Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Gondring
SHHHHH...Mommy has an (R) after her name, so it's okay.

Nobody said it was "okay", and Palin having an (R) after her name has nothing to do with it.

Are you comfortable being judged by your progeney's actions and those of their significant others? If not, you'd be better served to shut the pie-hole and stop being a butt-boy for our enemies in the media.
65 posted on 01/09/2009 8:54:23 AM PST by Antoninus (America didn't turn away from conservatism, they turned away from many who faked it. - Mark Sanford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: Antoninus

As an observer of the human condition I find it interesting that conservative religious right parents feel it is more important in 2009 to NOT ABORT BABIES and bring fetuses to term than for a couple to marry while even 40 years ago these same types of people felt it was more important for their children to remain chaste before marriage and would not support their daughters if they wanted to become single parents and live under their roof and thus preferred that their daughter not have the child at all and if she did give it away for adoption. I’m not saying that they counselled abortion in the ‘good old days’ but let’s put it this way—they would have been just as happy if the child was delivered stillborn. In the ‘good old days’ the reputation of the family was far more important than welcoming a bastard. Isn’t it ironic with the advent of the birth control pill and more knowledge about birth control that families have become more lax about their daughters claiming unwed status? You would think that parents would come to the conclusion that their daughters had no business getting pregnant outside of marriage with the means readily available not to do so and thus be even more upset than parents of yesteryear whose daughters did not have access to the ‘pill’ or birth control info. Perhaps abortion as a political and moral issue has superseded the need to preserve a family’s reputation from embarrassment and disgrace. How many young women before 1960 would have kept their babies if their parents who at that time also considered themselves religious conservatives had adopted the modern attitudes of 2009? By the way pro-life conservatives who support artificial contraception would not want to admit it but their position in 2009 lines up squarely with Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who invested her time and money heavily in developing the ‘pill’ so that families could be ‘planned’. How many 2009 religious right parents oppose ‘family planning’? Not very many I would think. And I’m not talking about abortion here.


91 posted on 01/09/2009 9:27:49 AM PST by techno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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