Marriage is up to them. Clearly they are already working outside the realm of what is ideal. The baby will be welcomed and loved. That I applaud. The mistake that got them there is so widely committed that I think, while important to acknowledge, it should be at this point dropped by critics. They can’t undo it. Love and provide for the baby. Marriage or not is something only they can choose. Both mother and father need to make a life long commitment to the children. Whether they also make a life long commitment to each other is something they must decide. We can all see why doing things the other way around is better. But that is not an option. I do not know the details. I’ll just celebrate the baby and wish them well.
There are situations where I would see the natural parent(s) as unfit to raise the child. This is not one of them. Relevant in today’s world, I would say homosexuality is one such thing that makes a parent unfit. But that view has been banned by the Supremes.
“Marriage is up to them.” Legally and practically, you are correct. However, no one lives in a vacuum, which means that making decisions based only on what the parties directly involved want would be unchristian. I know many people who had shotgun weddings because they were thinking beyond just what they (the bride and groom) wanted to do; they considered what would be best for the child, their families, and society.
If the new standard is, marriage is optional and you can do whatever you want, so long as you don’t have an abortion, then count me out. Not killing your baby is brave and I laud Bristol Palin for, as Greg Gutfeld on Fox said, choosing humiliation over convenience, but the bar must be raised. Bristol Palin and the father of this baby should marry and commit themselves to the child(ren). (If the father of the child is refusing to marry Bristol, then I have even more sympathy for her.)