Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Report: Bristol Palin and Fiancé Split
TODAY ^ | 03.11.09 | STAFF

Posted on 03/11/2009 3:47:01 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay

The pair, parents to 2-month-old son Tripp, broke up 'a few weeks ago'

Bristol Palin and her fiancé Levi Johnston have broken up, two sources tell PEOPLE.

The split happened "a few weeks ago," according to a source close to the couple, but it's unclear what precipitated it. "It was a mutual thing," adds the source.

"It kind of just happened," says the source, referring to the split. "I thought they would stick it out. But I think they can work together to raise Tripp."

Despite the breakup, Levi still sees the couple's son. Levi's dad, Keith Johnston, told PEOPLE recently that his son is a devoted and "proud father."

Bristol, meanwhile, is attending Wasilla High, taking a class to supplement course work she is completing at home. She also is considering enrolling in college next fall and studying nursing.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: bristol; bristolpalin; gossip; levi; levijohnston; palin; palinfamily; rumors; tabloid
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 1,281-1,293 next last
To: Philo-Junius
You are right, I confess to a little ridicule now.

Your misplaced arrogance seems to almost demand it.

681 posted on 03/12/2009 8:34:38 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (Stupidity has an expiration date 1-20-2013 *(Thanks Nana))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 679 | View Replies]

To: brwnsuga

No one is arguing for the child’s “removal” if that implies state intervention. We’re arguing that Tripp deserves married, committed parents, and since Bristol cannot provide that, Tripp’s interests would be better served by Bristol finding him parents who can.


682 posted on 03/12/2009 8:35:26 AM PDT by Philo-Junius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 678 | View Replies]

To: rintense

That would be a disaster for them to marry, then divorces after years of problems. That boy is not mature enough to be a husband and father. He doesn’t even have a high school degree, how was he supposed to support a family. Better that they mature and if they are still in love later, let them get married then.


683 posted on 03/12/2009 8:35:50 AM PDT by brwnsuga (Proud, Black, Sexy Conservative!!! I am no LEMMING!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: ejonesie22

So you are capable of judgment then?

Then please extend me that same right, please, whether or not you agree with the judgment.


684 posted on 03/12/2009 8:36:38 AM PDT by Philo-Junius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 681 | View Replies]

To: Philo-Junius
I agree that you're wrong. How's that? Your wording is down right scary. Children have a 'right'? So, once again, if this is your position, what is the ramification when parents violate that 'right'? It sounds like to me you would support a law that only married people are allowed to have children. THAT'S how draconian you sound.

You have stated that if your own daughter decided to keep her baby as a single mother, even after the most honest attempts by you to persuade her to put it up for adoption, you'd support her decision. If its good enough for you, why isn't it for any one else?

685 posted on 03/12/2009 8:38:38 AM PDT by rintense (Go Israel!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 628 | View Replies]

To: Philo-Junius
Judgment, no, not at the level you seek to practice.

Discernment however...

686 posted on 03/12/2009 8:39:20 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (Stupidity has an expiration date 1-20-2013 *(Thanks Nana))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 684 | View Replies]

To: Philo-Junius

I disagree, not while Bristol has her parents to help her out. Grandparents are a bedrock. I had my children IN wedlock and my parents were invaluable in helping my husband and I raise excellent children. Can you imagine being a grandparent and seeing some stranger come and take your grandchild saying “Hey, I’m married, and therefore better for YOUR grandchild”...makes no sense. Are you a parent or a grand-parent?


687 posted on 03/12/2009 8:40:00 AM PDT by brwnsuga (Proud, Black, Sexy Conservative!!! I am no LEMMING!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies]

To: Philo-Junius
Sure, bring on more insults, those’ll be persuasive. Rice paper has thicker skin than you -- my words were gentle.

It's a good thing you aren't in Palin's shoes getting all this undignified garbage heaved at you by self-righteous Church Ladies happy to pronounce verdicts on fellow Christians about things are none of their concern. You couldn't take it.

But man, you can sure dish it out!

688 posted on 03/12/2009 8:45:21 AM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 624 | View Replies]

To: rintense

So many misstatements, so little time.

A right does not entail legal enforcement of that right at all costs. Saying I am endowed with the right to the pursuit of happiness does mandate laws to guarantee my pursuit of happiness where it conflicts with other public goods. No one has ever in this thread arguing that state intervention was advisable.

Social norms are not inevitably laws. Please dismount from that hobbyhorse. Publicly expressing support for a traditional social norm and publicly disapprobating those who flout those norms is the traditionally acknowledge best way to avoid NEEDING laws to uphold rights.

I stated that I would support my daughter and child if she persisted in obstinate defiance; I would not support her decision. That decision would not be good for anyone.


689 posted on 03/12/2009 8:45:58 AM PDT by Philo-Junius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 685 | View Replies]

To: chickpundit

Amen. Thank you, cp.


690 posted on 03/12/2009 8:46:48 AM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 627 | View Replies]

To: Finny

My skin is fine, thanks; I just make it a practice to note and comment whenever my interlocutors cease arguing rationally and start moving to insult, because its usually at the point at which they’ve run out of logical support for their position and are merely banging the table in indignation that anyone dare to contradict them.


691 posted on 03/12/2009 8:48:02 AM PDT by Philo-Junius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 688 | View Replies]

To: Finny

“The most oily part is that so many Church Ladies (male and female) here think they’re being good Christians.”

Ah yes; that was indeed gentle...


692 posted on 03/12/2009 8:49:11 AM PDT by Philo-Junius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 688 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay

Rejoice, lovebirds Rihanna and Chris Brown are still together!


693 posted on 03/12/2009 8:49:16 AM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Finny

“It’s a good thing you aren’t in Palin’s shoes getting all this undignified garbage heaved at you by self-righteous Church Ladies happy to pronounce verdicts on fellow Christians about things are none of their concern. “

Undignified garbage heaved at me, yes, do tell. I certainly don’t know anything about that.


694 posted on 03/12/2009 8:51:39 AM PDT by Philo-Junius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 688 | View Replies]

To: Philo-Junius

That above should read:

“Saying I am endowed with the right to the pursuit of happiness does NOT mandate laws to guarantee my pursuit of happiness where it conflicts with other public goods. No one has ever in this thread arguing that state intervention was advisable.”

Haste makes waste; sorry.


695 posted on 03/12/2009 8:55:37 AM PDT by Philo-Junius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 689 | View Replies]

To: Philo-Junius

Take three:

“Saying I am endowed with the right to the pursuit of happiness does NOT mandate laws to guarantee my pursuit of happiness where it conflicts with other public goods. No one has ever in this thread BEEN arguing that state intervention was advisable.”

Sheesh.


696 posted on 03/12/2009 8:56:47 AM PDT by Philo-Junius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 695 | View Replies]

To: Philo-Junius
Let's see since my original comment was to Twink NOT YOU It seems you are the interloper with the attitude stinking into MY post.
697 posted on 03/12/2009 8:57:11 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (You want me to buy heavy metal? Metallica?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 649 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

When you sent your comment to Twink on the bulletin board rather than via Freepmail, you made it an open comment visible to all, in the nature of an open letter to which anyone may respond.

Did you not know this?


698 posted on 03/12/2009 9:00:07 AM PDT by Philo-Junius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 697 | View Replies]

To: Philo-Junius

“...endowed with the right to the pursuit of happiness “

Don’t you get upset when people say that the Constitution guarantees the “pursuit of happiness”, and that makes it a law or something? It’s not even in the Constitution.


699 posted on 03/12/2009 9:02:31 AM PDT by MayflowerMadam (I feel much better since I gave up hope.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 689 | View Replies]

To: Philo-Junius

So you responded with your snarky attitude.


700 posted on 03/12/2009 9:03:09 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (You want me to buy heavy metal? Metallica?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 698 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 1,281-1,293 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson