Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Sarah Palin's stupid mistake

I'm glad I supported Governor Palin when she ran for the Presidency with McWhat'shisname. I wish they'd won.

When the news came out that Palin's daughter had sinned sexually, I was glad that the Palins were not taking Obama's our-grandchild-is-a-punishment-so-kill-it approach. When Pastor Doug Wilson immediately laid responsibility for Bristol Palin's sin at her father's feet, I took issue with him at length ...and I still agree with myself!

I'm glad of all those stances, with no "But's" or second thoughts.

Now Governor Palin does something I can't defend, and haven't the slightest inclination to defend. Palin gives her shallow, foolish, clueless, unrepentant daughter a global microphone, and lets her strike at the heart of what Palin herself professes to believe.

Be clear: Bristol Palin has accomplished nothing of global significance in her life. Nothing has earned her the spotlight. Her mother, by contrast, is a focused, excellent, disciplined woman. What's more, her mother professes to be a Christian, and has lived a life that adorns that testimony.

The only reason Bristol Palin is in the spotlight is because she sneered at God's law regarding sexuality, was found out, and is herself the child of a famous mother.

This gets her the spotlight — and it is an undeserved prominence.

Still, Bristol could use it for good, in an Ephesians 5:16 way. Were she a humbled, chastened, repentant child of God, Bristol could view the opportunity as repentant king David did:
Then I will teach transgressors your ways,
and sinners will return to you" (Psalm 51:13).

8 I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go;
I will counsel you with my eye upon you.
9 Be not like a horse or a mule, without understanding,
which must be curbed with bit and bridle,
or it will not stay near you (Psalm 32:8-9)
She could speak of her sin, and of the glories of Christ. She could point the nation to Christ. Bristol could do all that. But she didn't — and Governor Palin had to know she wouldn't. That, or Palin has been terribly deceived by her daughter, or is a wretched, disengaged, irresponsible mother.

Todd and Sarah Palin let Fox News into their house, and put their still unmarried daughter and illegitimately-conceived and still-fatherless grandson on camera, and they let Bristol share her unrepentant, unchastened foolishness with the world. To the families that defended and looked up to her, Governor Palin has presented her daughter as their Proverbs 13:20b and 1 Corinthians 15:33.

Now, if someone wants to argue that the interview was edited and slanted... fine. Governor Palin knew that would happen. She knows the media hate her and her faith. She had to have told Bristol it would happen.

So how does one defend these statements, from a Christian perspective, in any context?
VAN SUSTEREN: Any sort of -- I mean -- and I realize, you know, what joy a child brings to a family. But was there any sort of thinking that maybe -- did you have any sort of sense about, I wish that maybe this would happen a year or two from now, rather than now?

BRISTOL: Yes. Of course. I wished it would have happened in, like, 10 years so I could have a job and an education and be, like, prepared and have my own house and stuff. But he brings so much joy, I don't regret it at all. I just wish it would have happened in 10 years, rather than right now.

VAN SUSTEREN: You know, it always is sort of a difficult thing, you know, when it's a question of youth, and no one ever really knows what to say to a young person in your situation.

BRISTOL: Yes. I don't know. I just -- I hope that people learn from my story and just, like, I don't know, prevent teen pregnancy, I guess.
She doesn't know, like, y'know, she guesses. Pregnancy, gestation, delivery, motherhood — still doesn't know, still guesses... yet she thought that was worth telling the watching world, the world that already ridicules her mother for her faith in Christ?

Here's what Bristol says about her mother's influence on her decision:
VAN SUSTEREN: What didn't anybody get? What didn't people understand?

BRISTOL: That -- there's a lot of things. They thought that, like, my mom was going to make me have the baby, and it was my choice to have the baby. And it's just -- that kind of stuff just bothered me.

VAN SUSTEREN: And in terms of your mother making you have the baby, I mean, the whole issue of, I guess, the right -- the right to life and choice and things like that.

BRISTOL: Yes. Yes.

VAN SUSTEREN: But this is your issue. This is your decision.

BRISTOL: Yes. And would have -- [would have what?] doesn't matter what my mom's views are on it. It was my decision, and I wish people would realize that, too.
Further, we learn that she didn't even tell her parents first. She told a best friend, and her accomplice, Levi. The three of them sat her parents down, and her parents had to hear it from her friend. Not their daughter, not the brave father. The friend. Great.

And Bristol depicts their reaction in terms of her having "a lot of growing up" to do. When someone sins, when I sin, that isn't my first thought; I don't think it ever should be anyone's first thought. Sin is not immaturity — it's sin. Bristol wasn't a tot showing bad manners; she was a young woman knowingly and deliberately violating God's law. Is that what she got from her parents — that she just needed to mature?

Well, it isn't what she needed, nor needs. She needs what any sinner needs. She needs Christ. She needs to humble herself, repent, mortify her sin, make right whatever she could, put off the patterns and sinful attitudes that birthed the sin, and walk with Christ (cf. Job 42:6; Proverbs 28:13; Ezekiel 18:30; Matthew 13:8; Romans 6; 8:12-14; 2 Corinthians 7:10; James 4:6-10). If this exposes that Bristol never truly believed in Christ, she must repent and do so (Acts 16:31; 17:30).

But a chastened humility is not what radiates through the interview. Rather, an in-denial giddiness over the joys and trials of young motherhood — and still, her child is fatherless.

Well, Bristol doesn't think her child is fatherless. She says that Levi is "a really hands-on dad. He's just in love with him as much as I am."


Gosh, that offends me, as a Christian man and a father. This boy is so "in love with" his son that he doesn't mind if the child bears the stigma of illegitimacy now, nor that he would bear that stigma forever, if Levi were to die before finally marrying Bristol. So "in love" that Levi pursues his life and schooling or whatever as his child and the woman he wronged start the family by themselves. So "in love" with the child that he continues to set an indelibly wretched example for his son, that words alone will never undo.

I can't begin to tell you how impressed I am not with Levi's "love" for that child.

Bristol several times speaks of being "blessed" in her family, but that's always in the context of their usefulness to her, their utility. She shows us more of her attitude towards her parents:
VAN SUSTEREN: Your parents know you're doing this interview. You're 18, so you make your own decisions, but do they know?

BRISTOL: I told my mom yesterday, so...

VAN SUSTEREN: That was good timing, yesterday.


VAN SUSTEREN: You don't give them much notice, do you, advance notice.

Well, that's just great. Bristol's mother is an international figure now, almost was vice-president; she (Bristol) caused her embarrassment and threatened the focus of the campaign... but, hey, whatever. I guess it looked like a hoot to get out there and, y'know, blab with Greta.

And blab she does. Once again, Bristol is given an opportunity to say something about her sin. Here's what she says:
VAN SUSTEREN: Teen pregnancy -- what's your thought on that?

BRISTOL: I think everyone should just wait 10 years.

VAN SUSTEREN: That's just -- why?

BRISTOL: Just because it's so much easier if you're married and if you have a house and a career and -- it's just so much easier.

VAN SUSTEREN: What do your parents say about teen pregnancy?

BRISTOL: It's not something to strive for, I guess. It's just -- I don't know. I'm not the first person that it's happened to and I'm not going to be the last. But I don't know. I'd love for -- to be an advocate to prevent teen pregnancy because it's not, like, a situation that you want to strive for, I guess.
Gets very vague and "I guess"-y, doesn't she? But it gets worse, as she's given yet another opportunity:
VAN SUSTEREN: I don't want to pry to personally, but I mean, actually, contraception is an issue here. Is that something that you were just lazy about or not interested, or do you have a philosophical or religious opposition to it or...

BRISTOL: No. I don't want to get into detail about that. But I think abstinence is, like -- like, the -- I don't know how to put it -- like, the main -- everyone should be abstinent or whatever, but it's not realistic at all.


BRISTOL: Because -- I don't want to get into details on this.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, no, I don't mean personally, just big picture, not -- not necessarily about you, but...

BRISTOL: Because it's more and more accepted now.

VAN SUSTEREN: Among your classmates and kids your age?

BRISTOL: Among -- yes, among kids my age.

VAN SUSTEREN: How do you change that?

BRISTOL: To see stories like this and to see other stories of teen moms and just -- it's something that's -- I don't know, just -- you should just wait 10 years and it'd just be so much easier.
I don't know, I guess, I don't want, uh... "not realistic" ...uh... "more accepted" ...uh... "easier." Mercy.

Um, Bristol? It still is not "more accepted" with God. Has no one pointed that out to you?

Now, if I were reading this, I'd be thinking, "Dude, you're being a bit harsh on Governor Palin. Bristol did this without her permission or knowledge. How can you lay this on her?" Fair enough. I don't want to lay this on Palin unfairly.

But Governor Palin enters the interview at this point, and here's what she says:
VAN SUSTEREN: OK. We weren't expecting you because Bristol -- she told me that she had just sort of sprung the interview on you.


VAN SUSTEREN: And this is her idea about -- talking about the big picture of teen pregnancy.

SARAH PALIN: Yes. Yes. And I'm proud of her, too, wanting to take on an advocacy role and, you know, just let other girls know that this is - - it's not the most ideal situation, but certainly, make the most of it. And Bristol is a strong and bold young woman and she is an amazing mom. And this little baby is very lucky to have her as a mama. He's going to be just fine. We're very proud of Bristol.
Palin's "proud" of Bristol's "advocacy role."

I could go on quoting, but there's no point. Palin speaks of it as a "surprise," as something that "happened to" Bristol (you know, like being hit by a stray bullet, or catching a cold). She actually says, "Life happens. Life happens and you deal with it, and Bristol's dealing with it wonderfully."

Greta however uses the opportunity to whack on Palin's Christian faith. Oh, she doesn't use the words, "I despise your God and this is as good a time as any to say so" — she uses "abstinence," which to a Christian means "obeying Christ in the area of sexuality." Greta feels it unreasonable and even "unkind" (towards Levi) to obey Christ. Palin does not correct her, nor mention Christ at all.

In fact, nobody mentions Christ, or God. No sign of Him at all.

Final thoughts: I was content to let Bristol be their problem, their business. I was content to give them the benefit of the doubt (not the damn of the doubt, as I think Pastor Wilson did).

But now they let her make it my business, everybody's business.

And the taste it's leaving is bad.

I mean to write about this at Pyro, soon. But often our faith is most severely and bitterly tested when a dearly loved one shames and spites Christ. Do you sell Christ out to accommodate an unrepentant loved one's sin, or avoid that person's displeasure?

Is "Hallowed be Thy name" just words?

Situations like this test the heart like nothing else can.


DJP said...

Let's see. How many silly, derailing responses can I anticipate and head off?

"Come on, ease up! She's just a kid."

She's old enough to have sex and make a baby. She's old enough to read and heed the Word. She's old enough to repent.

"Come on, ease up! She's not a pastor or something!"

You have to be a pastor to be a Christian? Only three of the NT letters are expressly addressed to pastors - and Paul expects the church to be reading over their shoulders.

Being a Christian isn't just for pastors. This isn't rocket science. It's Christian Living 101 - or should be.

"Come on, ease up! It's not like she's a mass-murderer!"

No, but she can go to Hell forever for this, if she doesn't take herself to the Cross (Ephesians 5:3-13). Bristol doesn't get some kind of exemption from that.

"Come on, ease up! It's not like she's spokesman or a leader!"

She put herself in this position. Greater privilege = greater responsibility. It's all over the Bible. Look it up.

"Bwahhhh hahahaha bibble bibble gooble! Bwaghagha! I hate Biblical conservatism! I'm a Communist!"

And a troll. We know. Get new material... or, better still, a new heart, and a life to go with it.

"Come on, ease up! Everyone sins!"

Yes, I know. And everyone will go to Hell, apart from Christ.

Did I miss anything?

DJP said...

Oh, one more.

"Aha! You see? That proves the Palins are terrible parents!"

Not necessarily. See my first post, linked above. Good parents can have idiot children. My own stupid mistakes can't be laid at either of my parents' feet.

But this is stupid. And Bristol certainly shows no sign of having been clued to Christian basics, at all.

Proverbs proves it could be because she was never taught — or she could have been taught, and refused to listen, heed, keep, and do.

JackW said...

Levi = cling to.

I have no idea what Bristol means.
I suspect she has no idea either.

Sarai Palin?

The Squirrel said...

Uhm, sin, righteousness and the coming judgment. I think you've about covered it. Wish someone would take Levi aside and explain what it means to be a MAN, not just a male.

Fred Butler said...

You are meaner than me.

In a good, righteous sort of way.

Jay said...

I was raised in a small Southern town with a very high teen pregnancy rate (seriously, my high school had a day care, and it wasn't meant for teachers' kids). Perhaps because of the frequency of the sin, most Christians in the area seemed to have a somewhat relaxed attitude about the fornication going on. In fact, a lot of the phrases I would hear when a teen girl wound up pregnant sounded like Sarah Palin.

"She's got a lot of growing up to do, but she'll pull through."

Now, I can contrast that with how that same small Southern town responded to homosexuality. They understood that was sin, but they often forgot to tell the truth in love, and prejudices, stereotypes, and yes, actual homophobia got in the way.

The difference, I think, rests in the fact that no one back home had ever really gotten to know a person who turned out to be gay. But everyone knew the unwed teen mothers. They were their daughters, sisters, nieces, etc. The fact that these were women who were known and loved made pointing out their sin so difficult that people, I think, simply forgot about it.

Similarly, when I look at other people from my high school who went to college, and have met more diverse people (gays, Muslims, Jews, atheists, etc.) I see a lot of the same attitude once held for teen mothers extended to the whole of nonbelievers. "Well, they're good people, and I like them, so maybe I was wrong back then and it's not sin after all."

That's probably the biggest problem with such small, homogeneous, communities. The prejudice and ignorance that one often comes across there is wiped away with experience, but often the Gospel goes with it.

Tangent over. :)

Tom said...

Maybe -- just maybe! -- Palin's Christianity is like most of the "religious right's" Christianity: less Christ, more posing.

They BOTH need the Lord.

Kim said...

Well, young Miss Palin came across rather blase about the whole thing despite the desire to be an "advocate." It's too bad Mother didn't know about it; perhaps she could have prepared her for the gravity of giving an interview such as this one.

She came across as rather ditzy, I think. I don't think she can be an advocate for teen pregnancy until she knows exactly what she thinks and why.

The Squirrel said...

I performed a wedding a few years back where the bride was visably pregnant. Before I married them, I spoke to them at length about how they had sinned by acting married before being married and their need to repent. I could tell that no one had ever talked to them like that before. I like to think I got through to them, but they've moved away, so I don't know.

Sex before marrage is not just accepted, but is expected by the world today, and any attempt to uphold Biblical values is ridiculed as "old fashioned" and "judgemental".

Rachael Starke said...

The whole thing made me ill.

I've got an 8 y.o. dughter that is convinced her job in life is to convince her parents why she is always right.

And a 6 y.o. daughter that knows what's right and often hates it.

And there are a lot of days when I'm plain ol' wore out from the discipline and the exhortation and the encouragement over every miniscule step forward.

But this story reminds me of what might happen if I give up.

And color me also equally disgusted with M[?]. Van Susteren. Shamefulness all around.

jazzact13 said...

Some questions--

How was this interview set up without the mother's knowledge of it, until the last minute?

Is the girl still considered a minor?

And where are the "Stop picking on Chelsea" people? Ok, ok, she's not Chelsea, but still...

threegirldad said...

Man -- that was painful...and disheartening.

Herding Grasshoppers said...

Precious few people are willing to speak the truth in love. That's hard work. It's a lot easier to swing to one side or the other.

DJP said...

Hard work, and risky. What if the Palins upset the little princess?

Gilbert said...

I just pray that in private, after seeing that interview, that Sarah gives her some deep life lessons from the Word. If Sarah didn't hear that interview, she obviously made herself look really dumb, and Christ look bad.

Here's a "silly, derailing" response for most people: When I sin, differently but with the same punishment demanded by Christ that comes along with it, I need to repent. I pray she does. But utterly sad and depressing.

Al said...

You speak as if there is some stigma associated with illegitimacy. Rather, it seems to be a place to show God's grace. You know, sinning that grace may abound.

Second, as far as dad being responsible, well recreational dating is a pathetic way to meet your baby daddy. Or the best way to meet him, depending on how you look at it. Dad should have said no at the start.


al sends

Ron said...

Stupid Mistake; letting the interview even happen, especially after being "told" about it "yesterday." Where's Todd Palin in this? Wise counsel from elders or even respect for/of their counsel? I know that my first response after being "told" would have been "Not happening. Cancel it."

DJP said...

Yes, or "Not while living under our roof and on our dime, you're not."

That should work, too.

Or, "Sounds great. Let's have Pastor ____ in on it, too, just to make sure we stay on-message as a family."

threegirldad said...

But Dan. She's eighteen years old. They can't tell her what to do anymore.

Don't you understand?

Solameanie said...

I saw this interview myself last night, and appalled doesn't even begin to describe how I felt about it. Appalled and very disappointed.

I have to wonder how her home church in Wasilla feels about it.

Solameanie said...

Bwahhhh hahahaha bibble bibble gooble!

I'm posting this separately so it doesn't take away from my serious comment.

Dan, that has to rank up there with "glibby gloop gloopy, nibby nabby nooby" from "Good Morning Starshine."

Oliver must be rolling in his grave.

DJP said...

Sure, you're laughing now, but just you wait.

Anonymous said...

As one who experienced this years ago, let me offer the Palins a possible response for such situations.

What we did was wrong. No doubt about it. Killing the baby because of our sin only increases our guilt (not a feeling) before God. So here we are. We're pregnant and we're getting married on Saturday if you would like to join us. We have been forgiven by God through the finished work of Jesus the Christ and we are moving forward.

Michelle said...

If you had to ask my twelve year old daughter or my eleven year old son what they thought of pregnancy outside of marriage, they'd tell you it was wrong because the Bible says you have to be married to have a baby. That's because they are growing up being taught what the Word says (we're parenting only by God's grace and in His strength).

Bristol Palin's responses certainly don't show that she knows the Word of God to be the standard. That's not really surprising because her mom's responses here don't either.

philness said...

I think Dan your dead on correct in everything you have mentioned and your indignation shows your love of your first love.

I just wished the Palins pastor could have been more of a shepherd by seeing this coming and prepare them for this inevitable event and great opportunity to glorify our Lord.

I feel perhaps we could have taken more ownership and have seen this coming ourselves and prayed for someone prepared and faithful to reach the Palins. We were first introduced to them back in late August. We had plenty of time. We had to suspect this was going to happen. I can’t help but think that somehow someway we could have prevented the irresponsible representation that ultimately grieved our Lord and continues to perpetuate the destruction of our trusted stronghold. (Psalm 18:2)

Dan I pondered your post at Pyro yesterday concerning Proverbs 21:22 and it seems the enemy is very wise in his attacks to our trusted stronghold. (Psalm 18:2)

I think these videos of Bristol Palin should be watched by every youth group in the church (perhaps even a curriculum made) to show how successful the enemy is on Christians and Christian families who are not fortified. I hope the Christians who are fortified may feel the pain caused and have a greater heightened sense of protecting and loving our first love. And the more we love our first love the more we will want to keep its walls fortified.

Neil Cameron (One Salient Oversight) said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DJP said...

Banned troll OSO asked me to tell you that he's had some exciting things happen in his life.

For one thing, that huge poster of Sarah Palin he's been trying for so hard on E-Bay finally arrived. He has it up on the ceiling in his mother's basement where he lives. First and last thing each day, he blows it a kiss, and says a little prayer in the hopes that he some day is blessed enough to live in a world where someone of Palin's caliber is in a position of power, and not an unaccomplished fake like Obama.

In other news, he wanted to tell you he almost made a friend today.

It was so close!

GrammaMack said...

"But often our faith is most severely and bitterly tested when a dearly loved one shames and spites Christ." How true. God has used a similar circumstance to test my faith and to open my eyes to the depths of His grace and mercy. What a wonderful God we serve!

Herding Grasshoppers said...


My kids are wondering why I'm laughing out loud. (Your response to the troll.)

On further reflection, I'm very curious how their church did respond to Bristol's pregnancy. (Not being snarky - I have no idea.)

About the time I graduated from HS, my home church had a situation... two young MEMBERS of the church were in a 'relationship', and the girl became pregnant. There were a great many more complicating factors, (but no famous parents.) The pastor and elders handled it beautifully.

No hand-wringing, "well, I don't know", or any nonsense.

Truth and love have to go together.

DJP said...

Amen, Julie, and praise God for that. That is a pivotal moment in their lives. If some loving, gutsy pastor can't speak (and act on) the Word of God plainly and directly, with the unified backup of church and leadership, real chaos and ruin can follow — to their harm, and to the shame of Christ's name.

SolaMommy said...

I hate to be the one sticking her neck out to say this, but...perhaps if Sarah didn't have such a demanding career she would have had more time to teach her children God's Word.

SolaMommy said...

And in somewhat related news:

CR said...

Once again, our own Comrade OSO, surprises us. He's seeing the light evermore.

I do hope he gets to move out of his mother's basement sometime, though. That's gotta be tough.

Aaron said...


No disrespect intended at all here. I was raised knowing and understanding sex before marriage was wrong. I wont bother to tell you what I did as soon as I was free. Call me back when your kids are 22, in college, and bombarded every minute of everyday with sex. Now, thast doesn't make it right. I was wrong and I needed Christ. Nearly everyone of my mistakes can I trace to my sexual activity. But I'd put off on planting your victory flag until you get there.

SolaMomma: First, see my message to Michelle. You can preach to your kid all day long, but that doesn't mean he/she will walk the primrose path. Secondly, Why do you call you the mother but not the father?

Jay: I disagree with you a bit. I think one of the problems is that we, as Christian mothers and fathers don't teach our kids the proper use, role, and responsibilities relating to God's blessings. All I ever heard when I was growing up is sex is bad, alcohol is bad, wealth is bad (and I grew up in a small town environment as well). Never ever was I shown how to exercise self control. I wasn't shown how to enjoy God's blessing responsibly nor was I told what the earthly consequences would be if I misused them. Only
God can bring regeneration to your child. But even the heathen can be taught that "x" action will bring "y" result. And finally, we don't do ourselves any favors by supporting bad lifestyle choices. Yeah, it seems cruel to withdraw support from people who make mistakes. But if you don't make people live with the consequences, why would you expect them to do anything other than whatever they want?

Aaron said...

"Wish someone would take Levi aside and explain what it means to be a MAN, not just a male."

It must be horrible to be a woman looking for a mate these days. Most of the single men I know aren't at all worthy of any woman's respect, much less her marriage prospect. But, when you get the milk for free, why buy the cow? And if you don't buy it, why the heck would you feed it, milk it, or care for it in anyway whatsoever?

Jay said...

Aaron: I'm not sure what you're referring to. I was talking about the fact that being raised a Christian in a very homogeneous community can lead to either extreme prejudice (which can hinder the Gospel) or extreme liberalism (which, again, hinders the Gospel) once you're exposed to more diversity later in life.

I say this mainly because in such a community, everyone you know is a Christian, and everyone you know is close to you, and so when one of these people openly sins, their closeness makes it hard to tell the truth in love.

This was my main point. Sorry if it was unclear. What was your comment responding to specifically?

Michelle said...

Aaron, thanks. I can see how my comments could have come across as smug and I realise that for all our instruction, our children may make foolish and destructive choices in the years ahead.

As Christians we see the Word of God as instructive and authoritative, a lamp unto our feet. Bristol Palin may be one of those young adults who, in spite of all the instruction, made foolish choices and didn't follow wise counsel. But why didn't Sarah Palin mention the Lord or His Word? Why didn't she take the opportunity to point to Christ and seek God's glory in the situation?

Aaron said...


Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending Sarah or Bristol. You got my point. Even when you are a great parent (like yourself), your kids can make mistakes (or in my case, outright rebel). Saying or thinking "my kid would never do that" is a bit naive considering they have the same sinful tendencies as the rest of us.

Jay: Closing in on midnight, it just doesn't seem important anymore.

DJP said...

Aaron, I think Michelle's specific point was to add to what I'd said. I was perfectly content to let the Palins deal with this, and give them the benefit of the doubt. But now the elder Palins let their obnoxiously self-centered daughter take the spotlight, and when she's asked the least question about her behavior, she's all stammers and I-guesses and I-don't-knows. It made me wonder what she'd ever been taught or heard or learned.

Michelle's saying (if I understand her correctly) "Yeah, even my tiny little girls would be able to handle those questions, so what's up with that?"

Not a brag, just a conversational addition.

Solameanie said...

An interesting little aside to this whole thing, which might be illustrative of "Christian" kids' upbringing.

If you remember the boy band named "Hanson," while they were in secular music, they always identified themselves as "evangelical Christian." I found it odd that after that identifier, they refused to talk about their faith other than to say it was "very important" to them.

And, more connected with this issue, at least two out of the three ended up getting their girlfriends pregnant out of wedlock, only to marrying afterward. It might have happened with the third one also, but I'm not sure. No acknowledgement that this was wrong out of the camp at all.

If supposedly evangelical kids don't seem to think having a roll in the hay before marching down the aisle is wrong, something is clearly wrong with what they are being taught in youth groups, churches, and at home -- if not all three.

Michelle said...

DJP, thanks - that's exactly what I meant by bringing my own young children into it - that even they would be capable of answering the question.

And I echo DJP and Solameanie, I have to wonder what Bristol has been taught. At the age of eighteen, the concept that sex outside of marriage is wrong should not be a difficult one to articulate.

Kay said...

Gah! 'I'm really proud of her being an advocate'? And pray tell, how exactly is she an advocate?

Teen girls look at Bristol Palin and see someone who has a cute ickle baba, all supported by her parents - so supported she can be on the telly without asking them first! - and who has told them that, yeah, you know, abstinence is a blah blah blah, UNREALISTIC, and unfair on your boyfriend.

Young men see Levi and think - hey, cool, even if she does get in the family way, I can play 'daddy' with out having to do any of that dull real commitment stuff.

Yeah, that kind of advocacy is in such short supply nowadays. Bristol really fills a gap in the market.

DJP said...

Nobody does "dead-on" like our Libbie does "dead-on."

Aaron said...


Understood. And again, I wasn't being disrespectful. I agree with the gripes, especially with Sarah Palin, who if she is a Christian, should have had a stronger message.

I think the problem here is that I don't wonder what she's been taught. I believe she hasn't excepted Christ as her Savior and therefore, I expect Bristol to answer questions like she did. She probably has been taught the truth but chose to reject it. So now she's in the untenable position of having to deny the faith to the public and her parents or be wishy-washy in order to pretend to be a Christian while meanwhile be-bopping with her boyfriend. It's easier just to be wishy-washy (and I'm speaking from extensive personal experience). Because somebody (in this case Bristol) doesn't say the truth doesn't at all mean they don't know what the truth is. I strongly suspect that Bristol doesn't answer with the truth because then she must confront her sinfulness and accept one of two propositions (1) she is sinning and needs to stop despite what she may desire or (2) she's decided to reject Jesus for her desires. It's a lot easier to say you're saved and be sexually active then it is to admit 1 or 2 above. Especially since a verbal rejection of the faith would likely result in family and church pressure (which incidentally should be there in any case, but church discipline is sorely lacking in most churches).

The answers to the questions are difficult if you are a hypocrite, that's my point


Or maybe they have been taught, do know better, but have decided to reject God and march to their own drumbeat? It's a lot easier to deny God in action then it is to come outright and say, "you know what, I've decided to live like the heathen." When I was in rebellion, I was sexually promiscuous but you'd never, ever get me to say that I wasn't a Christian. It wasn't until I became a Christian that I could (or rather would) look back and say, I rejected Christ and was not a Christian. I also met the father of one of the band members for the group POD. I don't know these boys (now men I suppose) personally, but what little I do know makes me question their Christianity. The one thing I do know, is that they received Biblical guidance and teaching from this boy's father.

Aaron said...

again, our first presumption is that she is not capable of articulating it was wrong because she wasn't taught properly. My first presumption is that she was taught but that she rejected Christ, at least in action. Lack of Christian discipline then allows her to maintain in this position.

Kim said...

Nobody does "dead-on" like our Libbie does "dead-on."

Yup; absolutely!

Hugh McBryde said...

I don't think you understand. Retroactively, Bristol's parents have approved of the relationship.

She is a mother, and having sex with the father.

There is no suggestion that Bristol has or has had other sex partners.

She is Levi's WIFE.

You can say she's not, you can say she's having sex outside of marriage, and she apparently did, but once the parents ratified the arrangement by NOT breaking it up, whether she realizes it or not, whether Levi realizes it or not, they are husband and wife.

What distresses me is that you people, all possessed of Bibles, probably a LOT of Bibles, probably in a LOT of translations and possibly in different (and maybe original) languages, don't realize it.

What we should be telling them is that they're husband and wife, whether they avail themselves of the increasing silliness of a ceremony or not.

DJP said...

Sex makes fornicators, not marriage. They're not married-on-a-technicality.

Nice screen name, though.

Hugh McBryde said...

Define marriage, in terms of how it happens, practically speaking then DJP.

Use your BIBLE.

DJP said...

Kind of pushy and chest-pounding for a visitor.

Marriage is fundamentally a bilateral covenant of companionship (Genesis 2:24; Proverbs 2:17; Malachi 2:14), which (other things being equal) must be entered into in a manner recognized as honorable by parents (Exodus 20:12), church (Hebrews 13:7, 17) and state (Romans 13:1-7). The covenant is sealed, not created, by sexual initimacy (Genesis 2:24b; note the order).

Hugh McBryde said...

Exodus 22:

"And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins."

Her father, gave her to Levi. Upon discovering the illicit relationship, he should, if he had not wished his daughter to be Levi's wife, refused.

Bristol's father has not refused her to Levi. They are husband and wife.

To cite the ideal circumstance of marriage and then deny that a less than ideal relationship has been ratified because it is not perfect, is folly.

Beyond that you do not describe the mechanism, and you pretty much point to verses, and ask the reader to do the work of looking it up.

If you don't have time, (and I mean this respectfully, truly I do) don't blog.

If you don't want comments, close comments.

Whether you realize it or not I've been following, largely in silence, YOUR BLOG for many months, probably since last summer.

I contend that Levi passed the sole option to make Bristol his wife to Todd Palin (who by the way, eloped with Sarah) and seems to respect the usurpation of his own authority based on his past behavior and his present ratification of Bristol's relationship. I doubt Sarah's parents now contend that Todd is not her husband.

I would remind you that there is no example, mandate or suggestion that Marriage occur as a function of church or state, or with the sanction of either, anywhere in scripture.

The state likes to think it can declare an estate marriage, or not. Free speech rights say I can call anything I want to be marriage, marriage. God says that what he has (BY HIS RULES, NOT OURS) joined together, let no man put asunder.

I suggest to you that Levi and Bristol are husband and wife, whether they realize it or not, whether you realize it or not.

What the state is preparing to say marriage is, you probably don't want to recognize anyway.

DJP said...

You only get one chance to make a first impression, and you've certainly chosen how to make yours.

Your disagreement is noted, as are your opinions as to how others should run their blogs and lives. For further discussion of your view, I refer readers to your blog, where presumably they can see how it should really be done right.

Hugh McBryde said...

Ah! Chest Thrown Out Puffiness! How Baptist of you. I note that while I may have not made a suitable first impression, you are also making one of your own. And you really didn't deal with the substance of the posts I made.

That's up to you of course, and I shall probably continue to follow your blog.

Using scripture as our Guide, it would seem to me that Bristol and Levi are husband and wife already. Whether they remain that way, or even realize that they are different issues altogether. I think we can both agree they got off on the wrong foot.

suziannr said...

Well, gee Dan, since you referred me to his blog I checked it out. Now I'm all like...oh my...backed out of there quickly. Polygyny as a doctrine? And as for Sarah Palin, I'm disgusted by the behaviour of the entire family. Why have the new parents not married, is he living in the house with them? Where is the pastor and where is the father of Bristol and the husband of Sarah. I no longer am just waiting to be able to vote for her for...we have plenty CINOs already.

Hugh McBryde said...

As long as you don't presume to call me a "CINO" I'm fine. :)

As far as referring people to my blog, anyone is welcome to confront me here, there or anywhere with regard to what they might find. If it is seen as unchristian though, I'll want an explanation beyond "everyone knows (fill in the blank)"

REM said...

O, Mr. Palin, why for is thy foot stationary? Mobilize it toward thy offspring’s hinny!

threegirldad said...

I'll want an explanation beyond "everyone knows (fill in the blank)"

That's a dubious claim from where I sit. Dan already provided you such an explanation, and you shrugged it off in pretty short order.

What you want, it seems, is something else entirely.

Hugh McBryde said...

From where I sit, he didn't. What I'm being given amounts to what Clinton said, when he "apologized."

He said he wasn't going to.

Then he said something that sounded like an apology (that wasn't).

Then he said he wasn't going to do it again, because he already had.

I haven't seen Dan give me anything other than verse addresses and make an appeal to authority (his own).

JustJan said...

The lack of maturity in accepting the interview without counsel from anyone makes me wonder about her ability to parent.

Anyway....I have a question. What would your church do if Bristol Palin were a member of your congregation?

I really don't understand why they have not gotten married.

DJP said...

Jan, REM - I was content to let this be the Palin family's issue. Girl was pregnant, they weren't going to murder the baby, she was going to marry Levi, done.

But Governor Palin calls her daughter an "advocate" and lets her do this. So it's all fair game, I figure. She's let Bristol make it our business. For what is Bristol an advocate? Self-absorbed hedonism? No shortage of advocates there.

Does Bristol claim to be a Christian? I share your questions: why isn't she marrying him? What has the church done? What is it doing?

Again, I gave Palin the benefit of the doubt about mothering. But... how can Bristol be so utterly clueless on something that most kids of Biblically faithful parents at least could discuss intelligently?

Now, it's a problem.

I was happier when it wasn't my business, and this clearly clueless, selfish little girl hadn't been made a role model of some kind.


JustJan said...

@The Pharisee

I have seen this sort of argument on several Christian chat rooms. This sort of advice often means that the sin of fornication is compounded by the sin of marrying an unbeliever.

Marriage is a covenant. Sex does not MAKE a covenant. The covenant contract contains promises/vows/pledges. Further there is generally a covenant sign (rings in this case).

What is the contract that is made by having sex?

Failing to recognize the seriousness of the covenantal relationship is silly. Giving advice based on this casual attitude about marriage is dangerous.

Aaron said...

I have a question. What would your church do if Bristol Palin were a member of your congregation?

I've never, ever seen or heard of a specific example of chuch discipline. I've never, ever heard any discussions with other Christians about the appropriate Biblical response to a teen who is in sexual sin. So I have to confess, the answer is I don't know. And this is my biggest beef since you'd think that since sexual sin is so rampant in and outside of our church, that we'd have some common understanding of how we should respond according to Scripture (or by applying Biblical principles).

I really don't understand why they have not gotten married.

It seems pretty clear to me. Bristol and Levi don't accept the authority of Scripture. Scripture is the only authority that tells them they should get married (or if you want to play this game) accept the responsbility of already being married.

Why have the new parents not married, is he living in the house with them?

Is it true that Levi is living with them? Are you kidding me? No consequences for sin. Yeah, it sucks to tell your kid, sorry but you've decided to live life your way, so now get on it with it (without my help) but why would we expect our kids to follow rules if there aren't consequences?

Part of the problem has to do with the pro-life movement, IMO. We are so obssessed with stopping abortion (and of course, we should be against it) that we take away all consequences for the underlying sexual sins. We're constantly told that we must "love the sinner but hate the sin" i.e. we have to be loving, encouraging, etc. or our kids will continue in sexual sin and just have abortions instead of choosing life. But then we wind up implicitly supporting the underlying sin itself.

"And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this essentially say that if a man seduced a woman who is not married, then he should go about the process of making her his wife? And wouldn't that imply that by merely having sex with her that it doesn't automatically make her his wife? That there is some formal process?

P.S. DJP, keep up the great blog!

Aaron said...

I think she's being touted as an advocate for choosing not to have an abortion (which, IMO, is a classic pro-life political move).

She certainly isn't an advocate for Biblical Christianity or a spokesperson for Trojan.

The Church leadership (assuming Bristol is actually an actual member (vs. simply a regular attender) of a church. If Sarah Palin is a member, the church leadership should at least have a meeting with her to make sure she understands the Biblical position and how her statements have undermined this position.

Aaron said...

typo. I meant to say

The Church leadership should go through some disciplinary process with Bristol (assuming Bristol is actually a member vs. simply a regular attender) of a church .

If Sarah Palin is a member, the church leadership should at least have a meeting with her to make sure she understands the Biblical position and how her statements have undermined this position.

JustJan said...


Thank you for your comments.

I really don't know what the right answer is here. My first choice would be to strongly encourage Bristol to put the baby up for adoption.

I am not inclined to encourage 2 young people who are not able to clearly demonstrate their faith in Jesus Christ as their savior to get married.

I would also not accept her living under my roof as a single mom with the boyfriend coming around to play daddy when he feels like it. If you want to keep the baby and play adult, you need to move out and get your own place.

Should the church begin by dealing with Bristol because she is 18 or with her parents since she is living under their roof?

REM said...

I am sadly agreeing with you. Bristol should be disciplined by the Palin's church (?), but big surprise if she doesn't even attend there. It would have been better if the perceived church was involved before but now would have to do. Messy and sad.'re BILL CLINTON. Just try and live that down.

threegirldad said...'re BILL CLINTON. Just try and live that down.

And we have that on good authority (which means not Dan's authority), so it must be true.

SolaMommy said...

Aaron, my comment was about whether Bristol has been taught God's Word, not whether she is a believer. She obviously doesn't even know that what she did is sin, and that even in 10 years it would have been sin (b/c she made no mention of waiting till marriage, just waiting 10yrs) and that it is reasonable to expect that teenagers refrain from sexual sin. And since Sarah was the one interviewed with her and also made no mention of her daughter's sin, but instead threw her full support behind her being some kind of role model/spokesperson I have to wonder if she even knows God's Word herself! Todd was not in the interview, so I have nothing to go on as far as his stance, so I made no mention of him. For all we know, he could be fuming over this.

Aaron said...

"For all we know, he could be fuming over this."

Yep, we don't know. We don't know who was taught what or what anybody knows. I think you are generous in giving all of the Palins the benefit of the doubt by saying you're not sure they know God's Word (i.e. you wonder if and what they've been taught). I personally think that Bristol has been taught premarital sex is sin and has chosen to ignore the teaching. I also think that Sarah Palin knows it is wrong, but is now in the quandry of figuring out how to deal with the product of that sin (i.e. the child). I think that Todd is negligent in not laying down the rules in his own house, with his own family.

But I admit that I could be wrong and maybe the church is faulty in its teaching.

Moon said...

"If you remember the boy band named "Hanson," while they were in secular music, they always identified themselves as "evangelical Christian." I found it odd that after that identifier, they refused to talk about their faith other than to say it was "very important" to them."
Are you serious? I used to be a HUGE hanson fan I had all their CDs and unofficial biografies, and scrapbooks and I never knew they were Christian...yikes!

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this essentially say that if a man seduced a woman who is not married, then he should go about the process of making her his wife?" He had to pay the bride-price just like any ol' regular wedding back in those days.

Not to be harsh but I don't think Shechem defiling Dinah made them husband and wife anymore than Levi and Bristol's fornication makes them husband and wife.
just my two cents on that.

As for the whole situation, I'm surprised...mostly because Palin is a professed Christian but apparently my catholic mom knows more about what the Bible says on extramarital sex than Palin does. I wasn't just taught that extramarital sex is bad I was taught that God considers it to be sinful.
As for what my church would have done: As soon as they would've found out about the pregnancy they would've begun the process of church discipline.

"But Dan. She's eighteen years old. They can't tell her what to do anymore." yeah try telling that to my mom and dad and I'm 23 :P

"Aha! You see? That proves the Palins are terrible parents!" No but both of their responses, Palin child and Palin mom's, make me wonder how well/much do they read their Bibles if they do so at all, what they're being taught at church (cause at some point they must have mentioned something about fornication, at youth group maybe? too hopeful?)

Hugh McBryde said...


I believe you and I have encountered one another before. Were you perhaps a "Mod" for AOL at one time?

You're throwing up issues about rings and signs of a covenant etc that have no basis in scripture.

It remains a fact that having sex with a man's virgin daughter gives him the irrevocable right to demand that such a man be his daughter's husband. We might have trouble getting modern society to accede to that, but it's nonetheless true.

I maintain God defines marriage, not men. The fact that we defy God regularly and regularly ignore conditions that dictate inevitable consequence hardly means that certain relationships don't exist.

I repeat that there is no example or mandate or suggestion in scripture that marriage is the province of the state, or the church. Families enact marriages, God defines what family actions result in marriage.

Todd Palin ratified the relationship of his daughter Bristol with Levi. HE may not think he has created a husband and wife relationship by doing so, but I contend that God has, if what we are told about their relationship is true.

Hugh McBryde
(Aka Prakk)

Aaron said...

"He had to pay the bride-price just like any ol' regular wedding back in those days."

Ok, I looked up the verse that Pharisee used from Exodus 22.

"then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days.
(Deu 22:29)"

First I found it odd that Pharisee would use Old Testament law to support this contention that God considers sex to be an act that creates a marriage. I also noticed that Pharisee also abided by the Father's perogative to refuse. What I didn't see is Pharisee demanding that Levi pay Todd 50 shekels of silver!!!

Poor hermeneutics...

GrammaMack said...

Aaron, thank you. As a parent whose child was taught God's Word and right from wrong and yet chose to rebel in this way, I believe your take on Bristol could be accurate."I strongly suspect that Bristol doesn't answer with the truth because then she must confront her sinfulness." Exactly. Which would explain the hemming and hawing as well. It does not necessarily mean that her parents did not teach her the Bible.

Hugh McBryde said...


I did not say that. Let me clarify for you.

What I said was that sex can create an obligation that passes the sole right to decide to the girls father.

I've argued this line before and this is always the deliberate characterization that opponents to the position I take, make.

Shorter version? That's a straw man sir. What is my argument again? Quite simply that the man deflowering another's virgin daughter passes his right to decide to the girl's father.

Todd Palin decided. They are husband and wife. It is pathetic to watch my brothers and sisters in Christ try to define marriage in civic terms, in ceremonial terms, when scripture never does.

Wedding feasts are described in scripture, but by God's law marriages started when a betrothal was made, often long before sexual relations began. They could also start when then offended father could take his daughter's seducer and hitch him up to his daughter's wagon.

I won't say shotgun because there were none, but "plowshare" will do.

JustJan said...


No I have never served as a mod anywhere.

Todd Palin decided?!? In the model that you propose there was an ACTIVE negotiation and agreement between the bride's family and the bridegroom.

Sex is no more creates a covenant than cutting an animal in half does. Marriage is a covenant. Sex is an activity reserved, by God, for a husband and wife who were PREVIOUSLY bound by that covenant.

DJP said...

The Pharisee and all:

Perhaps I was too polite. The Pharisee declared himself "distressed" because every one of us were, unlike him, ignorant of our Bibles on this subject. Corrected, he demanded that I define marriage, and shouted that I must use "my BIBLE" (because, you know, I never do that). I did so, but I didn't do it his way, so he complained about that, and me, and how I live, and how I conduct this blog. It was a sweet moment for us all.

Then I said, "For further discussion of your view, I refer readers to your blog, where presumably they can see how it should really be done right."

I evidently wasn't plain enough, as some good-hearted souls have tried to help him out, but it's not going anywhere.

So here it is, plainer and less polite:

I see you, The Pharisee, as someone spoiling for an argument centering around your idiosyncratic views of things. I'm saying that you may certainly do that. I'm saying you may not do it here. If any of my readers want to argue with you, I point them to your blog (without recommending the blog per se), where they can do so as long as you both hold out. That will be up to them, and you.

But not here. You stated your view, you've had responses, you've told us what you think of the responses, and now we're moving on. You're done here on this subject, as of this comment.

So, folks, move on.

And if anyone needs a reminder as to what this blog is about, here you go. There are innumerable blogs with barely-moderated meta's, and this isn't one of them.

It's a blog, not a bog.

Hugh McBryde said...

As you wish Dan :)

DJP said...

With no sarcasm of any sort, I doff my hat to the most gracious response I think I've ever gotten to an "everyone out of the pool."

< doff >

philness said...

Mean while back at Biblical Christianity.

Since I do not have a blog I was wondering with Dan's permission if we might now begin to offer some suggestions of how Bristol could reconcile this whole thing. Assuming from the premise she is indeed saved but an infant in the Lord with busy parents less well equipped to foresee or handle such matters.

DJP said...

< shrug >

Give it a go.

philness said...

Well, on second thought she might do more harm to the cause of Christ if she tried. But I think the first place to start would be picking up the phone and making an appointment with the pastor if the pastor hasn't already done so himself by now.

DJP said...

Amen to that. I was just praying for the Palins and their pastor.

Is the leadership of that church being torn by the prospect of having to confront such a famous, prominent, influential family for (apparently) so badly botching this situation on so many levels?

Easy for us to throw stones from where we sit, but regardless, that shepherd's duty before God is, I think, pretty clear. Pray he rises to the challenge with 1 Timothy 5:21 and 2 Timothy 4:1-4 firmly before his heart.

REM said...

Yes and amen. Their church being the church here would be refreshing and I pray it happens.

However, what's incentive to get a cameracrew in a living room of a house you're begging to be thrown out of so somebody can play Barbara Walters with you? You don't clear the air with the public unless you intend to breath it in the future. Fishy. Career/Exposure? Power trip/Experiment? Friend/Boyfriend put her up to/dared her? Sorry, but the space it out ten years/advice to the realistic/trip over my each word bit was too cartoon numskull even in this situation & off of every conceivable target that I can only ponder truer motives. Nevertheless, what's done is done.

Aaron said...

GrammaMack, We're on the same wavelength.

REM: Maybe she got paid? Fox doesn't usually pay people I don't think. Your right though. We haven't, until you mentioned it, examined her motives.

CR said...

I've had mixed feelings about this. When I first heard about a "Palin" interview, thought it was going to be on the Gov. As I saw it, and saw that it was about Bristol's pregnancy, I turned it off because I wasn't interested.

After hearing all the stuff about it, I thought it disappointing that Bristol did not mention about her sin, once, nor anything about the Lord.

She is 18 and doesn't need her parents permission to interview. Greta has this fascination on Palin even though she disagrees with her politically. Most likely Greta pushed for the interview. Yes, Gov. Palin could have said, not in my house. I don't know what her motives were, maybe she was trying to...well, I don't know what she was trying to do.

I don't want to assume just because parents are believers then it follows for their children (see Hezekiah and Manasseh; David and Solomon; etc. etc.) I do believe Gov. Palin is a believer and I think she demonstrates it from having Trig and from the videos that the far left fringe group have found of her talking before churches to try to mock her.

Here's what we can expect, though, in the future. Look for those people like Piper and also look for others suffering or developing PDS (including professing Christians)to use Bristol as a rant to say that Palin is a poor mother and poor example or that she should never run for public office.

I for one was disappointed that Gov. Palin participated in the Bristol interview. I don't know that I would call it a stupid mistake, but not good. Lord willing, I do hope she decides to run in 2012. We'll see.

CR said...

Well, saw the first 19 minutes of the interview. I'm beginning to see this is not Sarah Palin's mistake at all. In the interview, Bristol admitted to Greta that she sprung on her mother about the interview she had with Greta the day before the actual interview. And again, Bristol is 18 years old. She didn't need her mom's permission for the interview.

Yes, technically, Sarah Palin, could have said, "not in my house." Sarah Palin was probably just as in much shock when Bristol told her that like when Bristol, sorry, when Bristol's best friend told her about Bristol being pregnant. Who knows, maybe Sarah Palin had hopes Bristol would be more repentant.

Like I said, already, be ready for people to say that Sarah should stay home and she's a terrible mom. Maybe those same professing Christians will say that Hezekiah was a terrible dad to Mannesah.

But I don't think this was Sarah's mistake at all. Bristol sprung this surprise on her mom the day before. This was her daughter's mistake and blown opportunity, not her mother's.

DJP said...

Well, Carlo, I've shared your admiration for Palin, and I agree with you on just about everything. But here, I absolutely stick to what I said.

1. Don't downplay the fact that the Palins could have (and should have) flat refused. If they couldn't, if they don't have even that much control over what goes on under their roof, then I am forced to admit that it is a mark against their parenting.

2. Saying that Bristol sprung this on her mother, the governor of the state and a former candidate for vice-president, and that she got away with it — and all the more so if (as you seem to hint) it displeased the Palins — does not speak well of the Palins as parents.

3. You seem to gloss over Palin coming in and bubbling about how proud she is of Bristol, and what an "advocate" she is. That is simply inexcusable.

4. Bristol reflects no Christian thinking whatever on what she's done. The Palins can't get off the hook, or be let off the hook, regarding that. Either they failed to teach her as they should have, or they failed to realize she was unrepentant, or having realized that she was unrepentant they did nothing about her harming others (and their testimony as a family) through her appalling example.

5. Regarding what others will say about Palin and her parenting, you know what my stance has been. But this forces me to say that, if it emboldens such critics, the Palins have only themselves to blame for it. Not only that, but whereas before such critics have had only guesses and innuendo, this has handed them solid ammunition.

6. There are more kids where that one came from. If Sarah Palin were to become vice-president, or president — as I'd hoped — then what are they going to inflict on the nation? If Governor Palin lets her foolish daughter give such a harmful interview at this point in her career, how much more harm could President Palin's children cause? You know that Bristol's words are being used to mock and denigrate abstinence, as it is. What surprises would other Palin children unleash?

It was a disaster, and I can't let my political views and concerns cloud my estimation of it. (Not in any way implying that you are.)

CR said...

DJP:You seem to gloss over Palin coming in and bubbling about how proud she is of Bristol, and what an "advocate" she is.

I missed that. I probably just need to watch the whole interview.

DJP said...

Well, I quote it in the article above, and link to the transcript.

Aaron said...

In my estimation, Sarah has had poor counselors throughout her campaign and even now. Could you imagine running for President, Senate, or Governor without having a coordinated family plan? You'd meet with your staff every week but you don't meet with your family to solify a plan to deal with the press? And where are her campaign strategic advisors?

Aaron said...


Carol Platt Liebau just posted an article on townhall that is along a similar vein.

Unknown said...

whacked!!! Oh, and yes, it is 'whacked' not wacked.

Monyet kecil said...

Just so you all know, Sarah Palin IS NOT a godly person. She lies whenever she opens her mouth, and she deceives people as well as God!

My proof:

SHE LIED WHEN SHE SAID SHE IS THE MOTHER OF TRIG. Most likely, BRISTOL is the mother of Trig - as well as the mother of Tripp!
NO birthcertificates have been shown for either baby. When was Tripp born? Sarah-the UNgodly says he was born on Dec 27. Have you seen the few pictres they showed on Greta's show? NOT ONE OF THEM has any Christmas decorations in the background!!!!

Monyet kecil said...

To re-iterate my post above: I believe BRISTOL is a SECOND-TIME MOM, and Sarah-the-UNgodly one has been covering for her daughter!

Aaron said...

I can't wait to see Dan's remark after this one. The libs love when it suits them. I guess this is one of those situations where it doesn't (since they debunked this).

Anonymous said...

I'm guessing "L" is for Loser.

DJP said...

At the moment, I'm actually puzzling over where we are having a controversy over the spelling of "whacked"....

You know, I think I'll just leave it up. If only as an oddity, so people can know that They are still out there, the people who think Bush personally flew the jets into the Two Towers and then bailed out with Elvis on his back, and believe anything (to say nothing of "everything") the MSM and Daily Kos tells them.

This thread caught the attention of a bunch of people who hate Sarah Palin and (for the most part) display no clue what the Bible says about anything. With the customary depth of such folks, they think we all want Bristol to die a horrible death and then go to Hell, and yadda yadda yadda. I think it's just bracing periodically to be reminded that 1 John 3:13 is still true 1900 years after it was written, and it will still be true in 1900 years if the Lord doesn't return by then. "Do not be surprised," John writes — because he knows we always will be.