Glass Houses?
The targeting of Gov. Sarah Palin’s pregnant daughter for public ridicule has been justified by some on the left by a claim that it is legitimate to critique anyone who believes in “family values” when and if their family fails to actually live up to them. People who live in glass houses, they say, should not throw stones.
But this assumes that Gov. Palin actually threw any such stones in the first place. Oddly, the “hypocrisy exception” that anti-conservative haters always seem to throw out whenever they target a conservative relies relies on a completely unproven presumption that “family values” conservatives actually condemn individuals who depart from those values. But they provide no evidence to support their assumption or justify their resulting prejudices and double standards. “Glass houses” is an excuse, not a reason.
Do some “family values” types extend their moral prescriptions to personal condemnations? Of course. Do all believers in “family values” condemn and despise those who fall short? No. I am of course aware of outrageous comments by extremists like Pat Robertson, but I certainly have not yet heard of any evidence that Gov. Palin’s socially conservative policy views have translated into ANY personal criticisms towards ANY individuals who fall short. She is simply presumed guilty of this by her critics with no evidence whatsoever because, after all, she’s a conservative and we all know that they are evil, intolerant, and vicious, blah, blah, blah. (Insert usual laundry list of anti-conservative stereotypes here.)
Once again, the anti-conservatives’ rationalizations are just wrong. It assumes that all conservatives are self-righteous, holier-than-thou ninnies who beat up everyone else who falls short only to be exposed as hypocrites when their own families fall short. But that is a useful partisan stereotype, not an actual fact. Most conservatives are aware of human fallibility and do not hate on the sinner as the stereotype about them assumes. Most do, in fact, exactly what Gov. Palin has done with her daughter — privately lament the moral failure, but nonetheless support and help the person who has failed. That this is treated by many liberals as a bad thing is a sign of sickness in their worldview, not hers.
Of course, if the anti-conservatives ever bothered to actually get to know some real conservatives instead of just mindlessly internalizing a slate of anti-conservative presumptions, they might know better. Ironically, it is precisely the self-anointed arbiters of “tolerance” that turn out to be the most intolerant and the most driven by unquestioned prejudices and bigotries about others.
The problem you have is that by and large nobody is badmouthing Palin’s daughter. It’s just reality that ignorance based sex education increases teen pregnancy and it’s inconvenient that Palin’s own family is a casualty of the law of averages, but that’s nothing against the daughter. The other problem you have is that for all the whining about respecting privacy, it is the McCain campaign that released information that the daughter is pregnant. It is the McCain campaign that’s got the cameras on the couple, bringing the poor kid down from Alaska, etc. It’s sad, but the media can be trusted to follow the sex instead of the real scandals.
Jason,
Yes it is a private matter but I think liberals are trying to say minus all the negative name calling is that the VPILF has supported policies such as abstinence only education in the schools that can lead to teenage pregnancies. Sure, it is true that sex ed not teaching abstinence leads to teenage pregnancies but I think the evidence points towards more of an increase in teenage pregnancies where abstinence only edu is taught.
If liberals want to criticize the VPILF they should do it on her policies rather than personal life. It might be more difficult in this situation as they seem so intertwined.
"It’s just reality that ignorance based sex education increases teen pregnancy and it’s inconvenient that Palin’s own family is a casualty of the law of averages,"
Greg, I think you’ll discover she had a fairly standard sex education in her high school. And I have to say, do we really think in this day and age that any teenager doesn’t know about birth control. My daugher knows where buy pills on the street…and I’m a doctor!
"It is the McCain campaign that’s got the cameras on the couple, "
You mean after that fine Democratic blog, Daily Kos suggested that her younger brother was actually her son? I mean how dare she fight back. Maybe we should have quietly sent her away to a boarding school for unwed mothers….. Oh that’s right its not the 1940’s anymore!
has supported policies such as abstinence only education in the schools that can lead to teenage pregnancies. Sure, it is true that sex ed not teaching abstinence leads to teenage pregnancies but I think the evidence points towards more of an increase in teenage pregnancies where abstinence only edu is taught.
Such an impressive command of the facts on display here. As Chris mentioned, from what we can tell it appears that the school Bristol attended had the type of sex ed program that does teach about contraception (so there’s your first error). Second, there’s not simply a choice between ‘abstinence only’ or ‘teach contraception’, there’s the more commonly accepted mixed approach which explains that abstinence is the only 100% effective method of preventing pregnancy and STDs, but contraception does lower the risk if individuals do engage in sexual activities. The comprehensive approach is the one that has proven most effective (though obviously some pregnancy and STD will still occur regardless of the knowledge level of kids.)
I haven’t seen any evidence that Sarah Palin opposes the mixed approach- all of the criticism of her is based on a survey response in which she indicated that she wouldn’t support explicit programs (which are the extremes of sex ed where very young children are taught about everything from anal sex to homosexuality, and often these programs involve the actual distribution of contraceptive devices to the students.)