Sorry for a longer than expected post...I know how annoying it is to go through this on a message board. I broke it down into two parts. I thought of doing two threads, but the two topics are related.

First, I'd have to say that I agree with Republicans that most discussions or attacks towards governor Palin's pregnant, underage daughter would be in bad taste and poor form. She was a child who made a mistake and is trying to make right that mistake. I do not, however, feel that she is totally off limits. As an individual person, yes, as the underage child of a public figure, yes, but not the present situation. I do not feel that anymore than I did about Chelsea Clinton being considered "off limits" while she actively campaigned for her Mother. Obviously Bristol Palin is a different situation, and no where to the extreme that Governor Palin's daughter is. I'll try to avoid making anything directly towards here but a general commentary about the situation. I digress...

This has presented a unique situation among conservatives, especially among the talk show circuit. Teenage pregnancy in America is on the rise, and it's especially heated with how popular culture has treated it in movies like "Juno." Britney Spear's younger sister, Jamie, recently gave birth and she was destroyed by the conservative media. Underage, unwed, teenage mothers have always been the victim of attacks by the far right in the US. Now, here comes the hypocrisy. Bristol has been praised for being a brave, courageous young woman who just made a mistake and is doing the right thing by marrying the father of the child.

I think this is beautiful. Conservatives have the power to forgive and understand that young mothers are not the evil breed Republicans attribute them to be, but young people who are in unfortunate situations. I think many more people should embrace the idea of forgiveness, if anything, for the sake of the unborn child who did not chose to come into the world into that situation.

So, I know better. I know this is only because she is Governor Palin's daughter and they're making an exception either to promote their political support, or if anything because she's a Republican, Upper middle class and white. Great, now will they spread their forgiveness to the rest of the underage teenage mother's of the world? How about minority mothers? How about those who can't marry because the biological father has no business raising a child and the mother is actually doing the right thing by not marrying him? How about situations of Rape? What about Those children who never had positive role models or parents to teach them what sex is? Do you hold it against them still for actions they had no preparation against?

I think every child should be afforded the right to be born to a loving Mother and Father, but obviously we don't live in a perfect world. I think Republicans should, for once, spread their compassion to include more people than young Bristol. If not, if they need a venue for their wrath, instead of directing towards the unwed Mothers, direct it towards the Fathers of these children. It takes two to create life and for every child born to an unwed Mother there was a Man who was in total control and refuses to take responsibility or accountability for their actions. Instead of demonizing these young women, support them and encourage the Men of the world to grow up a little themselves and be responsible.

On the same topic, this points to the blaring, BLARING contradiction in Governor Palin's "abstinence only" stance regarding sex education. Here's a clue: If you're teaching children not to have sex, and they're having unprotected sex resulting in higher pregnancy rates, abstinence only doesn't work. Also, why be abstinent?

Before anyone gets crazy thinking about why I asked this rhetorical question, understand that I will support and teach my children to wait before they're married**. But if you're going to ask, and you're going to try to support abstinence only you have to have a reason why. The only notion that comes to mind as to why anyone would do this would be Christian dogma known as the law of chastity. (or other term to whichever sect you belong to** Obviously, this is the concept I hope to educate my children about) This is not something you're going to teach, or have ANY power to support in a classroom. Teenagers who truly wait until marriage do so because of either strong personal conviction, or parents/community/church leaders who offer them support. Not because it's how they were taught in school.

Sex education isn't designed for these kids because they already having tools in place to support and encourage abstinence. Instead, you are forcing this to teenagers who are filled with raging hormones, have no support to be abstinent outside of school, and have no personal belief that sex is wrong. What are they going to do? Here's a shocker: They're going to have sex. Instead of empowering these kids to know how to protect themselves and be educated about the greatest power given to man (the power to procreate) you're telling them it's naughty and to not do it, so when they're forced to face their hormones and submit to them, they don't have the knowledge to be fully prepared. In other words, kids who have to face the real world and the real world doesn't tell them to be abstinent are being set up to fail because we're not educating them. (see: increase in AIDS rate and teenage pregnancy)