BellaOnline Forums Relationships Married No Kids Sarah Palin and kids

OK, are other people as annoyed by the fact that candidates for public office have to parade their kids on the stage? We saw this a few days ago with Sarah Palin when at one point during her speech, all five of her children were on stage and it seemed that her whole presence was screaming, "elect me because I am a woman and I have five children". Honestly, who cares? We need people who are visionaries in this world and we couldn't care less if our politicians have children, grandchildren, none at all, or whatever.
Plus, Sarah Palin's vote to not allow sex education in Alaska is sickening. Look what happened to her teenage daughter.

Where should she put her family? Hiding somewhere off camera? When you have children they are part of you and usually go everywhere with you until they forge out on their own.
She chose to have those children. And I might say they are a very pretty bunch.

If she does get elected to the position, wouldn't you have wanted to know as much as you can about the candidate?(like the fact that she has children)

And finally we hope and pray that when we raise children that they have a strong foundation in which to live a good life, getting pregnant at a young age is usually not tops on the list, but we would all be fooling ourselves to say that our children we bear will be perfect and never make mistakes big or small.
Thanks for your time every one!

Mary Caliendo
Tea Editor

I agree that Palin is using her image as a "mother" to make her electable -- and quite honestly, parenting does not qualify one to hold public office.

If she is going to present herself as a "mother" first, and say things like "the only difference between a soccer mom and a pit bull is lipstick," then she can't be surprised when the media starts to pick apart her family life.

Just my two cents.

Kim

Marriage and children have been used to win elections because they're seen as signs of stability and normalcy, at least since the 1950s pro-family conservative era. Single people are often seen as targets for scandals (ie who they're dating, how the relationship's going etc.) and we all know how suspect the childfree are. As recent examples of this political pressure, Sakozy got married within a year of becoming the French president and Canada's last governor general married her commonlaw spouse of many years upon assuming office. It is simply not seen as acceptable to be unmarried or without children in public office. Children signify the conservative ideal of success, which is only more true for women, so they are always prominent during elections.

This might have been fine in the 50s but now, with only 25% of Canadians and Americans in two-person married households with children, it's just a joke. Far from being "average" or "normal", the traditional nuclear family is beginning to lose its dominance demographically, but not politically. I would love it if we could actually elect people based on their skills and experience, but that happens as seldom in national politics as in high school student elections! It's a popularity contest and certain votes count more than others.

There's a vast difference between parading your children as trophies and "hiding somewhere off-camera", an entire spectrum of choices that might be more appropriate.

My undergrad thesis was on the American family as a constructed defense against Communism. Very interesting stuff!

For over half a century at least, our country has glorified a nuclear family in a suburban home. Everyone who doesn't fit into that is suspect -- singles, people without kids, homosexuals, etc.

Very sad that we aren't more enlightened in the 21st century!

Kim

It is not our vote that is being courted. And having a family does appeal to the vast majority. And I personally do not think Sarah Palin would treat me badly for choosing not to have children--so why should I treat her badly for choosing to have them? She is a Conservative Republican, she never claimed to be a Liberal Democrat. You either agree with her politics and vote for her (and John McCain--who has 7 children) or you don't and vote for Barack Obama (and Joe Biden who has, I think a son?) Barack Obama who, incidentally has children too and I think Michelle Obama comes across as being more of a stereotype than Sarah Palin does.
I am not expressing a political opinion here--just saying--be fair!
Ravyn

Just to clarify, I have even heard it expressed that while Barack Obama is off running the country/world, that Michelle Obama will be staying home raising the girls. I wonder if this would be different if the children were boys? As far as a role-model is concerned- I would much rather use Sarah Palin than Michelle Obama! But on a personal aside, from what I have heard and seen, I find both women likeable. I just think Michelle Obama is way more typically the average "mom" than Sarah Palin. I think Sarah has more to talk about than just her kids!
Ravyn

Sex education in the schools is so important. I don't think she has a leg to stand on with this one, honestly.

Quite frankly, my values in order of importance are God-Family-Ministry-Occupation. And, I choose those who represent me in any capacity to display a similar value system (whether it is interesting or not).

I agree Jilly. Sex ed is VERY important.

Palin's values are not even remotely in line with my own.

Kim