Today I heard the first sneering reference to Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter, Bristol, by a liberal talk show host of all people! Doesn't he realize that his party stands for teenage pregnancy without consequences, and woe betide anyone who would blame such a thing on the parents of that child?
In the liberal world view, parents are hardly responsible for their offspring's failings. In fact, no one is responsible for even their own failings. There is always an excuse, and it is always OK as long as it fits the left-wing agenda.
It will surprise many to know that I do believe that Sarah Palin has some responsibility here. But then, so does her husband. It is each and every parent's responsibility to know where their children are and what they're doing. Of course, when they reach the age of 16, kids are much harder to keep track of. We all know that.
In addition, I hardly believe that Sarah encouraged Bristol to get pregnant. "We believe in family values, dear," she would say. "Now, go get laid and,while you're at it, let me give you some pointers..."
No. I think that no one can believe that scenario for a moment.
So, we're left with the only other conclusion, which is that Sarah Palin did reasonably well in raising her kids, and Bristol decided on her own that she wanted to have sex with a boy. As a result of that choice, she is now pregnant.
BRISTOL SHOULD NOT MARRY
Many conservative pundits are roundly congratulating Bristol for her choice to marry Levi, the father of her baby.
Just because a girl makes a bad choice and gets pregnant as a result of it doesn't mean that she needs to compound that choice by getting married in some attempt to justify it.
ADOPTION IS AN OPTION
If Bristol were my own child, I would encourage her to give the child up for adoption. If she were dead-set on keeping it, I would recommend that she have the baby and raise it on her own, with Levi's help. Perhaps, in a couple of years if they still find that they are compatible with each other, they can marry for the right reasons.
LEVI IS NO GREAT CATCH
Although he's very handsome (which can spark a girl's interest for all the wrong reasons), Levi has said of himself "I'm a f---in' redneck," and he has stated on his MySpace page that he doesn't want kids. I don't get the impression that Bristol will find that she has much in common with him five years from now, as she stares at him from across the breakfast table.
Can we realistically expect that Bristol will have a successful future when she is merely one child marrying another? Studies show that the human brain is only fully developed at age 25. Do we really think that two 17 year olds can get married, settle down, raise a family and grow old together?
Let's not kid ourselves. It's been done before, but the likelihood of such success is slim-to-none.
In my opinion, the Palin parents should be discouraging Bristol's marriage. Either Bristol isn't thinking clearly and truly wants this, or she's being encouraged to "become an honest woman."
PUNISHMENT BY MARRIAGE?
Bristol's already made the choice to be sexually promiscuous. Barack Obama once said that he wouldn't want his daughter to ever be "punished by a baby." Instead, are some conservatives punishing her with marriage?
Raising a child lasts for only 18 years. But a conservative marriage ideally lasts a lifetime. Are we all ready to sentence Bristol to a marriage with another child, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, when neither of them have fully developed yet?