Did you like Sarah Palin's convention speech?
posted at 9/5/2008 1:07 PM EDT
<em><strong>By Phil Tympanick</strong></em>
The recent nomination of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin for Vice President of the United States has caused much fervor on the political scene. Though her poise, experience, pragmatism, and policies should be the focus of the press coverage, it appears her nomination has put a spotlight on a completely tangential issue as a result of the recent announcement of her 17 year old daughter Bristol’s pregnancy. It was only a matter of time before our liberal friends at the Boston Globe would chime in and, boy, was it a beauty. Despite the fact that I’m annoyed by the fact that Kevin, and his liberal counterparts in the liberal media have no idea about the sexual practice of Mrs. Palin’s daughter and her fiancé, and presumes that they were not using birth control, and that their pregnancy was completely “unintended”, I do agree with Kevin on one point; it gives us a chance to educate our children, and more importantly, our society.
The recent column by Kevin Cullen entitled <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/09/04/abstaining_from_change/">“Abstaining from Change”</a> in the September 4th issue of The Boston Globe sheds light on the purely liberal way at looking at teenage pregnancy. In the article Kevin claims that what is happening to Bristol is “real life” that could happen to any of our sons or daughters. His argument presumes it’s inevitable and says “Here’s some news for the Holy Rollers who want religion to be used in the making of secular public policy. Teenagers have sex”. Now that is a truly insightful and perceptive comment. He even had to go back to the site of his first employment to verify that fact, but in doing so, completely missed the point that his mentor, a woman by the name of Anne Teschner, who runs The Care Center, an alternative school for pregnant and parenting teens in Holyoke, used to characterize the reason for our high teen pregnancy rates. She said, “We’re not meeting the spiritual, psychological, and emotional needs of our teens”. Note the first word there Kevin. It’s SPIRITUAL!
Kevin implies that our over-sexualized culture is to blame and that “kids having sex” is some kind of hormonal inevitability and trying to stop it is futile. That, my friend, is a cop out. It’s typical of liberals to acquiesce to challenges when the issue is “just too hard”. Take abortion, war, and virtually everything else they stand for, and against. Their stance essentially equates to “the easy way out”. When it comes to helping the poor, their solution is easy; just tax the rich. When it comes to energy, don’t drill for oil or build nuclear power plants, just tax the oil companies’ profits and pretend that green alternatives are sufficient to address the problem. When it comes to fighting terrorism, don’t. Simply appease the radical nuts and negotiate with them without pre-conditions. That’s a lot easier than sending our troops five thousand miles overseas to fight them head on right? Think about it. Name an issue, and the liberal solution is to always, without fail, “take the easy way out”.
The problem is that this kind of defeatist mentality doesn’t work, especially in the long term. Furthermore, this approach isn’t how we deal with virtually all of the other ills that plague our teens. For example, we spend millions on drug abstinence programs like DARE. We spend countless dollars on ads touting the hazards of drinking and driving and even send our kids to jail when they offend. Yet, somehow, knowing the perils of teen sex, we offer our teens condoms and sex education that teach them how to use them “properly” using bananas and cucumbers to personify the male anatomy.
When Mr. Cullen said that McCain and Palin oppose sex education, he was wrong. They don’t oppose sex education when abstinence is a part of it, only when abstinence is not. Sex education in our schools today isn’t about teaching the perils of teen pregnancy, but rather how to best avoid it with birth control. It isn’t about informing our youth about the life-altering consequences of teen pregnancy, only about how you terminate one. ''We teach sex education, but there's no portion of sex education which talks about the advantages of waiting. . . ." said Massachusetts Govenor Mitt Romney in an April 21st, 2006 Boston Globe article. In a survey distributed among gubernatorial candidates in 2006 Mrs. Palin said “The explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support” and that she “favors abstinence-based sex education programs”. Romney’s position is supported by most conservatives who said in the same April 21st article, ''We're saying let's provide an opportunity for parents and school districts to add abstinence to the curriculum. It's not abstinence only. It's abstinence also." Therefore, your assertion that McCain/Palin oppose sex education is a distortion of the truth, as are many of your claims about the McCain/Palin policies in your columns.
I would be deeply remiss to criticize his liberal point of view without offering solutions. So here goes. What if we could entice the Hollywood crowd to glamorize abstinence as vehemently as they do pre-marital sex? What if people like Bristol Palin became vocal advocates for abstinence, and spoke of the difficulty of raising kids as a teenager. What if she spoke of the missed chances to attend the many teen events, to experience dances, proms and all the other things she and her future husband are likely to miss out on? And what if her future husband spoke of the challenges his young fatherhood thrust upon him as he pursued a hockey career at the college or professional level? Are you telling me that we can’t change fundamental behavior in our kids because of hormones alone? Please don’t give in to the “easy way out” crowd…again, Mr. Cullen.