There are ironies, and then there are real ironies. In the aftermath of Bristol Palin's candid interview with Greta Van Susteren this week about teen abstinence, one of mom Sarah Palin's chief support groups -- right-wing evangelicals who promote abstinence -- tore into Bristol over her comments on Fox News that "abstinence is unrealistic."
In a statement entitled "The Cold Hard Facts Melt Myth That Abstinence Is Unrealistic," the National Abstinence Education Association (NAEA), an organization dedicated "to serve, support and represent individuals and organizations in the practice of abstinence education," issued a rather harsh and direct response to Bristol's claim:
During Sarah Palin's recent vice-presidential bid, her unmarried teen daughter Bristol's pregnancy became a hot campaign topic. As a follow-up report on this compelling human interest story, Fox News Commentator Greta van Susteren, asked Bristol Palin about abstinence. Bristol shared her view that "abstinence is....not realistic at all." It is suspect that media, seemingly devoted to science based research, is quick to claim Bristol Palin's experience as proof positive that abstinence education for all teens should end...
The NAEA statement concluded:
While Bristol's story makes for an interesting human-interest story, her comment should not be the basis to form public policy on the complex issue of teen sex especially if we look at the facts regarding the teen sexual activity.
I'm not going to touch NAEA's implied reference to Fox News with a ten-foot pole. But only weeks after Sarah Palin said "leave my kids alone," her biggest "news" promoter, Van Susteren, sneaks into Alaska behind Palin's back for a ratings-grabbing interview with Bristol. And then a conservative Christian group goes after her daughter.
Where's Palin's vituperative comeback at Van Susteren or the NAEA?
Her silence says truck loads.
I've written more than two dozen pieces on Palin since she was picked to ride shotgun with John McCain, and I've never once mentioned Bristol and her pregnancy. But now that Bristol is 18 and coming forward with public interviews of her own about issues such as teen-pregnancy and abstinence, I felt compelled to point out the irony of this new attack on Bristol and the hypocrisy of Palin's silence.
Moreover, this is not the first time that the NAEA has used Bristol's pregnancy to advance its own cause. Last September, Valerie Huber, the executive director of NAEA, invoked Bristol's pregnancy in an op-ed piece for USA Today pushing the abstinence myth.
The governor was silent then, too.
I don't pretend to be an expert on teen pregnancy. But for the record, I think Bristol was spot-on in her comments about abstinence. If Sarah Palin's evangelical base really wants to confront teen pregnancy, they'd be smart to listen to Bristol Palin and others in her shoes and absorb some of their real-life wisdom.
How exciting. Your reference to the Bronze Age is very interesting. I studied Biblical Archaeology in Israel and it is rare for anyone, other than archaeologists and their students, to know about the Bronze Age, let alone refer to it. Your point is very well taken.
quote:
Palin's idea of sex education is teaching abstinence only. Clearly this notion of schooling has been thriving in her family... Palin, the beacon of Victorian morality, the icon of the far right Christian notion of the purpose of sex, clearly didn't have enough time to properly parent her own kids. I think she can keep her opinions to herself. Bristol, thank you for your candor.
/quote
Amazing, finally something I can agree with one of the Palins on.
I hope that my own children wait until they are at least 18 and then are very cautious in their approach to sexuality, but I know that hoping may not make it so and the higher priority is their future health and happiness.
Even when the social mores and punishments were stronger abstinence didn't work all that well.
Your comment may, no doubt, help many other Christian Conservatives to deal with this very real and serious problem of abstinence only education and its subsequent teen pregnancies.
Abstinence is clearly against human nature. The only way to avoid the ruinous consequences of unwanted pregnancies is to ensure that our children be fully informed. They can avoid throwing away their futures if they have all options of avoidance and mitigation available to them. We should not allow the religious to limit the ways in which secular people can exercise their rights.
Being against birth control is an insane position. They claim that the basis of their belief is that every life is precious. But they care nothing of the teenage mothers whose futures are ruined forever by having the responsibilities of child-rearing - not to mention the lives of the innocent men, women and children of other faiths who are routinely murdered in military actions of which they often loudly approve.
Religious texts are often destructive and irrelevant to the world as a whole. It's time for us to loudly rebuke these narrow-minded views, bring a proper, secular discourse to all these issues and disallow religious distortions from carrying any weight whatsoever in our public debates.
Silencing someone of a different viewpoint is not the answer. That's the death of liberty, not the exercise of it. Let me speak from one such religious text. The Apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9, "I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I." (Paul was single.) "But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn." In those days, there were no contraceptives. If you had sex, there was a pretty good chance you would have a pregnancy and/or STD, and without penicillin, sex outside of marriage could be deadly. Essentially, Paul is saying to use you common sense.
The Holy Bible has been misquoted, abused, and conveniently ignored throughout history. But can you argue against a way of life which promotes justice, mercy, protection by law against crime (thou shalt not murder, rape, steal, lie, etc.), and loving your neighbor as yourself? Christians have flaws because Christians are human. But the love of God, the sacrifice of Jesus, and the comfort of the Holy Spirit transcend our human deficiencies to reach up and strive for something better!
"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27 KJV)
Life expectancy in the Roman empire was between 22 and 25 years. Infant mortality and childhood diseases that are now easily treated took its toll on the population.
Agragrian economies need labor to produce, and in order for the papal church/state to survive and prosper, it need larger quantities of people to farm the land. There was more arable land (and profits from which to build more churches) than there were people to farm the land.
Hence, the exhortation to go forth and multiply.
As usual in the course of human history, just follow the money, and you will be enlightened.
Bristol looks much wiser than Sarah, it is a paradox.
All because those crazy Puritans, who were KICKED OUT OF EUROPE for being so whacked out in the first place, were given the time of day, some freakin' corn, and were allowed to replicate.
Look at the legacy. Look at it. The whacked out religious 'values' voters are still lying and they're still voting.
OMFG. The NAEA are a group of idiots. Why would anyone think public policy is being formed based on a TV interview with Bristol Palin?
incidence of std's caused by substitution of anal sex to preserve virginity-----------over 15 million
seeing Bristol on Fox------------------------------------------priceless