Posted on 09/02/2008 12:39:14 AM PDT by SolidWood
ST. PAUL, Minnesota (CNN) -- Key evangelical leaders rallied to Sarah Palin's support Monday amid news that her 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, was having a child.
"Before, they were excited about her, with the Down syndrome baby," conservative, anti-tax activist Grover Norquist said. "But now with this, they are over the moon. It reinforces the fact that this family lives its pro-life values."
Palin and John McCain oppose abortion and have supported promoting abstinence in schools, which would seem to make Bristol Palin's pregnancy an inconveniently timed development.
But she is keeping the child, a fact that could make the Alaska governor -- whose candidacy has been enthusiastically embraced by evangelicals who regard her as one of their own -- even more popular among that key GOP voting bloc.
"Fortunately, Bristol is following her mother and father's example of choosing life in the midst of a difficult situation," Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said. "We are committed to praying for Bristol and her husband-to-be and the entire Palin family as they walk through a very private matter in the eyes of the public."
Evangelical leader Richard Land also backed Palin completely.
"This is the pro-life choice. The fact that people will criticize her for this shows the astounding extent to which the secular critics of the pro-life movement just don't get it," Land said in a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Shoot...
and...
prisoner6
You betcha.
I've heard this all day and I can't quite get it--do people who are pro-birth control NEVER get pregnent unexpectedly? Is it only those who subscribe to abstinence who get pregnant? (Seems to me it abstinence is PRACTICED they have a pretty good chance of success.)
Do prochoicers never get pregnant unexpectedly? The number of abortions would say otherwise.
A sure thing to peel them off. Didn’t.
I agree. Gov Palin lives the pro-life idea. Nice job Gov!
Yeah, if this isn't the case what does it imply? That pro-choicers have babies on purpose, to kill them?
I am all for not bashing Bristol and her family, but this is getting too much. Glorifying pre-marital sex is just something I never would have witnessed on FR. I am thrilled she is keeping the baby, but let’s not be in jubilation over a 17 year old having a baby. Sheesh...
AMEN!
It’s the accepted wisdom on this issue—that her abstinence support is wrong because her daughter got pregnant—and I just don’t get it, particularly since Palin is not anti-birth control.
To CNN's consternation...
The left simply does not understand the Conservative worldview. It’s foreign to them, for one thing. More importantly, they believe their own propaganda, which presents a distorted caricature of what Conservatives believe. And so they think, based on their flawed, distorted model of how Conservatives think, that the news of Bristol’s out-of-wedlock pregnancy should be viewed by the conservative base as a strong negative against Sarah. Of course, they are quite wrong.
What a stark contrast to liberals who would slaughter the baby in order to do what Eric Cartman (yes I'm quoting South Park here) said: "Abortion is the ultimate form of cheating! You're cheating nature itself!"
Having pre-marital sex wasn't an act of heroism, and I haven't witnessed here anyone glamorizing it. But the way the family are handling this is laudable as it is the only RIGHT way.
Please point out where pre-marital sex is being glorified on FR.
For some reason the view here at FR on pre-marital sex has changed drastically over the last eight months.
It was just eight months ago when the world found out the 16 year old Jamie Lee Spears was pregnant and the view on Miss. Spears pregnancy was somewhat different than it is for Miss. Pailin's.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1941462/posts
The "jubilation" (which is too strong a word) is not over having a baby, it's over not aborting a baby. The distinction is crucial.
The pregnancy itself is unfortunate—but in the absence of any evidence that Sarah condoned such activity by her daughter, or failed in her duty to properly instruct her daughter in the matter, it has no bearing on Sarah's fitness for office.
It hasn't but I've seen that accusation thrown around a lot in the last 12 hours or so.
It's almost looks like a talking points memo has been released to a select few...
That's probablly it- the libs are throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks.
I think the "oh-so-concerned" about Sarah's ability to be a mother and VP falls into the same category. All they are doing is pi$$ing women off. To which I say: Keep it up dems, just keep it up....
No one is in jubilation a 17 year old is having a baby. People are in jubilation because a 17 year is not killing her baby.
I'm not really cheering the situation, I think we were all shocked by the news. However I'd be a major hypocrite if I condemned her.
Yet now with the disgusting freaks from the left in full assault mode and after a 17 girl who's keeping her child, I think they need our support more than ever. It's not saying "you go girl" so much as "we'll help get you through this with moral support."
So the scorecard is two more kids the left couldn't get killed. You can bet their ghouls are raving bonkers over it...
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.