Double-standard of the evangelicals?

Question

Apparently, Sara Palin has a 17y/o unmarried daughter whom is pregnant. In the past, evangelicals have been very quick to judge others poorly whom are in a similar situation. However, this time this group is keeping its criticism to itself. Personally, I think this demonstrates a healthy bit of hypocrisy on their part. Any thoughts?

Answer 1

They don't want to take the heat.  

They don't belong in the kitchen.  

McCain should drop her from the ticket.

Answer 2

That's unfortunate. I'm an evangelical, and I think it's very distasteful - what her daughter's done. But it's not Sarah's fault. And now that the deed is done, it's time to move on and love the baby/mother. That's how we should respond to anyone in such a predicament.  

Answer 3

I don't think you have your principles straight on this one.  Sarah Palin is strongly Pro Choice and has been consistent with that, both in her decision to keep her own child (despite Downs Syndrome) and in supporting her daughter's decision NOT to consider abortion.

It was not the evangelicals who attacked...but the liberals...and Obama just told them that family was "off limits".  

I think you might have a bias either because of an overly narrow sample of evangelicals, or because you love to see people with evangelical "values" exposed as hypocrites.  

I regret that we are all struggling with a perfect calling, but a life on earth that is far less than perfect.  It is in the goal and in the values that we distinguish ourselves...say "I blew it"...make it right...and start again in pursuit of things that are honorable.  Evangelicals are about sharing the "good news" that we can be made right with God, not about demonstrating that they are perfect.  

Answer 4

So you are being "quick" to judge the Palins huh...good way to prove that judging is wrong.

All parents, no matter what denomination or political affiliation, have problems with teens from time to time. No one is perfect.

The difference is, because the Palin's are pro-life, her daughter will keep the baby and marry her boyfriend. In a democrat family, the daughter would have had an abortion and no one would be the wiser.

At least the Palin's are ready to face their daughter's mistakes with love and support, and are not trying to hide it from the world. All of us should be able to admit when we have done wrong, and do our best to make it right.

Answer 5

Evangelical christians are not a political group. An evangelical is one who preaches the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The young girl kept the baby instead of killing it...what's wrong with that choice...she needs support, not condemnation.

Answer 6

You expect politicians to be honest and straight-forward. Keep dreaming.

Look up the meaning of Politics in the dictionary.  

Answer 7

I am shocked, SHOCKED I SAY, that politics brings out hypocrisy in people.

<end sarcasm>

Answer 8

In the  past, everyone was judgmental about a 17 year old girl getting pregnant.  That's why, as late as the 1970s, girls who got pregnant were sent away from home until they had their babies.

There will be plenty of people criticizing and judging not only Palin's daughter, but Palin herself, the public school system, Palin's husband, John McCain, the Republicans, the Democrats, the IRS, the lack of light in Alaska during the winter, global warming, additives in food, urban sprawl, the oil crisis, and everyone else they can blame and judge for the girl's predicament.

But the fact is, it comes down to one thing.  A 17 year old girl chose to have s*x but unwisely did not use birth control so she got pregnant.  That happens.  

What you fail to recognize is that many evangelicals will probably be rejoicing that she is keeping her baby rather than getting an abortion.  

Answer 9

Hypocrisy - Par excellence  

Answer 10

well, since she is pro-life, i look at it like she has instilled those beliefs in her child as well ( considering she is still pregnant and didn't have an abortion )... to bad her child didn't use protection... and for anyone to point a finger is wrong... the means in which we judge others, we too will be judged... I don't know about you, but i have my own problems without pointing a finger at someone else....

Answer 11

You want hypocrisy?

The only ones who are obsessed with criticizing Gov. Palin for having a pregnant daughter (oooooh!) are the media and the left, who are pouncing on this like it's some kind of big "gotcha!".  Forget the economy, national security, or any other issue; MY GAWD HER DAUGHTER IS PREGNANT.  And before this came out, Gov. Palin herself was lambasted by the same people for having (gasp!) five children (and one of them with Down's syndrome!  Horrors!).  So much for the drumbeat of "every woman has the right to choose" when her "choice" isn't one they like.

Show me where evangelicals have been "very quick to judge others poorly" for being pregnant out of wedlock and actually giving birth to the child instead of aborting it. Just one source.

Answer 12

1) "Evangelicals have been very quick to judge others poorly whom are in a similar situation"(sic):   That's easy to say but you give no examples. So how about proving your point. If this is something which "evangelicals" have been prone to do with VP's and other political appointments, prove it.

2) So let me get this straight:  You are complaining because you are disappointed that Evangelicals are NOT criticizing an unwed teen for choosing not to get an abortion and choosing to marry the father. Can you cite even ONE example where Evangelicals criticized a young girl for making those pro-life choices?

3) You think this demonstrates "a healthy bit of hypocrisy on their part. Any thoughts?"   Yes.  I think you are the one showing a double-standard.  (That is, you think it is wrong for evangelicals to criticize someone for their pro-life choices -- without giving even one example to prove your point -- but then you complain when Evangelicals (who do NOT consider McCain one of their favorites, to say the least) failed to criticize a 17year old unwed mother. Hmmm. Interesting.)

I guess some people complain no matter what.  (I suppose then according to your logic, Evangelicals are being hypocrites when they fund homes for unwed teen mothers.  OK.  And thank you for your efforts to create a better society.)

Answer 13

I guess living in a society that is s*x driven, it is hard for someone to resist the temptation.  We are all human and make mistakes, but fortunately her daughter is making two correct choices after making one mistake.  She is having the child and marrying the father of the child.  I guess this is a point where you may advocate condom's and s*x education, but the question in this is, would you have intercourse with someone you were attracted to but also knew this person had std or aids?  Probably not even with a condom.  False sensee of security is not the answer either.  The guidance taught by evangelists is way better than what any secular "progressive" teachings present.  Disease will spread, hearts will be broken, and people will feel empty if they follow the progressive guidance, but if you follow the evangelical side you will have meaningful relationships.

What do you mean by better?  It is a relative term, which could be used in either side of our discussion.  If you mean better as in easier to learn, no pregnancies, no disease (not true--false sense of security), treated as objects to gain then lose...  For my position it may go into more meaningful relationship (s*x not the most important part of a relationship-get to know the person before you commit to him/her), prevents diseases (can't catch a disease if you don't have s*x), harder to follow (narrower path to follow).