Thanks for the kind words about my friend. That experience taught me a lot about myself and others….

But abortion is difficult and I know that if it were illegal people would still pursue it as they have done for centuries… putting themselves at risk. Making it illegal won't make abortion go away, but when women hear stories like Palin's they will hopefully be convince to keep the baby. Palin can identify with the anguish, plus speak to the fact that the baby has a medical condition…. And she still shoose to keep it and that she is happy for her decision. Palin has the perfect argument to make for choosing to keep the baby for all the right, moral, good, Christian reasons.

Thanks again.

Perhaps I wasn't clear or you may assume what my conclusion would be….

But I think we mostly (if not totally) agree on this…

We all have heard stories of how Obama watched his mother fight insurance companies as she fought her losing battle with cancer. So we see a more human side of him, and understand that he has first hand knowledge of the problems millions face with insurance companies. And how he might form his views around stem cell research.

We've also heard him talk about his grandmother (and him) being on foodstamps at one point in their lives. So I think if Obama does support programs which would help those in need, while at the same time support programs which raise people and give them opportunities, specially educational opportunities, then he speaks from experience.

Up until now I have not heard many such personal stories from Palin. We've heard her acknowledge and talk about Trig. But this is the first time we've heard her get personal in her stories and show a human side to herself.

I think she does have a powerful message based on her own personal experience that many women go through. Sharing her story can help other women.

And while you and I may differ over pro-life and pro-choice… I think Palin would attract more women voters if she shared her story and the anguish she went through. Otherwise she just sounds like any typical anto-abotion foe who doesn't have real experience with the issue… when quite the opposite is true.

I may be pro-life in my personal beliefs so I always support people who can make good arguments and can share their personal experience on such matters. But I believe in a pro-choice public policy as it IS a difficult choice for women and not one size fits all. So to the extent that Palin's story is deeply personal, humanizing and gives credence to her anti-abortion position is absolutely great. She comes from a much more powerful position than say someone who claims to be anti-abortion, but then goes out and gets an abortion.

So my comment about her having compassion towards other women is meant to mean that she should understand exactly what those other women feel, and argue that she found it best to follow her principles and morals and keep the child. But I feel it is counterproductive if Palin supports legislation to enshrine her own personal and religious beliefs into the legal system.

I think that such actions actually lessen her personal story because then she is just justifying why abortion should be illegal. The real story is the anguish many women go through over this issue. If Palin argues from a moral position, then I think she stands on higher ground. If it's just about justifying her legal position, then that will be part of the argument (and in the minds of some people the entire argument). The goal is to help woman arrive at a decision to keep the child and be at peace with that decision.

So I think you and I most agree on this issue…. though you may want pro-life all the way and enshrined into law.

As an aside… you mention people who felt like wanted to murder someone in retribution. I happened to have such an experience about ten years ago…. A friend of mine was attacked by someone with an axe and he nearly died. the only thing that kept him alive was that he kept remembering in some self-defense training that he took that the instructors told the class, “To keep fighting back”. And he did.

When he told me, I was ready to mruder that person myself. It was realyl an eye opener for me and gave me another perspective on some people's actions. And I totally agree with you when you say, “Christians don't believe that sin is unthinkable, we believe that we're tempted all the time but have to keep clear guidelines on what the objective right choices are even when we're tempted to do the wrong thing.”

I think it's a lesson that many people don't fully understand unless they've been in a position which is at odds over the morals they've embraced their entire lives.

As I mentioned earlier, it's no different than realizing that the families of victims of violent crime might feel a temptation to support the death penalty even if they think it's morally wrong. I've even heard people say that they were shocked that their own anger was so great that they found that they would personally want to murder the perpetrator of the crime- even though they'd clearly not changed their minds about the correctness of that action- and they wouldn't go around educating people to the idea that murder as vengeance should be legal.

She has a personal connection to the situation that is faced by all women who find themselves in that situation, and she's still convicted of the idea that the 'choice' of abortion is morally wrong. Saying that it occurred to her that she has that 'choice' is not at all the same as saying that she is glad that that choice was legally available to her. Christians don't believe that sin is unthinkable, we believe that we're tempted all the time but have to keep clear guidelines on what the objective right choices are even when we're tempted to do the wrong thing.

“The results of the amniocentesis, she said, “blew me away, rocked my world” and helped her understand “the complexities of what a woman goes through”'

It would be great if she can learn to translate the compassion she feels towards herself and Trig towards women in similar circumstances. Both on the campaign trail an in her policies. She has real life experience that she can use to educate others.

…

I have never been a Palin supporter, but really guys, I fail to see the need to demonize her in a constant, ongoing manner about everything that happens in her life. She is NOT the Devil (of course, there isn't one anyway, but you get my point), and she is NOT going to be a serious national candidate ever again.

She will get press for a long time, there will be a core of supporters, but she is too flawed a candidate to make a serious run beyond, maybe, Senator.

I know plenty of women who don't tell their husbands or partners about a pregnancy until around that time period- and several who didn't know themselves they were pregnant until around then (I've even known one of those girls who gave birth without ever knowing she'd been pregnant, though in those cases I always suspect they know on some level but are in denial.)

Alternatively, it's also possible that her statement that Todd didn't know was false, but if so it could have been a lie to protect him (does she have the right to publicly acknowledge if he had similar thoughts, just because she's making the admission herself?)

Who cares, and why should we have the right to even question the timing? Why should we be privvy to such private details of when she knew and when she told her husband anything? For people who's rationale for supporting the right to an abortion includes the right to privacy, it's quite amazing how selective some people are in applying that right.

I have no doubt that it was a wrenching decision, but I have very serious doubts about the above statement. Amniocentesis is done no earlier than the 10th week of pregnancy, and usually between the 14th and 16th week. The public could be in the dark, but is she saying she kept the pregnancy a secret from her own husband? She was over three months pregnant, and Todd didn't know? Sounds highly suspect to me.

It's the same point that's made sometimes by family members of a person killed by a violent attacker if they say that they personally understand why other people might support the death penalty, but they still believe it's morally wrong. Expressing understanding of the thought process that fuels the other position is not at all the same as expressing solidarity with that other position.

Sheesh. Why is it that whenever someone makes a statement against interest, admitting to something like this, the statement is then twisted and used against the person? And why can't people see that when you behave that way, you're encouraging other people to behave more defensively in the future and avoid making any admissions like that- which only fuels our polarity and political extremism, since everyone behaves more stubbornly?

What I OBJECT to is her thinking that I do not have the right to make a different choice. Choice is choice. We either have it, or we don't.