compare her qualifications to Obama's (which is going on here in the US) is wrong. They are not running for the same position.
Regarding the Government getting involved in people's personal life...why not...aren't we trying to educate the same people line up for AFDC which are government funds.
I'm all for freedom and freedom of choice but when you ask me for my money...you are going to get my opinion on how to spend it.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (2 September 2008): Quote: "That's why I oppose controls on both abortion AND guns. And why I favor sex education from parents."
I agree, to a point. I don't want to see fully automatic AK47s allowed on the street, or in the house for that matter. A shotgun is a far more effective way to protect your family at home. I also agree that sex education should come from the parents. The problem is that few parents give their children any meaningful amount of sex education. The only sex education that my wife and I ever got from our parents is that women (and men from my mother) who have sex with more than one person in their lives are sluts, whores and unworthy. What kind of sex education is that? This is why government needs to get involved.
...............................
A
male
reader, ChiRaven +, writes (2 September 2008):
 Actually, she isn't telling anybody their kids can't have sex education. She is saying that it's time that the PARENTS stood up and took the responsibility for giving their children the proper education in that vital part of their lives. So that we wouldn't have all these teens writing in here saying "I just CAN'T tell my parents I'm pregnant." You can just bet that those parents never had the kind of open talks with those kids about sex that those kids needed, never opened the channels of communication that would make the kids comfortable with talking to them about sex. As Palin's daughter obviously was, by the way. Her parents knew about the pregnancy from early on.
Pro gun? Ever been to Alaska? Most of it's not exactly a place where you're going to be able to call the local police in time to do yourself any good if you run into real trouble. They have a tradition of having to rely on what they can supply themselves there. That includes protection. And Americans have rights under the constitution that we now know, thanks to a recent Supreme Court decision, include some rights to "keep and bear arms."
The abortion debate is contentious, but at the heart it hinges on one central question: at what point is it murder. Even the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that prevented government from interfering with most abortion decisions and keeps them private recognized that at some point in a pregnancy the state acquires a legitimate interest in protecting the life of the fetus. (Surprised? Go look it up.)
I personally believe that that debate is just part of a larger question that will prove to the THE central moral question of the 21st century: what EXACTLY is the definition of a human being. The application of this question to the problem of abortion is obvious. But it is much broader. As technology advances in this century we will see that question cropping up more and more often. Bioethicists are already debating the problem of human-animal hybrids, for example. What if we manage to augment a human brain by melding it with a computer? Is the result still human? What if we go the other way, and add a human brain TO a computer? Does the computer become human? How much "human" intelligence (biologically based) does a biological/silicon composite intelligence have to have to be considered human? And there is always the slim chance that this century could even bring us into contact with extraterrestrial intelligence. Not likely, but possible. We need to fully understand what we mean when we say that something is or is not human, does or does not have human rights. And it's not a question we can just ignore, because it won't go away and it will only get worse.
We've got a lot more than social issues on our plate in this election. Issues of the economy and foreign policy will probably dominate the public stage. But if we're going to frame questions in terms of social issues we should do so in some sort of rational manner and look at them from a dispassionate viewpoint.
I personally believe that the less government control we have in our lives the better. That's why I oppose controls on both abortion AND guns. And why I favor sex education from parents. I don't trust government not to screw it up. But those are just my views. And it's why I find it so hard to locate a candidate who I can really support wholeheartedly in this election. But I keep trying.
...............................
A
female
reader, Yargh +, writes (2 September 2008):
 No, but for more reasons than her "abstinence only" stance. She thinks that creationism should be taught in PUBLIC schools, that global warming is not caused by man, that the pledge of allegiance was written by the founding fathers, and the list goes on. See this site for a more comprehensive list of what she has going against her: http://www.politicalbase.com/profile/jnail/blog/&blogId=3385
I really do hope that she is the last nail in McCain's Coffin!
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (2 September 2008): Eyes, I just go home and cry and wonder how the new congress and president are going to screw up everything.
...............................
A
female
reader, eyeswideopen +, writes (2 September 2008):
I'm with you Trouble, and after I cast my votes all over the board, I usually go home and get tight.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (2 September 2008): Hey Uncle Phil.. do you have the same google links as me.. Someone's running a poll with the same question as you just put here.. now that's really funny.. lol
...............................
A
male
reader, daletom +, writes (2 September 2008):
It sounds like you're trying to link a handful of unrelated matters into one sensationalist question, but I'm not sure what the question is.
Do we know whether Palin's children were educated in an abstinence-only monastery, or by if-it-feels-good-do-it public teachers? And is a pregnant teenager the worst failing a parent can have? If so, what does it say about the child's character for choosing to carry the baby to term and raise it to be a responsible adult? And besides, is Palin running to be elected as a parent, or as vice president?
And by the way, "anonymous male" (the thread starter): What precinct are you registered to vote in?
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (2 September 2008): I don't think that her personal life or her daughter's personal life should have anything to do with it. I just think that her thinking is dangerous and makes her an undesirable candidate. By the way, I'm moderate, so I never actually like any of the final candidates in either party. I like some ideas from both parties and usually split my vote 50-50 amongst all of the offices on the ballot.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (2 September 2008): Uncle Phil there are other candidates for that post, apart from our Dear Gordy.... I submit as a good example, William Cavendish-Bentinck, 3rd Duke of Portland who ruled in 1783
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (2 September 2008): To answer a question with a question - is Gordon Brown the most useless Prime Minister we've ever had?
...............................
|
