i don’t understand why so many on our side of the aisle have a problem with this. of course, i understand why the “kill any baby if it’s in any way inconvenient” crowd is behaving the way they are. and i know lots of libtards take glee in expressing mock outrage over anything that involves the Palins. however, this pregnancy was planned. she was supposed to already be married to the father by now. she’s not a welfare queen or a crack addict. this baby will come into the world with a mother and father and an extended family that will make sure it’s raised properly. what’s more, this child will be the offspring of a MOH winner and will have their choice of service academy to attend. this kid is getting a heck of a leg up to start life. maybe by the morals of my generation, it would have been better to wait until after the wedding, but the morals of her generation are quite different than those of mine. if she makes right with God, i really don’t understand why anyone on FR would be giving her grief. it’s not like we aren’t all aware that the struggle against sin is one that everyone wages on a daily basis.
...”I really don’t understand why anyone on FR would be giving her grief”....
If she has any grief it’s self induced by flaunting her life in full view of the audience with no regard for the affects this will have on her children nor her family.
What she should do is step out of the “celebrity mode” she’s attempting to stop sliding away from underneath her. It’s playing out like a bad soap opera.
Wow, really?
So you're advocating moral relativism here on Free Republic.
The problem most of us have is that many well regarded appraisals of conservative principles start with An Enduring Moral Order, one for God and one for man.
We don’t have to get reactionary and yearn for the moral order of centuries past, but we do need to understand that the moral order we are born to is of value. It is worth conserving — hence conservative.
We have been falsely taught for about two generations that it is each succeeding decades youngster’s “responsibility” to shed the morals of their family. This is taught by leftists but most young people end up adopting it for a time.
Through the ages conservatives have pointed to the folly of this process of chronological bigotry whereby we think our forebears are “out-of-date” without stopping to examine why these morals are worth holding. In this case, a child grows up from day one without a father and mother working in concert to set the family frame.
“I don’t understand why so many on our side of the aisle have a problem with this.”
She took hundreds of thousands of dollars while promoting herself as the spokesperson for abstinence-only. Now we learn she doesn’t walk the walk.
This does incalculable damage to the abstinence-only movement, feeding into the left’s claims of “unrealistic!” If our own poster children can’t be bothered make it work, it’s harder for us to promote it to the wider world.
Hypocrisy also hurts the conservative movement as a whole. We’re having a very hard time reaching younger Americans, and this sort of naked hypocrisy only drives them farther away. We have to stop making excuses for these sorts of conservatives-for-pay and promote instead people who not only espouse but believe and practice our philosophy.
All this damage from one little hypocrite. Time to call her out.