[Saya]

Originally Posted by erinelway

Max's mom, I completely agree with your post.

Another way of thinking about this: I wonder how Republicans would be reacting if we were talking about Hillary Clinton here and not Sarah Palin. If you consider it objectively, you have to know that Clinton would be eviscerated by the Republican party for the same actions. No question about it. I find this turnabout regarding family values interesting. In particular, James Dobson, the head of Focus on the Family, has spent a great deal of time arguing that women with children should not work outside the home. But yet he supports Palin. It seems just a scoche hypocritical. Dr. Laura, on the other hand, has at least stayed true to her message.

I also found Palin's RNC speech to be utterly unprofessional. The sneering comments she made about worthy opponents were akin to a neighbor gossiping. And lastly, I find comments about the idea of supporting her because she's a woman, or a mother, to be ridiculous and actually sexist. I judge her by her ability to be Vice President, and nothing else. Possession of a vagina has nothing to do with her ability to lead the United States.

Erin, I totally agree with all of this!!

Thanks to all of you who answered my question! I tried to tie down DH a little bit more last night about what he really meant by his comment, but I'm still working on it. I think in retrospect he may have been saying that since at the end of the day his perspective is that the pro-life position is about saying what people CAN'T do, the two positions can never come to any kind of real understanding/compromise. I'll have to think about this a little bit. I used to be a mediator, and trying to reach consensus and understanding has always been to me a value in itself. But I know that's not always an achievable goal.

Mindy, it's really funny that you've always seen this board as liberal - I've always seen this board as pretty conservative, but that's probably just compared to where I live, which I will admit is NOT a particularly politically diverse area!

[adoptnky]

Originally Posted by Max'smom

I think one of the false comparisons made here is that this is about Palin's choice to be both a mom and a career woman. Running for office at any level is a nearly 24 hour 7 day a week for many months job, even at the city level it basically means that a person hardly sees their kids our spouse for days at a time. Running for VP of the US is months of travel with no predictability regarding where you will be, what you will be eating, who you will be eating with, etc. This is not a typical career schedule. A parent with a regular job can come home from work and be with their kid in a home environment, feed them, play with them and tuck them in. A candidate for the VP can do none of those things, because they are on the road for months and at night, they have to do stumping work and plan for the next day's speeches.

This isn't about making a career choice. This is about that child's development, attachment in particular. Many people on this board combine taking care of SN kids and a career. But we try to work it out so that we give our kids a lot of continuity and many of us use attachment parenting and other techniques to promote bonding, such as not letting even close relatives hold you child so that you take care of their basic needs. Trig is almost certainly going to be cared for mostly by a nanny for much of his early life, and I am certain that his time with the nanny won't end at 6 pm or so as it does for those of you who have a nanny.

People all over the world take time off from work to care for infants. I have a demanding career. Our adoptive son was 5 months old when he came home. I carried him everywhere for months because that is the attachment advice people are given these days. I took 5 months off from my career - despite the fact that some of my immediate co-workers didn't understand and despite the really tight financial situation this put us in, etc. When people have a SN child, often they are told to keep that child's world small, so as to stabilize that kid and build up their coping skills. Trig is going to be living in a series of hotels and conference rooms, and if he is lucky, they will find a wonderful nanny who will manage to raise him.

The fact that she is putting being VP above her family at this critical time is why I find Palin's "family values" stance to be hypocritical.

I don't see this any differently then many Hollywood moms who give birth and then immediately go off to shoot a film - it happens all the time - and I don't see the media giving them a hard time. There are many kids that have nannys.

I do agree completely with erinelway - I wouldn't expect ANYONE to vote for a candidate because of their gender. But, I also don't want people to discount her just because she's a women and people think she should be at home taking care of her kids.

It's also a valid question as to whether or not I'd feel the same way if it was Hillary. I would like to think that I wouldn't judge her based on her parenting choices - but I did decide to not support her earlier because I don't agree with her on the issues.

How luckly are all of us that we can discuss things like this on a public forum and still be nice to each other.

Kim

[crhrjp]

Regarding the pro-choice or pro-life sides being "reasonable" or "unreasonable" or being capable of changing their position; that's why it's best left to personal choice. If you're adamantly prolife, don't have an abortion, if you are prochoice, well then you have that option.

Unfortunately this is a HUGE political issue. There will be supreme court changes during the next president's term and if the court heads more conservative, well there goes Roe v. Wade. If Roe is overturned, I don't the majority of our "red" states will be chomping at the bits to legalize abortion.

Consequently I think a candidate's stand on abortion is important. I don't (obviously) want my daughter to be pregnant at age 17 like Bristol Palin, and if she did, I certainly wouldn't force a shotgun wedding. Young marriages like this have double the rate of ending divorce than those who wait until age 25.

60% of girls at age 12 are sexually active. I can't kid myself that my child will be any different. The rate of high school pregnancy per year is 7%. We should be teaching our daughters (and sons) about birth control and not burying our heads in the sand of abstinence. Should my daughter become pregnant, I would want her to have a choice on abortion or not (which by the way is a choice that Bristol Palin does NOT have in Alaska at that age thanks to her mom).

I want my daughter to go to college, have a career, etc...things that are extremely difficult when you are a 17 year old mom. I think most of us are older parents and so our children aren't going to have great grandparent support from us for their children (our grandchildren) in 15-20 years. Unlike Juno, less than 1% of children born to unmarried mothers are placed for adoption...that's just reality...the arguement that all these children would go to happy homes is false.

Abortion is relatively cheap, extremely safe, and easy..lets keep it that way. If you're dead set against abortion for any reason, well then don't get one and you can discourage others all you want (within legal bounds). Just let my family be..

the DH

[jules17]

60% of girls at age 12 are sexually active.

Whooooa...where did this statistic come from??

[SKL]

[quote=Saya]I think in retrospect he may have been saying that since at the end of the day his perspective is that the pro-life position is about saying what people CAN'T do, the two positions can never come to any kind of real understanding/compromise.[quote]

I'm sure your husband believes there are some things that people "can't" (or shouldn't be able to) do, but perhaps he can discuss those things like a rational human being.

Here's a bit more perspective. For many of us, it's really not about what the "law" says we "can or can't do." It's more about what society says, and the things the government sets up in communities, that influence how the "choice" is made. For example, the "counseling" that unwed mothers receive to the effect that their child will be so unfortunate if allowed to live that it is better to end their lives. The freedom of others in the mother's life to pressure or even force her to do this even if she personally wants the person she conceived to live. The misconception / miscommunication that an unplanned child ends up being an unwanted child. The idea that young people (male and female) should be able to shrug off their mistakes because pursuing their selfish dreams is more important than anything else. The "logic" that cutting off what makes us women is the number one solution to the inequality of the sexes. Using my tax money to push this "solution" to the detriment of women.

But most of all, the attitude that snuffing out a life is seen as "obviously" making our world a better place. The domino effect this attitude has on the community's overall respect for life in all its forms.

If certain adamant pro-choice / pro-abortion organizations had not worked so hard to put all of the above in place, pro-life people would be a lot less concerned about the absence of laws against the practice.

Hence to many of us, it's not really about what an individual woman "can't" do. However, I'll grant you that certain pro-life groups haven't communicated this very well.

[SKL]

Originally Posted by jules17

60% of girls at age 12 are sexually active.

Whooooa...where did this statistic come from??

Yeah, that's definitely inaccurate, I'm sorry (no, actually pleased) to say. It isn't even 50% in high school for girls.

[jules17]

Abortion is relatively cheap, extremely safe, and easy..lets keep it that way.

For now, I refuse to get into my belief system with regard to abortion. I just want to question the "easy" part of your comment. I strongly disagree with that statement. I have a few close friends who did have abortions in their early 20s. They are now nearing 40 and it still haunts them to this day. For one of my girlfriends, she literally stopped every dreaming of having a child once she had had an abortion. Not because she didn't want a child...because she didn't feel she deserved to be a mother after "what she had done." I have talked to her for years about getting help with her immense grief and loss. She said it is a "double whammy" because not only did she have an abortion, but she chose it. The shame she feels is crippling. And so she spends her days torturing herself with how old her child would be now and what he/she would be doing.

So I would never call abortion "easy" - maybe you meant the procedure itself? Well, I can't speak about that. But the long term effects are huge. So I say that mandatory counseling and support must be in place as well.

[crhrjp]

By "easy", I mean easy to schedule, perform..hopefully like any medical procedure. I know from experience that psychologically it is NOT easy...

re: 60% stat: actually 63.1%

http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/n...agerJune06.pdf

from CDC data

[gwenrenee007]

Originally Posted by SKL

I'm sure your husband believes there are some things that people "can't" (or shouldn't be able to) do, but perhaps he can discuss those things like a rational human being.

I don't think you are discussing the reasons very rationally yourself. You are stating your reasons you believe that there should not be a choice. When Saya was asking if you "see the other side" not what your beliefs are. You have listed your beliefs over and over on this subject and in a way I think (my opinion) saying this the the right way and you are wrong if you don't think like me. Others may think or believe differently and that is their right and others may have different reasons for being pro-life than you and that is also their right. I can see the issues from both sides of the fence, but I am pro-choice. I won't go into why I disagree with you or what my beliefs are because it really doesn't matter.

I think you are being demeaning to Saya and not answering what the original question was....can you see the issue from the other side?

This issue is not a hot button for me but there are others that are and I am very thankful we aren't talking about those.

[jules17]

Those statistics are based on GRADES 9-12, not AGE 12. Huge difference.

[SKL]

Originally Posted by gwenrenee007

I don't think you are discussing the reasons very rationally yourself. You are stating your reasons you believe that there should not be a choice. When Saya was asking if you "see the other side" not what your beliefs are. You have listed your beliefs over and over on this subject and in a way I think (my opinion) saying this the the right way and you are wrong if you don't think like me. Others may think or believe differently and that is their right and others may have different reasons for being pro-life than you and that is also their right. I can see the issues from both sides of the fence, but I am pro-choice. I won't go into why I disagree with you or what my beliefs are because it really doesn't matter.

I think you are being demeaning to Saya and not answering what the original question was....can you see the issue from the other side?

This issue is not a hot button for me but there are others that are and I am very thankful we aren't talking about those.

First of all, I answered Saya in an earlier post directly to the question she asked.

Secondly, your comment that my reasoning is not rational, and that I said nobody else should have a choice, illustrates my comment that those on the pro-choice side aren't always willing to have a rational and respectful conversation.

I never once stated anywhere on this thread that people should not have a "choice" to get an abortion. I went out of my way to point out that my views aren't even about what people "can or can't" legally do. You are reading my words through your own filter. This is pretty typical of both sides. I guess the point is that it's certainly not just the pro-life side that prevents respectful conversation from taking place.

[jules17]

I know from experience that psychologically it is NOT easy...

Well, in my opinion, it's not easy then.

Again, I don't want to get into my beliefs or opinions. It just burns me up to see it described as "easy" when I have watched my friend suffer for over 15 years. And again, I feel like services should be provided for the psychological - which as we all know, can and often is much more painful than physical.

[gwenrenee007]

Originally Posted by jules17

Those statistics are based on GRADES 9-12, not AGE 12. Huge difference.

Oh thank goodness! Age 12, my heart skipped a beat! I believe ages 9-12, unfortunately.

[Max'smom]

Originally Posted by crhrjp

re: 60% stat: actually 63.1%

http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/n...agerJune06.pdf

from CDC data

Per this data, 30% of 9th grade girls have had sex at least once - this would mean girls around ages 14-15 or so. The percentage is higher for boys.

[connorsmommy1999]

For example, the "counseling" that unwed mothers receive to the effect that their child will be so unfortunate if allowed to live that it is better to end their lives. The freedom of others in the mother's life to pressure or even force her to do this even if she personally wants the person she conceived to live. The misconception / miscommunication that an unplanned child ends up being an unwanted child. The idea that young people (male and female) should be able to shrug off their mistakes because pursuing their selfish dreams is more important than anything else. a life is seen as "obviously" making our world a better place.

I wasnt going to chime in on this....but this post really struck a chord.

I got pregnant at 17. I was a 3.9 student, had been accepted to Annapolis Naval Academy, already had most of my Associates Degree completed (night school and summer classes - this was before "Running Start programs).
I had a LOT going for me....

the pressure was UNbelievable. I cant even count the number of people who told me that I should "just" have an abortion. So many people felt they were "helping" by telling me that I'd ruin my life - and therefore make my baby's life miserable - if I had the baby. Everyone felt the need to point out that it would be easy to abort and then go to the academy, get my law degree, get married and then have a family. They would even go so far as to say, "what a shame that someone with your brains would end up a welfare mom."

It was truely horrid. I have never in my life felt so lost, so alone and so miserable.



One day I woke up and decided that they were all wrong.

That "shameful, horrible mistake-that-will-ruin-my-life" is now 17 years old and is THE most amazing person! He is really a gem. I raised him as a single parent for a while - never on welfare, not even for medical - and we MADE it! He kept me going, kept me moving forward and plugging along. He gave my life direction and focus. I am blessed to have him and dont regret him for one minute.
Yes, it was difficult but I wouldnt change it for the world.

This is why I'm pro-life. I feel strongly that abortion shouldnt be so easy to do...and we, as a society, have shifted in a way that is scary. So many people would have liked to have seen me abort my son. But this world is a better place because he is IN it.