Why Liberals Hate and Fear Conservative Women

[elalumno]

As long as she wants to dictate policy that will affect my daughters, her daughter most certainly is.

Her daughter is running for office?

Really please do tell.

And we aren't talking about burning her daughter at the stake, we are simply pointing out that if her mothers policies haven't worked at home, why would they on the national level?

Look, just face it, you find exploiting a 16 year old girl's misfortune good, something even Obama has said should be off limits, so stop whining like a sissy when you have that pointed out to you.

Some people attack and exploit little girls, you are one of them, got it.

As to her mother's policies, they aren't working ANYWHERE, her daughte is immaterial to the discussion. Remember, even obama has said as much.

[elalumno]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...041301003.html

<H1>Study Casts Doubt on Abstinence-Only Programs

By Laura Sessions Stepp
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 14, 2007; Page A02

A long-awaited national study has concluded that abstinence-only sex education, a cornerstone of the Bush administration's social agenda, does not keep teenagers from having sex. Neither does it increase or decrease the likelihood that if they do have sex, they will use a condom.
Authorized by Congress in 1997, the study followed 2000 children from elementary or middle school into high school. The children lived in four communities -- two urban, two rural. All of the children received the family life services available in their community, in addition, slightly more than half of them also received abstinence-only education.

</H1>
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/pub...ions/index.htm

<H1>Five Years of Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Education: Assessing the Impact [PDF]

By Debra Hauser, MPH, Vice President, Advocates for Youth
Introduction

Since 1991, rates of teenage pregnancy and birth have declined significantly in the United States. These are welcome trends. Yet, teens in the United States continue to suffer from the highest birth rate and one of the highest rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in the industrialized world. Debate over the best way to help teens avoid, or reduce, their sexual risk-taking behavior has polarized many youth-serving professionals. On one side are those that support comprehensive sex education—education that promotes abstinence but includes information about contraception and condoms to build young people's knowledge, attitudes and skills for when they do become sexually active. On the other side are those that favor abstinence-only-until-marriage—programs that promote "abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard"[1] of behavior. Proponents of abstinence-only programs believe that providing information about the health benefits of condoms or contraception contradicts their message of abstinence-only and undermines its impact. As such, abstinence-only programs provide no information about contraception beyond failure rates.

</H1>
http://www.newwest.net/main/article/...sex_education/

Obviously what gov. Palin advocates is a policy which has been proven a failure.

[Underhill]

Originally Posted by elalumno

Her daughter is running for office?

Really please do tell.



Look, just face it, you find exploiting a 16 year old girl's misfortune good, something even Obama has said should be off limits, so stop whining like a sissy when you have that pointed out to you.

Some people attack and exploit little girls, you are one of them, got it.

As to her mother's policies, they aren't working ANYWHERE, her daughte is immaterial to the discussion. Remember, even obama has said as much.

Obama has to say that. He's running for office. I am simply pointing out the obvious to people on a web site.

Say what you like, Pallin wants to stop all sex education for my daughters. She wants to stop any schools from handing out condoms to my kids. So using her daughter for a case study is certainly no worse than her imposing out of touch and unrealistic rules on our kids.

And if you disagree El, I really don't give a shit.

[elalumno]

Obama has to say that.

Really? So he has not ethics. Got it.

I am simply pointing out the obvious to people on a web site.

As am I. You exploit children, I point it out.

Say what you like, Pallin wants to stop all sex education for my daughters. She wants to stop any schools from handing out condoms to my kids.

Legitimate points.

So using her daughter for a case study is certainly no worse than her imposing out of touch and unrealistic rules on our kids.

Exploitation. But we see that you are good at exploiting young girls.

And if you disagree El, I really don't give a shit.

Right, but my pointing out the truth sure pisses you off.

Note, I can discuss the issue and link artilces relating to the failure of what Palin advocates. No need to exploit a child. You can't, you NEED to exploit that 16 year old. You are so filled with hate and anger that you relish exploiting that child. Anything to score political points.

[Suraklin]

Is there actually any sort of law on the subject or is it all 'good faith'?

The daughter being pregnant at 16 on it's own is really not a political story... it can be legitimately reported because Palin told us all about it along with her other kids. Beyond that short of something else to make it newsworthy then it should be left alone.

Now if the wildest rumours were true then that would be different - Palin would have engaged in a conspiracy to lie to the US people in order to get votes - very relevant I would think...

[ninjalooter1701]

I wonder how this one is working out.