Is it true this 44 yrs old vce president just had a 5th baby?

Question

And a baby with down syndrome diagnosed before birth?

Does pro-life means taking selfish decision that causes untold hardship/life long distress to innocent will be babies?

I understand caring for a deformed needy child but do we have to make this needy children on purpose based on our own selfish interest?

Why will a 44 yrs go for another baby despite all the odds against her?

And this is suppose be a president should McCain die after a win?

Where are the values of reproductive health education in this governor Palin's America?

Himmmm. Smart governor or vice president?

Will McCain and his followers ever get it?

Answer 1

So now, you want to use abortion rights as a way to attempt to create genetic perfection? We should now abort all babies that may not be perfect? I think Hitler attempted that already and failed.

Answer 2

The real question to ask is why wasn't she using birth control or protection at that age?  If she is opposed to birth control, I shudder to think if she is elected.  We don't need to keep moving backwards.

Answer 3

Wow, you are a prick. She had the baby. She stepped up to her pro-life beleifs even when she was put to that decision. You my friend, have no balls.

Answer 4

I was kind of looking at that  myself and really questioning her judgement because of it

She already had four childern  and she has got to know that having children at such an advanced age carries a significant risk of that child having some fairly significant birth defects >which it did

Despite the risks she didn't take any actions to prevent the pregancy from occuring nor did Mr P.

Most women would have demanded that Mr P have a vasectomy after kid #4 was born or if he wasn't receptive to  that idea then just had a tubal ligation done

Interesting defy the odds decision making that doesn't speak well of her future decision making ability.

Answer 5

Sour grapes...must be the flavor kool aid you are drinking. next time, use tap water instead of toilet water.  

Answer 6

That's a cheap shot, is that all you can come up with?  She did the right thing and not kill her baby.  Human life is precious, regardless of who´s life it is.  

Answer 7

She deserves respect for bringing that baby into this world, and loving it.

I am pro-choice not pro-abortion.^

Answer 8

nope

Answer 9

yeah. and also 60 year old having babies?

Answer 10

Yep, and she lied about it when being swore in as Governor.

She said she would not have anymore babies because she would devote herself to the job even though she was hiding a 4 month pregnancy.

Now, she is going to be dragging a down syndrome child around the country.

No values what so ever.

Answer 11

no, sadly i dont think that they will!!!  the world would be a better place if the did 'get' it!

Answer 12

Okay, maybe parents should be forced to murder their unborn children if they are diagnosed with some sort of disability, what do you think?  How about parents who give birth to intellectually challenged offspring, they must be selfish, too?  I think anyone who is not capable of using correct spelling and grammar should have been aborted (as well as those incapable of recognizing sarcasm).

Answer 13

There are many issues I have with Palin but I want to try to be fair in my own criticism.  I think the biggest mistake is having a baby in your mid 40's.  I realize Palin is pro-life and that's fine, but I don't think it is responsible to conceive a child that late due to inherent risks of birth defects.   If the child was an 'accident' then that in its own right is irresponsible.  If the child was planned I think this is a poor judgement  KNOWING the full risks involved and understanding the consequences.  Once you have a baby with genetic defects knowing the risk that could happen- NOW you should devote EVERYTHING to the child!  Full undivided attention  That should be the only priority at THAT MOMENT to justify the outcome.  Run for VP or Pres later if you will, you'd even benefit from more experience then.

But what seems to continue a series of poor judgements is having a special needs baby and then sacrificing the pure and devoted attention that baby deserves to run for Vice President, during the baby's most important and formative years.  Forget party lines, I don't think that is how you should prioritize when

you have a baby that DEFINITELY has special needs - needs for love, full attention, and dedication from the mother.

I would NOT condone some Spartan or totalitarian method of aborting children with genetic abnormalities by any means.  Some actually do, citing cost to society and possibly even the best interest of an unborn child (quality of life, etc).    I was slammed on the question of judgement  I raised (i.e Downs babies are angels here to show us how to love and are not special needs babies)  but I am talking about a series of choices that I don't see as admirable or reflecting proper priorities.  And I believe all life is special too.

It is terrifically taxing and difficult to serve as VP or President well.  Is this in Trig's best interest now?   And the best example for our country and young people?

What she could be doing, is leveraging her position to fight for Down-stricken babies everywhere, but the priority would be to ensure that child became a striking role model and inspiration to all Down-challenged - that would be the first smart choice in this 'sequence', but to do that well she should focus on that child as her top priority. I am speaking to the immediate needs of a child, and I don't see this as devoted parenting.  I think she would have to acknowledge her own mistakes and challenges in the process because at this stage I think the modeling has been poor.