Palin's privacy versus her public stance: She would deny others freedom to make private decisions

LAT: Palin's privacy versus her public stance
She, her husband and daughter got to make private decisions privately. But her public views would deny that same right to other Americans.
Tim Rutten
September 3, 2008

....The McCain campaign's major defensive effort on Palin's behalf...has been the categorical insistence that any discussion of her 17-year-old daughter's pregnancy is out of bounds, an unacceptable invasion of the family's privacy....Palin's daughter and her unborn child's father are entitled to privacy as children -- and that's what they are -- and as individuals. They ought not to be pursued by reporters, nor should their friends and teachers be grilled for details about their private lives. Nobody asked them whether they wanted to be made symbolic caricatures in a national debate over the fulfillment of two strangers' political ambitions, and they shouldn't be treated as if they had.

That said, the fact of Bristol Palin's situation and the way in which she and her family have chosen to deal with it are legitimate issues, because they involve public policy issues on which Sarah Palin, candidate for vice president, has taken political positions. Palin, for example, opposes sex education in schools, including all access to contraceptive information for adolescents. Similarly, she believes that abortion should be illegal.

But Palin and her family dealt with two personal situations in just the way all Americans are entitled to meet them. When Sarah Palin and her husband discovered that their unborn son would be born with Down syndrome, they were free to make the decision that she would carry their boy to term. When they found that their 17-year-old daughter was pregnant by her high school boyfriend, they were free to reach a decision that the daughter, too, would keep her child and that she and the boy would marry. (They were free to do that even though many, perhaps most, Americans no longer regard teenage marriages as particularly desirable. Most people long ago put away the notion of a boy "making an honest woman" of the girl.)

The point is that the Palins were able to make all these decisions according to the dictates of their own consciences, formed by their own religious convictions, within the privacy of their own family and according to its values and traditions. What they decided is nobody's business but theirs; the fact that they were free to arrive at their own decision is everybody's business. The particular brand of social conservatism in which Sarah Palin quite evidently believes deeply would deny other American families and other American women the freedom to make these same intimate decisions according to the dictates of their own consciences, religious convictions and traditions.

The McCain campaign would like to cut off discussion of Palin's views as quickly and as completely as possible. That's because McCain's desire to find a female running mate whose views on abortion wouldn't further alienate the religious right led him into a reckless and ill-considered decision. He picked a vice president he hardly knew -- and now, his campaign would like to buffalo the electorate into doing the same....

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-rutten3-2008sep03,0,375027.column

wanted to allow her daughter to make a private choice, but would not allow others to do the same.

HYPOCRITES

because it WAS a choice, but she wants to take away that choice for everyone else. I have no respect for her. Hypocrite.

by making her have to marry this idiot and becoming a mother before she's emotionally prepared for the responsibility....doesn't mean that's the only option other, more enlightened parents have to make their daughters. It's the hypocrisy and bankruptcy of their public policy.

They claim to be anti-choice, even as they make a choice.

is Sarah Palin's motto.