Bristol's Choice

???Why the desperation?

Because Vice President Sarah Palin would mean Americans could actually end up electing a woman president without tapping a manipulative, soulless, stay-married-just-to-stay-in-power socialist.

How dare the Republicans threaten to do that? Only the "progressive" party is supposed to be allowed to put the first articulate woman in line for the White House! Why, it's just like when the Republicans dared to put a conservative black man on the Supreme Court. It's so wrong!???----Vin Suprynowicz (Las Vegas Journal Review)

???Why the desperation?

Because Vice President Sarah Palin would mean Americans could actually end up electing a woman president without tapping a manipulative, soulless, stay-married-just-to-stay-in-power socialist.

How dare the Republicans threaten to do that? Only the "progressive" party is supposed to be allowed to put the first articulate woman in line for the White House! Why, it's just like when the Republicans dared to put a conservative black man on the Supreme Court. It's so wrong!???----Vin Suprynowicz (Las Vegas Journal Review)

I'd like to know what Palin and McCain think about contraceptives specifically birth control pills. My personal convictions are pro-life (and the correct definition of pro-life which is anti-abortion anti-death penalty) but I'm concerned that if Roe v. Wade is overturned it won't be long before the morning after pill and birth control pills are banned. If you give women options, easy access to such birth control, then abortion rates would drop substantially.

When does pro-choice not include a decision to keep a child? Your narrow minded response that there was only one choice for the Palins with either of the pregnancies makes me sick. The pro-choice movement is wrongly named. Clearly, your agenda is no-life regardless the circumstance when ever a selfish, irresponsible female of any age determines to eliminate the genetic material she bears.

having read a lot of commentary regarding pro-choice lately, it amazes me so many pro-choice advocates can see only one choice in both of the scenarios regarding the Palins. I also looked for your biography to determine if you are a mother. Until you are, you can not begin to know the need of counsel of an adolescent. Certainly, a 15 or 17 year old could not make a decision on life alone.

As a former dem, now independent, I now see the fear card being played by the liberal press. Palin is 2ND on the ticket. The attacks on her just magnifies the fact that when it comes to experience McCain wins hands down over Obama. The dems claim UNITY so when they increase their house and senate seats they can counter any attacks on Roe v Wade and far right Supreme Court candidates.

It is so typical that the left thinks everyone's motives are inspired by their political inspirations. It is because that is how they behave. Hello!!!! Most of us make our decisions based on how we actually believe and if that furthers our political careers then so much the better. We live life. You should give it a try.

Pathetic...keep glossing over the loss of rights to the unborn American. I know women that have had abortions and can personally attest to the horrifying depression that results. Also as a father of an aborted child, where I was not consulted, I think there is a double standard for the right to choose for the woman versus the right to choose for the father and child. This right to choose ends when you choose to have sex.

I would take the statement by Gov. Palin: "We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby." to mean that abortion was an option considered by all - its just as we have seen in the past - Republicans do not practice what they preach.

The real debate shouldn't be about abortion but about how we as a society can educate our youth to PREVENT unwanted pregnancies. Abstinence is best, of course, but unlikely. People are going to have sex. We need to face that fact and deal with the issue of preventing unplanned pregnancies. With all of the birth control methods available, getting pregnant if unprepared is pure irresponsibility. Granted, there are the cases of getting pregnant on birth control, but often the fault lies in improper usage--again, irresponsibility.
We've taken away the social stigma of unplanned pregnancies. Jamie Lynn Spears and now Bristol have made it glamorous and almost ok to be pregnant at 17. It's absolutely disgusting that the press feels the need to be delicate with these mothers. Yes, they did the right thing by keeping their child...but that doesn't make it any more unsavory. An unplanned pregnancy at a young, uprepared age is NEVER the ideal situation.

The real debate shouldn't be about abortion but about how we as a society can educate our youth to PREVENT unwanted pregnancies. Abstinence is best, of course, but unlikely. People are going to have sex. We need to face that fact and deal with the issue of preventing unplanned pregnancies. With all of the birth control methods available, getting pregnant if unprepared is pure irresponsibility. Granted, there are the cases of getting pregnant on birth control, but often the fault lies in improper usage--again, irresponsibility.
We've taken away the social stigma of unplanned pregnancies. Jamie Lynn Spears and now Bristol have made it glamorous and almost ok to be pregnant at 17. It's absolutely disgusting that the press feels the need to be delicate with these mothers. Yes, they did the right thing by keeping their child...but that doesn't make it any more unsavory. An unplanned pregnancy at a young, uprepared age is NEVER the ideal situation.

Just as Democrats want limits on the death penalty (and rightfully so), Replicans want restrictions on the ability of mothers to kill unborn children (again, rightfully so). I have never understood how Democrats can fight so hard to keep anyone from killing degenerate murders on deathrow and with the same intensity fight for the right of all women to kill their innocent babies, many of whom if given the chance could live on their own.

While it is noteworthy that the Palin family is putting a brave face on this and trying to mute the fact that this is an illegitimate child born to another teenager, I find it appalling that this is the best that John McCain can do. Tragically, Bristol is a sad commentary on the way our family structures and the lack of sex education at home results in unwanted pregnancies. I would imagine that her parents might have wanted her to be educated in some fashion before taking on the responsibility of parenting. While I do not support abortion in any way, I am an avid and strong supporter of preventing pregnancy. It is morally wrong to kill a human being and the soul for soul teaching is stated just after what is said about a fetus that is mortally wounded. The Bible that the right wing conservatives so vehemently support is very frank on sexual matters and says nothing about the preventing of pregnancy only that once there it is considered a life that is not to be taken. We need to educate our children about sex and we need to also give them the means to prevent unwanted pregnancies other than an abortion. A life that is not created in the first place cannot be debated over, become a burden to our welfare system or require the raising of taxes to support. Sarah Palin should be ashamed that she has failed her daughter in such a humiliating and public way. Anyone who claims to be a real christian would know that fornication is unacceptable to the God they claim to serve.

Thanks, Ms. Lithwick, for your exposition of the growing hopelessness of your position. I wasn't fully aware of how much progress has been made in cutting Roe vs. Wade back to size. I wish you contemplative nights as you imagine the growing possibility of a president Palin leaving office in 2016 or 2020, bequeathing to the nation a 7 to 2 or even 8 to 1 conservative Supreme Court.

This is a very serious issue and should be taken and discussed in an adult manner. Not the rhetoric of left and right but honest debate. Intelligent people know this is not a constitutional right granted by law. It is a states rights issue and should be overturned until the states ratify the law and make it federal.
Furthermore to allow "children" access to unsupervised abortions is a new tenet of the left, the more abortions,the more commonplace the practice, the less chance anyone will notice. Kids have always been little adults to the likes of the writer. Their pregnancies a direct result of the 24 hour a day sexualized garbage on the TV and at the movies. Liberalism created the very pregnancies they now wish to abort. There was a time unwed pregnancy was a stigma and avoided at all costs. Today, thanks the the writer and her fringe ilk, it is commonplace and even celebrated in the movies.
As far a Palin and her daughter...the writer goes to great lenghts to play on your fears and slanders Palin with the broad brush of "Bristol's choice". She obviously assumes, guesses and insinuates to make her biased point....pathetic under the circumstances. No one knows what happened but the Palin family,
In the end women will still have a "choice". Some women will be reckless and use abortion as a contraceptive, some will be stupid kids caught up in the heat of the moment, the MTV peer pressure too much to handle and some will simply decide to abort for selfish personal reasons. Anyway you cut it abortion will continue regardless of who the next president is.
If only we could get the religious right to quit running to the courts everytime a restriction is passed, their goal to end all abortions, perhaps the choice crowd wouldn't be so opposed to restrictions in the first place,

This is a very serious issue and should be taken and discussed in an adult manner. Not the rhetoric of left and right but honest debate. Intelligent people know this is not a constitutional right granted by law. It is a states rights issue and should be overturned until the states ratify the law and make it federal.
Furthermore to allow "children" access to unsupervised abortions is a new tenet of the left, the more abortions,the more commonplace the practice, the less chance anyone will notice. Kids have always been little adults to the likes of the writer. Their pregnancies a direct result of the 24 hour a day sexualized garbage on the TV and at the movies. Liberalism created the very pregnancies they now wish to abort. There was a time unwed pregnancy was a stigma and avoided at all costs. Today, thanks the the writer and her fringe ilk, it is commonplace and even celebrated in the movies.
As far a Palin and her daughter...the writer goes to great lenghts to play on your fears and slanders Palin with the broad brush of "Bristol's choice". She obviously assumes, guesses and insinuates to make her biased point....pathetic under the circumstances. No one knows what happened but the Palin family,
In the end women will still have a "choice". Some women will be reckless and use abortion as a contraceptive, some will be stupid kids caught up in the heat of the moment, the MTV peer pressure too much to handle and some will simply decide to abort for selfish personal reasons. Anyway you cut it abortion will continue regardless of who the next president is.
If only we could get the religious right to quit running to the courts everytime a restriction is passed, their goal to end all abortions, perhaps the choice crowd wouldn't be so opposed to restrictions in the first place,

Where in the article was there mention of the baby? The paramount issue is not doctor-patient privilege, the paramount social issue is the treatment of innocent human life. While there is much room for discussion and disagreement on the issues raised in the article, it would be refreshing if the discussion included the one person whose life is at stake in the abortion debate - the baby's.

Amend the quote "Every time someone else in the decision-making chain gets the power to insert him or herself and conscience between a woman and her fetus, the range of women's choices contracts."

Every time government in the decision-making chain uses the governments power to insert itself and its will between a person and their will, the range of individual choices contracts.

This author is your typical elitist liberal hypocrite. She is in the front lines telling the government to use its power to reduce individual choices in the ways that she sees fit. She knows whats best for you, better than you know yourself.

The founders are right wing extremists in this authors view because they actually believe in liberty and limited government. Elitists liberals reject the founders view and want to change the constitution by using unelected supreme court judges rather than the amending process as set out by the founders. This author is a disgrace.