Stumping McCain On Sex In Schools
September 3rd 2008 22:44
It’s funny how a thing can change the trajectory of the week in politics. Before the announcement of Sarah Palin’s impending stint as a grandmother, the issue of teen pregnancy and what to teach in schools was still an issue but one that was hovering on the periphery of the campaigns big issues of war and the economy. But now, on the day Bristol Palin and her baby-daddy Levi Johnston publically greet John McCain at the Republican National Convention, the issue of sexual education in schools has zoomed back to the forefront. And it might be enough to trip up the McCain campaign if they don’t act fast. So far, McCain has done well to be open and honest about the Palin pregnancy but have so far avoided the question that a lot of people have asked since the issue was thrust into the spotlight: how do you teach sexual education in schools? The current President has actively supported a policy of abstinence, wherein teachers in health or science classes are only allowed to teach students to abstain from having sexual relations, and are absolutely unable to discuss the use of condoms or birth control.
Bush says that the only absolutely 100% positive way to ensure that teen pregnancies will decrease is to... well, to not have sex at all. Which, theoretically, is absolutely correct. But it denies the reality on the ground that, like it or not, teenagers are going to want to have sex and many of them don’t have the kind of self-control that Bush is promoting. It’s just one of those things. So the real question is whether or not schools should actively support safe sexual practice as a way to curb the teen pregnancy rate. That’s where the real contention lies. It generally divides along ideological lines. Right-wingers say that abstinence is the best policy and promoting safe sex inherently promotes sex itself which isn’t the role of the education system. Left-wingers, on the other hand, say that teen sex is a reality and wouldn’t you rather they do it safely than unsafely if they are just going to do it anyway? Both of them make good points, but regardless of the ideological break, the question remains as to what exactly the McCain-Palin ticket’s policy on sex education in schools is. We know that the ticket is pro-life at its core. That’s one of the things about Palin that has most appeased the conservative base that weren’t too sure of McCain’s conservative credentials. But what about before that? What about before the point where you have to choose to have an abortion or not to?
That’s where sex education comes into the picture. In 2007, McCain said he supported President Bush’s policy of ‘abstinence only’ education in schools. He said he definitely opposed the Government spending money on contraceptives to give out to kids, and in 1988 signed the Family Support Act requiring teen mothers to go to school and in some cases live with their parents or otherwise forego public benefits. In one gaffe last year, when McCain was on the trail for the Republican nomination, McCain was asked if he thought contraceptives helped stop the spread of HIV and his response? “You’ve stumped me”. Not the smartest move there, John. A statement like that is lose-lose. Either you seem like you’re making a decision on contraceptives while ignorant of what they are intended to do or you seem like you do know and you just don’t care. You can tell that the question was intended to trip up McCain. The questioner wanted to pose a question with an obvious answer in direct violation of McCain’s own position. The questioner wanted McCain to either answer honestly and undercut his own policy, or answer by talking around the question and look like a waffling mess. In this case, McCain kept it short and simple and so he kept the waffling at bay. But it still made him look like a mess.
Just remember that this really wasn’t on the public’s radar before the Palin’s joined the campaign trail. But that’s the way things work. Things come up over almost a year of campaigning that the candidates have to respond to that they would rather not. The Russia-Georgia conflict was a hit for Obama who not only was on holiday in Hawaii but couldn’t muster up a response that matched McCain’s tough stance. There was Hurricane Gustav which invoked memories of Katrina at exactly the wrong time for the GOP, who are generally blamed for the lax response to the 2005 hurricane. Now, the Palin pregnancy has brought this issue to forefront and John McCain has to answer the deeper issue, not only the facts of this particular case. Answering the questions head-on will help McCain regain control of the agenda and will firmly lay out where McCain stands on an issue that affects many American families.
This time, he can’t afford to be ‘stumped’.
Bush says that the only absolutely 100% positive way to ensure that teen pregnancies will decrease is to... well, to not have sex at all. Which, theoretically, is absolutely correct. But it denies the reality on the ground that, like it or not, teenagers are going to want to have sex and many of them don’t have the kind of self-control that Bush is promoting. It’s just one of those things. So the real question is whether or not schools should actively support safe sexual practice as a way to curb the teen pregnancy rate. That’s where the real contention lies. It generally divides along ideological lines. Right-wingers say that abstinence is the best policy and promoting safe sex inherently promotes sex itself which isn’t the role of the education system. Left-wingers, on the other hand, say that teen sex is a reality and wouldn’t you rather they do it safely than unsafely if they are just going to do it anyway? Both of them make good points, but regardless of the ideological break, the question remains as to what exactly the McCain-Palin ticket’s policy on sex education in schools is. We know that the ticket is pro-life at its core. That’s one of the things about Palin that has most appeased the conservative base that weren’t too sure of McCain’s conservative credentials. But what about before that? What about before the point where you have to choose to have an abortion or not to?
That’s where sex education comes into the picture. In 2007, McCain said he supported President Bush’s policy of ‘abstinence only’ education in schools. He said he definitely opposed the Government spending money on contraceptives to give out to kids, and in 1988 signed the Family Support Act requiring teen mothers to go to school and in some cases live with their parents or otherwise forego public benefits. In one gaffe last year, when McCain was on the trail for the Republican nomination, McCain was asked if he thought contraceptives helped stop the spread of HIV and his response? “You’ve stumped me”. Not the smartest move there, John. A statement like that is lose-lose. Either you seem like you’re making a decision on contraceptives while ignorant of what they are intended to do or you seem like you do know and you just don’t care. You can tell that the question was intended to trip up McCain. The questioner wanted to pose a question with an obvious answer in direct violation of McCain’s own position. The questioner wanted McCain to either answer honestly and undercut his own policy, or answer by talking around the question and look like a waffling mess. In this case, McCain kept it short and simple and so he kept the waffling at bay. But it still made him look like a mess.
Just remember that this really wasn’t on the public’s radar before the Palin’s joined the campaign trail. But that’s the way things work. Things come up over almost a year of campaigning that the candidates have to respond to that they would rather not. The Russia-Georgia conflict was a hit for Obama who not only was on holiday in Hawaii but couldn’t muster up a response that matched McCain’s tough stance. There was Hurricane Gustav which invoked memories of Katrina at exactly the wrong time for the GOP, who are generally blamed for the lax response to the 2005 hurricane. Now, the Palin pregnancy has brought this issue to forefront and John McCain has to answer the deeper issue, not only the facts of this particular case. Answering the questions head-on will help McCain regain control of the agenda and will firmly lay out where McCain stands on an issue that affects many American families.
This time, he can’t afford to be ‘stumped’.
| 36 |
| Vote |
