# I have one question for Sarah Palin . . . **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 4, 2008, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-one-question-for-sarah-palin/461918 "2008-09-04T01:24:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Pashnish\_Ewing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8797f3/32.png) [@Pashnish\_Ewing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pashnish_Ewing)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2008, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-one-question-for-sarah-palin/461918/81 "2008-09-04T23:14:28Z")
> [@Otto](#): > > Nah, that’s for people who work out at the gym way to much. I’d suggest “court rat” but that seems to be for tennis. Let’s go with “Baller”. See [definition #2](http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=baller) ---
**Author:** ![Figaro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ea666f/32.png) [@Figaro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Figaro)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2008, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-one-question-for-sarah-palin/461918/82 "2008-09-04T23:22:48Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Hey, I’m with you that abstenance only = makes no sense. > > But I ask you this: doesn’t _any_ politician having a pregnant teen daughter = a “reminder that [their chosen policy on sexual education] represents bad public policy”? Even if the policy at issue was one that we would both _approve_ of? > > Say a liberal politician believed in full, frank discussion of sexual health, and the ready availability of birth control for teens (which I personally believe to be the correct policy). Then their teen daughter gets knocked up. > > Does that mean that their policy has been thus proven wrong? I just don’t see it. I agree with you. My point was not well made. Palin’s daughter, as one person, can’t be the proof or lie of any public policy since she’s just one person. But the fact of her pregnancy, spotlit right behind her mother on stage, shines a symbolic light on the conflict between sensible public policy and attempts to legislate morality. The irony is in the symbolism, not in the fact of Palin’s pregnancy specifically. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2008, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-one-question-for-sarah-palin/461918/83 "2008-09-04T23:29:47Z")
I’m not pro-life, and I don’t agree with abstinence-only education, but again, the stereotype of Palin is a little off the mark. She’s a member of [Feminists for Life](http://www.feministsforlife.org/). From this article: [Sarah Palin - Feminist for Life](http://www.lifenews.com/nat4237.html) > [@](#): > > Most Americans heard the name Sarah Palin for the first time on Friday as Senator John McCain named her as his running mate. They’re getting a glimpse of the fact that the Alaska governor is pro-life on abortion, but what they may not know is she takes a unique approach to her position. > > Palin is a member of Feminists for Life of America – a venerable but little known pro-life group that focuses on the pro-woman reasons for opposing abortion. > > The organization is considered an expert on understand how abortion hurts women and the complications abortion involves from a medical, physical and mental health standpoint. > > Beyond that, Feminists for Life has championed the notion that one of the best ways to reduce abortion is to do the kind of work abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood should, but aren’t doing – namely, providing pregnant women with resources they need. > > Feminists for Life has spearheaded efforts to make sure pregnant and parenting college students, who have the highest abortion rates in the nation, get tangible help like medical referrals, child-care and assistance in completing their education. > > Palin, a mother of five, recognized the need to do more than say she opposes abortion and joined the organization. > > In August 2006, she told the Anchorage Daily News, she recognized the struggle young women face in an unplanned pregnancy saying, “no woman should have to choose between her career, education and her child.” > > For Palin, there is no inconsistency between advocating for women and taking a pro-life position. > > “I believe in the strength and the power of women, and the potential of every human life,” she said. Given that, I don’t see anything remotely hypocritical in her position regarding her daughter. It seems that this organization’s main position is that the best way to avoid abortions is to give pregnant women the support they need to have their children without ruining their lives. Sounds like pretty much exactly what Palin is doing, isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2008, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-one-question-for-sarah-palin/461918/84 "2008-09-04T23:52:29Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I’m not pro-life, and I don’t agree with abstinence-only education, but again, the stereotype of Palin is a little off the mark. She’s a member of [Feminists for Life](http://www.feministsforlife.org/). > > From this article: [Sarah Palin - Feminist for Life](http://www.lifenews.com/nat4237.html) > > Given that, I don’t see anything remotely hypocritical in her position regarding her daughter. It seems that this organization’s main position is that the best way to avoid abortions is to give pregnant women the support they need to have their children without ruining their lives. Sounds like pretty much exactly what Palin is doing, isn’t it? Well, I’d think that the best way to avoid abortions is to avoid unwanted pregnancies in the first place, therefore giving women the support that they need should be in the form of helping then know how to avoid pregnancy in the first place by something other than “abstinance”? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2008, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-one-question-for-sarah-palin/461918/85 "2008-09-05T00:01:01Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Hey, I’m with you that abstenance only = makes no sense. > > But I ask you this: doesn’t _any_ politician having a pregnant teen daughter = a “reminder that [their chosen policy on sexual education] represents bad public policy”? Even if the policy at issue was one that we would both _approve_ of? > > Say a liberal politician believed in full, frank discussion of sexual health, and the ready availability of birth control for teens (which I personally believe to be the correct policy). Then their teen daughter gets knocked up. > > Does that mean that their policy has been thus proven wrong? I just don’t see it. You can still get hurt playing football even if you wear pads and a helmet. Does that mean it’s just as safe to play without them as with them? Of course it’s possible to give a kid all the information you can about birth control and still have them get pregnant, but at least you tried, and you didn’t leave anything out. Teaching Abstinence Only is like playing without pads. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2008, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-one-question-for-sarah-palin/461918/86 "2008-09-05T00:06:18Z")
I’m as irked by the “but they’re planning to get married” thing as by the “abstinence only is working” bumper sticker on her belly. Think back to the people you were dating when you were 17. Some of you may have married them, but most probably didn’t, with a reason. I can understand her having the kid, I can understand the father taking an interest, but at 17 you’re a baby yourself, you don’t know who you are or what you believe in, and to be put in a shotgun marriage is just as likely to compound rather than lessen the problems. Two teenagers with no college and no history of responsibility being told “go make it work”- even with financial support and the like- is just sort of scary. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2008, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-one-question-for-sarah-palin/461918/87 "2008-09-05T13:36:13Z")
> [@Figaro](#): > > I agree with you. My point was not well made. Palin’s daughter, as one person, can’t be the proof or lie of any public policy since she’s just one person. But the fact of her pregnancy, spotlit right behind her mother on stage, shines a symbolic light on the conflict between sensible public policy and attempts to legislate morality. The irony is in the symbolism, not in the fact of Palin’s pregnancy specifically. This isn’t so much an argument as a reaction. It would work perfectly - as long as others share the same ideas about what a “sensible public policy” is. For those who believe that abstenance _is_ the “sensible public policy”, having a teen daughter pregnant has the opposite effect - i.e. ‘she’s no hypocrite, she knows first hand how difficult it is to deal with kid’s sexuality’. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2008, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-one-question-for-sarah-palin/461918/88 "2008-09-05T13:42:35Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > You can still get hurt playing football even if you wear pads and a helmet. Does that mean it’s just as safe to play without them as with them? > > Of course it’s possible to give a kid all the information you can about birth control and still have them get pregnant, but at least you tried, and you didn’t leave anything out. Teaching Abstinence Only is like playing without pads. You are arguing a point not on dispute. Of course “abstenance only” makes no sense, we all agree on that. The issue isn’t that, it is whether having a pregnant teen daughter _discredits your position on the issue_ - whatever it happens to be. Say two parents hold different views on football safety. One believes that the safest game is regular football, with pads and a helmet. Another believes that this isn’t really safe at all - the safest game is touch football, without equipment, because there is no tackling. They both have kids. Each acts on their beliefs. Both kids are injured. Whose point of view is discredited? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-one-question-for-sarah-palin/461918.md?page=4)