Tuesday, September 2, 2008

The Elephant in the Room

Yes, I know. Obamassiah said we weren't allowed to talk about Sarah Palin's daughter being in the family way. It's a private matter, I get that.

I am an evil, evil person because I've got to say something about it.

Bristol Palin is pregnant. To be completely honest, I really don't care. I completely agree with the right and left contentions that this is a family matter and the media or anyone else has no business discussing her or her unborn child.

Even if her mom is the one that told everyone.

But, you know what? I also think infidelity is a family matter. Remember that guy that was president eight years ago? Remember how he cheated on his wife with that White House Intern? I want to know where all the Republicans hell bent on protecting Bristol Pallin's right to privacy were when Chelsea Clinton's parent's marriage was being destroyed on national television.

Furthermore, when Clinton said he "did not have sex with that woman," everyone called him a liar. And they were right. He lied and it was a sad display.

But didn't Sarah Palin say that her daughter had not attended school in the last several months because she had contracted mono? Does anyone out there know if she actually does have mono?

One might argue that she did it to protect her daughter. O.K., I buy that.

But why couldn't one just translate that argument over to Bill Clinton, too? Maybe he was trying to protect his daughter from being hurt? Regardless, if Bristol doesn't have mono, her mother, gasp, lied about it.

And, I am curious, if Barack Obama had a seventeen year old daughter who was pregnant, would everyone applaud him for supporting her decision? Not likely.

People may not realize this, but I'm a very conservative person when it comes to family life. What I mean to say is that in my own life, I do not live an "anything goes" philosophy, and I'm pretty rigid in determining my own personal actions. See how I phrased that, my own personal actions?

I'm careful in expressing morality laden opinions or forcing others to follow my own set of rules regarding morality.

I'm even more careful about judging those who do not follow my personal beliefs, and I consciously make an effort not to evaluate other people's choices as "good" or "bad."

(God, I am so awesome. How can you stand it?).

I think a lot about what being an American means, and, to me, this is a very basic tenet: your personal beliefs are a valuable contribution to your nation, but your duty as an American is to respect and revere your fellow citizen's beliefs, as well. This is at the heart of the many other things that were meant to distinguish us from all those fascists in the rest of the world. (Back off, people of the rest of the world, that was a joke.)

As I said, Bristol's pregnancy doesn't bother me, nor does her decision to keep her child.

Good for her, she's displaying a real willingness to take responsibility for her actions at such a young age
, I think to myself, on a personal level.

At the same time, people who choose differently from her are O.K. in my book, too. (As a side note, you can order this book from Amazon.com, it's called, My Book: 10001 Ways to Gain Faiqa's Approval).

What is disturbing to me about this whole situation is that young women who are in her same exact position, minus the Vice Presidential candidate for a mom, have historically not been afforded the respect that she is receiving right now from conservatives.

Someone from McCain's camp said, "This is what happens in families." That's absolutely true. It does happen. But, I don't recall that being the party line when we were discussing inner city teenagers.

I remember something distinctly different being said about them. While I won't repeat it here, I'm pretty sure it wasn't "While we advocate abstinence, and we know your parents did their best to teach you values centered on abstinence, it's okay that you are pregnant. We're proud of the decision you're making to keep your baby. We are so very proud of you. "

Labels: , , ,


Blogger Miss Britt said...

The hypocrisy of it is what infuriates me.

THAT and the fact that it proves that YOUR MORAL FREAKING HIGH GROUND PRINCIPLES don't always work.

Which is what Democrats have been trying to say for years.

Wednesday, 03 September, 2008  
Blogger Avitable said...

I agree with you completely. And where can I buy that book again?

Wednesday, 03 September, 2008  
Blogger Tariq said...

Rightys are very emotional people. Please don't try to use factual information or any sort of logic when discussing a matter with them. It is nothing but frustrating dealing with their hypocritical reasoning, content-deprived speeches, and unwillingness to listen.

Wednesday, 03 September, 2008  
Blogger Faiqa said...

Miss Britt, hypocrisy IS infuriating. That word pretty much covers how I feel every time I turn on CNN these days.

avitable, I will tell you how not to gain Faiqa's approval: Imply in a comment reply on your blog that she was uncool and not hot in high school. I'll be sending you my personal copy of the book so you can start working on getting my approval back.

Tariq, thanks. It feels awesome when you tell me I'm right.

Wednesday, 03 September, 2008  
Blogger Avitable said...

Okay, you were pretty hot. But you were IB, and you were automatically not cool. Nobody in IB was. Except for Elaine Samuels.

Wednesday, 03 September, 2008  
Blogger Faiqa said...

I WAS COOL. Dammit. And don't agree just because you're trying to make peace. It doesn't suit you.

Thursday, 04 September, 2008  
Blogger Avitable said...

Oh, I'm not agreeing just to make peace. I'm just acquiescing and admitting your hotness. I'm standing firm on the issue of coolness, though.

Thursday, 04 September, 2008  
Anonymous Faiqa said...

OK. I'll take what I can get.

Thursday, 04 September, 2008  
Blogger Komal said...

hehe I'm still giggling at tariq bhi's use of the word "Rightys". C'mon man...lol.

Thursday, 04 September, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

a.) I responded to your comment on Britt'sblog.

b.) Clinton lied on the stand, under oath. It's a crime.
b2.) I agree that it should have been handled like any other marriage problems in any other family, behind closed doors.

c.) I'm sorry, I didn't read the whole entry, so if you noted that and I didn't notice, I apologize for being an a-hole.

d.) this is allyson, I am currently deleting and re-starting my blog, so I can't send you to my page, but rest assured, I'm not trying to be annonymous.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Blogger Happy Mommy said...

e.) I read the rest of this post... and jeesh! Really? I'm sorry I began a debate with you. I feel you are completely wrong. At seventeen with a mother who is obviously capable of helping her daughter when she hits snags, Bristol can be applauded for making this decision, because she's taking responsibility for her actions. In the inner city, babies having babies are most likely to be not so much taking responsibility for their actions so much as using the baby as a way to get back at the father, or get more money form the government, or get out of their momma's house, or something. They are neither prepared mentally, nor emotionally, nor financially, to be raising a baby.

Why do you think that people wouldn't support Obama if he had a pregnant daughter? Do you think it's a race issue? Or do you think that democrats are held to a different standard? Because quite frankly, if it's the former, the inner city babies having babies are not a black/white thing, it's a money and moral base thing. And if it's a party issue in your mind, then all I have to say is generally speaking Republicans do handle these kinds of "embarrassments" internally usually, while Democrats tend to allow this type of behaviour publicly and their only comment is everyone has a right to be who they are... nevermind the lies you were told before this came to light.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Blogger Avitable said...

Allyson, actually, the reason that it would be different if it was Obama's daughter who was pregnant was because the Republicans wouldn't be so understanding.

All you have to do is go back to watch any video of any Republican pundit, speaker, or mouthpiece talking about teen pregnancy or even a well-known teen pregnancy like Jamie Lynn Spears. They blame the parents. They say that it's the parents' fault.

Yet in this situation, it's not.

It's hypocrisy.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Anonymous miss britt said...

How dare anyone suggest to know someone's morals based on their economic status.

I grew up poor.

And I got pregnant for the same reason Bristol did- because I was young and naive and never thought it could happen to me.

Poverty does NOT equal immoral, selfish or irresponsible.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Blogger sybil law said...

Great post, Faiqa.
I maintain that you are cool NOW, and you were probably cool in high school.
Anyway, you're right - the sheer hypocrisy of the situation is what is so incredibly annoying.
Of course, I'm an independent, and both sides can be hypocritical. I am like, right in the middle on a lot of things, so I think I can see things... without colored glasses on, so to speak.
I have to say, though - Palin and McCain and their "shows" made me want to hurl.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Anonymous Zia said...

Inner city kids having babies is an interesting topic in its own right. As apart of my public health training, I took a class on developing programs and interventions. One example intervention was on teenage pregnancy in the inner city. One observation that came out was that inner city teenagers often have kids because they feel that this is the best time for them, given the presence of the extended family and the grandparents. In a sense, I guess the idea is that "it takes a village."

Economic prospects have much to do with this. If you feel that your income, as an indivdual, will not progress as much as you'd like then waiting is not as much of an issue.

Whatever the case, teenage pregnancy is not the issue. The issue is the irony of an abstinence education proponent and prolife advocate having a pregnant teenage daughter. Specifically, it is accepted by most scholars that abstinence is not as effective as safer sex education and it is strange that Sarah was "proud of Bristol's decision." A decision she would rather make for her and you, even if you were raped.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Blogger Happy Mommy said...

I did not say that being poor equals low morals, I said that being poor and having poor morals combined creates a situation where babies raising babies is not applaudable, it's atrocious.

And, Avitable, as far as Republican pundits blaming the parents... they're right. Being naive and not thinking that it could happen to you, comes from some mistake in parenting. It does not make the parent bad at his/her job, nor does it make them a bad person, but what it ultimately comes down to, is somewhere along the line mom and dad didn't get the message right.
Unfortunately there is no absolute right way to raise children, and parents are human, too. So they make mistakes. Politicians are human. And on each side there are radicals, and generalizations get made, which are unfair, but it's the way of things.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Anonymous Traci said...

The real issue is that she denied sexual education programs stating it is a matter that should be taught at home. How's that working? Obviously, the whole world can see it's just NOT. If it doesn't work for her with her amazing motherly abilities, how does she expect it to work for everyone else? Why is the right against teaching the consequences of sex and advocating ways to protect yourself when you choose to become sexually active? It seems they just turn a blind eye and pretend it's just not happening...see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.

Another upsetting point is that Palin slashed funding for a state program giving teenage moms a place to live. I'm glad her daughter might have the White House, but how can you advocate taking away a woman's right to choose and take away programs that would help mothers who keep their babies. The hypocrisy kills me.

Lastly, and on a similar but different issue: Palin pulled our heart strings as she told America that parents with special needs children would have an advocate in the White House, but cut Special Education Programs by 62% while in office. Is this her idea of helping, or will she change her mind about the housing for teenage mothers and special education programs now that these are difficulties she now faces in her own home. Unfortunately, I don't want to wait to see if she'll gain insight on the issues that many Americans face only after she goes through them herself.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Anonymous Traci said...

Oh, and Faiqa was totally cool in high school, of course that was what the drama geeks like me thought anyway.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Anonymous Zia said...

You can be liberal elite or you can be cool. You can't have both.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Blogger Faiqa said...

komal: It's a laugh a minute around here.

Happy Mommy:

Clinton lied on the stand, under oath. It's a crime.

So does that mean it's okay to lie if you're not on the stand? Awesome.

I'm sorry I began a debate with you.
Because I disagree with you? Isn't that what a debate is?

Do you think it's a race issue?
You're the one who said most people were voting for Obama because he was black. I think race is an issue, not the issue.

I think Zia's comment has addressed your comments regarding "inner city babies having babies" and their home life quite well. But don't tell him I said that.

BTW, I noticed on Britt's blog that you said people who didn't like you could go to your blog. Just because I don't agree with your politics, doesn't mean I don't like you. I don't even know you. That would be really narrow minded of me.

miss britt: I hope you don't mind that acted like a lefty nutter on your blog today. You're my blogging hero, and I don't think I could handle it if you were mad at me.

sybil law:Thanks Sybil! Actually, believe it or not, I'm an independent, too. And, thanks for the coolness vote. Avitable is just a little jealous that I have retained my coolness through the years while his has seriously waned...Derek Jeter body wash aside. Sooo cool.

zia: You academics and your research studies. This is all I read: buzz, buzz, buzz, buzz, buzz, buzz. I think I'm going to start calling you Senor Buzzy Buzzero. Or Buzzy Buzzeystein. Or how about just Buzzy Buzzbuzz.

Doesn't that choice you presented between liberal elite and coolness have some sort of catchy academic buzz word, too?

But I jest. You made some great points. You must have a really smart older sister that taught you everything you know.

traci:Well said. I can't think of anything else to add. It's amazing how you were able to get that thought out without using a single academic buzz word.

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Blogger Miss Britt said...

Mad? Are you crazy?

I'm impressed. :-)

Friday, 05 September, 2008  
Anonymous Happy Mommy said...

I believe that people lie all the time. Especially when it concerns trying to keep your very public life private. People lie to protect their families, themselves, and even the people they're lying to. They also lie to hurt. However, when you swear an oath to tell the truth, it becomes a crime.

I think that it is part of Obama's (or rather the people running his campaign's) plan to get people who are on the fence to vote for him as the First Black President. Please note, I said people on the fence, I would like to add people who are not well informed. I do not believe that people who read articles, and do research, and know the issues, are going to care too terribly much about what color his skin is. I know I don't. I don't feel that I'm being a racist for not wanting an inexperianced man running the country. The quest

ion I posed to you was whether you felt the repulicans would come down hard on him if his daughter was pregnant because of his race, or his party. I think Avitable answered that though, so if you agree with what he said, then that question is answered.

I hope that you don't dislike me just because we disagree, that comment on Miss Britt's blog was simply to stop people, anybody, from attacking me on Britt's page. I generally dislike when someone gives their unpopular opinion in comments and has no where for people to go to challenge them. I feel like that type of behaviour is childish, because then they don't have to defend their position, which causes me to believe that they are just trying to make trouble. I was feeling guilty because my former blog had been dropped by me for reasons too many to go into now, but I still had no place but in other people's comments to say my piece. So I put a comment where I had kicked up dust so people could challenge me and not put Miss Britt in the middle.

At the time I said I was sorry to have started this debate, I didn't know that you were informed, and I thought you were just regurgitating one issue, or article that you had a little piece of information on, and didn't want to have an arguement. I love debating, I hate arguing. I'm sorry that I judged you so quickly, and incorrectly.

I feel I want to clear up some things. I am not socially conservative. I do not agree with Sarah Palin on her pro-life or abstinence only education polocies. However, I also feel that I will teach my children at home, hopefully with the help of the school system, about safe sex, and the consequences of the decisions they make in their life. I will also support them when they make mistakes, and I will help as much as I can. I also will, and have, write/written letters to congress when it seems apparent that they are actually going to try to pass laws that I don't agree with. These are not the issues I'm voting on in this election. If these are the issues that are important for you for this election, then by all means don't vote for McCain/Palin.

BTW. I think of course Sarah Palin was proud of her daughter for making the decision to keep her baby, especially since it is exactly the decision she would make.

And this is the end, I promise: (Until you reply, anyway) Have you ever seen the movie Traffic? In that movie the dad was the head of the War on Drugs. He felt strongly about the War on Drugs, and he very publicly charged parents with the responsibilty of teaching their children to not use drugs. His daughter, in the meantime, was freebasing heroine. She had told her mom that she smoked pot, and so now not only was his daughter not behaving in the way he had tried to teach her and America to behave, but his own wife was failing to support him in his message. When he found out that she was doing drugs, it broke his heart. And he had to come out and publicly address the fact that even though he still believes that we must win the war on drugs, his daughter was addicted. And he had to publicly support his daughter while she was in rehab. And I know that it was 'just a movie' but I feel that Sarah is in a similar position. I think that she still thinks abstinence is the way to go, but once that mistake's been made the next step is being a mom.

Saturday, 06 September, 2008  
Blogger Faiqa said...

happy mommy, you're welcome to comment on my blog anytime you like. And, I think that parallel from Traffic is a pretty good one.

Saturday, 06 September, 2008  
Anonymous karmi said...

Back! Like a bad heat rash! lol
:-D Faiqa ... karmi is shocked, shocked to discover that you think he is Bob Dole! karmi couldn't possibly be Bob Dole, because Bob Dole always refers to himself in the 3rd person. karmi NEVER does that. lol :-D
Yes, hypocrisy is so disturbing, karmi agrees. Take for example the Stalinist show-trials Democrats are putting on when Barack Obama is an unnamed co-conspirator of Tony Rezko, the kazillionaire convicted felon. Franklin Raines, former Fannie Mae, CEO, who resigned in disgrace after accounting irregularities were discovered, was giving team Obama advice on housing and mortgage issues until last week. This is the same Franklin Raines who urged Congress to loosen up regulations on lending so that low-income Americans could get mortgages. For the record: Obama voted FOR that bill. McCain voted against it. I'll be back before the indictments issue. lol :-D


Saturday, 20 September, 2008  
Anonymous karmi said...

Oh, and another thing: Faiqa, you have offered no evidence that Sarah Palin lied when she said that her daughter had mono. Is it not possible that the daughter had mono AND was pregnant? You obviously assumed that Palin lied about a subject which wasn't any of our business in the first place, and in any case, is completely irrelevant to Gov. Palin's candidacy. Clinton made his lies our business when he lied under oath before a federal grand jury. He did that in order to escape civil liability in a lawsuit brought against him by a woman seeking redress of her charge that Clinton had sexually harrassed her. So where's the hypocrisy? I think you are trying to make the case that her daughter's indiscretion makes her (Sarah Palin) a hypocrite because the daughter behaved in a manner inconsistent with Gov. Palin's moral beliefs. Again, where's the hypocrisy? The Governor continues to believe that pre-marital sex is morally wrong despite her own daughter's misconduct in that regard. If the governor had insisted that her daughter get an abortion, THAT would constitute hypocrisy since Gov. Palin has taken a strong pro-life position. Faiqa, I am disappointed that you presented such a weak and circuitous argument. :-( But let's ask Tariq for his advice. Perhaps he would advise an honor killing? :-D

Cordially and entirely unemotionally yours,

karmi :-)

Sunday, 21 September, 2008  
Blogger Faiqa said...

karmiI suggest you read the post over again. As usual, your comprehension has been limited to your skimming the parts of my post where you thought you could make some sad attempt at being witty. Additionally, your comment about Tariq were completely uncalled for. Did you bring up the honor killing because his name is Tariq? Bad form. Plus, that's my HUSBAND you're talking about. He has more respect for women in his pinkie fingernail than the sum of you and your newly pseudo-feminist right wing cronies combined.

Monday, 22 September, 2008  
Anonymous karmi said...

Faiqa, I took your advise and I re-read your post. I see that you are correct; I didn't really address the heart of your complaint. If I am now correct, you complain that conservatives employ a double standard with respect to Bristol Palin and inner-city (read: African-American) girls who get pregnant. But, Faiqa, you don't specify any instances in which conservatives have employed this judgment about inner city females or which conservatives have done so. In fact, you expressly decline to do so. So, we are left wondering where all that conservative hypocrisy is located, except perhaps in the figment of liberal imagination. :-D In fact, liberals are the ones who encourage black American females to abort their children; they do this because they're deathly afraid that black Americans will out-populate whites. This view was expressed long ago by Margaret Sanger, founder of the liberal group Planned Parenthood. Sanger, in fact, was a racist who advocated negative eugenics, or governmental control of population so as to encourage white births and discourage non-white births. So there you have it: liberals go goose-stepping into the Brave New World. :-D
I'm terribly sorry if I offended Tariq. But he had earlier advised me to abandon my respect for Christian leaders such as the late John Paul II. With names like Tariq and Faiqa popping up all over this blog, I figured that there might be an outside possibility that Tariq might be Muslim. (duh ya think? :-D) Moreover, I made no comment about Tariq or Islam. I merely asked a question. Faiqa, I am still looking for that part of the U.S. Constitution that forbids "offensive" speech. Please tell me where you liberals find that. *grin* :-D

Yours sincerely,


Thursday, 25 September, 2008  
Blogger Faiqa said...

Oh karmi. You SO crazy.

Friday, 26 September, 2008  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home