- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Sarah Palin isn't helping her party's "abstinence-only", "family values" platform very well right now.
A direct quote from the Republican Party platform:
"We renew our call for replacing "family planning" programs for teens with increased funding for abstinence education, which teaches abstinence until marriage as the responsible and expected standard of behavior. Abstinence from sexual activity is the only protection that is 100 percent effective against out-of-wedlock pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS when transmitted sexually.
We oppose school-based clinics that provide referrals, counseling, and related services for abortion and contraception."
There are more people than I could probably count in a day if they were in front of me that are going to say the following: abstinence-only programs don't work, Sarah Palin's daughter is living proof of that statement, and federal funding of birth control and prevention of sexual diseases (through types of birth control) is critical for teenagers.
Obama doesn't have to say a word. All he has to do is watch everyone else say it - they are already saying it now.
Being pro-life is not the issue. If that's Sarah Palin's (and her daughter's) opinion, they are perfectly entitled to that viewpoint and there is nothing wrong at all with it.
However, Ms. Palin putting her daughter in harm's way by allowing her to be potentially exposed to chlamydia, HIV, herpes, etc. by teaching her abstinence-only sexual education? That is not exactly looking out for your child's health if you don't give them critical information other than "don't do it". I wouldn't dare let my daughter past the age of 9 (and believe me, she's past that age) without the knowledge that could literally save her life someday.
What were Sarah Palin - and the Republican Party - thinking?
