How Much Does Sarah Palin Like Condoms?

A couple of weeks ago, Fosco waxed enthusiastic about his new favorite Palin, new mom Bristol. In the course of that post, Fosco made some accusations about the beliefs of Bristol's mom, Governor Sarah Palin. An anonymous commenter (who I assume is The BeeMaster, although he forgot to sign the comment) took issue with some of Fosco's facts and asked that Fosco make "corrections." This is a reasonable request--assuming Fosco was wrong. Let's find out, shall we?

Here is the first question raised by the commenter (Fosco's original words are in italics):

And so, on behalf of America, I'd like to apologize to Bristol Palin. Bristol, I'm sorry your mom is a hillbilly idiot who didn't want you to learn about how not to get pregnant.

Untrue. Sarah Palin has never backed abstinence-only sex education. In fact, she supports contraceptive education in public schools: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/06/nation/na-sexed6

And from a radio show debate: "...I’m pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues. So I am not anti-contraception. But, yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids. I don’t have a problem with that. That doesn’t scare me, so it’s something I would support also.”

The question, then, is: what type of sex education program does Sarah Palin support?

The commenter has found two statements by Palin that suggest she supports sex ed that teaches about contraception. Both of these quotes are referenced in an LA Times article:

“I’m pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues,” she said during a debate in Juneau.

[...]

"I’m pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues. So I am not anti-contraception. But, yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids. I don’t have a problem with that. That doesn’t scare me, so it’s something I would support also.”

All of this may seem relatively straightforward, and Fosco is willing to admit that Sarah Palin is not quite the anti-contraception crusader that he has painted her as. However, I think Palin's view is a lot more complicated (or confused) than the commenter would like to admit.

The problem, of course, is Palin's response on a questionnaire by the nutjob Eagle Forum. When she was running for governor, Palin responded to the following question in the following way (you can find the full questionnaire here):

3. Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for [sic] explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?

SP: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.

Now what are we supposed to make of this answer? On the face of it, it does seem to suggest that Palin supports "abstinence-until-marriage education" instead of "explicit sex-education programs." After all, the question was worded as an "instead of" question and Palin explicitly (teehee!) chose the second alternative.

Of course, the problem here is what the hell the phrase "explicit sex-ed programs" means? Well, it turns out that "explicit sex-ed" is a loaded code phrase used by conservative groups as another, scarier, name for "comprehensive sex-ed." You can read about its deployment in this NY Times article. And while most parents do support the teaching of basic contraception in sex-ed classes, it is not clear whether a scare term like "explicit sex-ed" is intended to include such information (although I'd be willing to bet that unrolling a condom over a banana or cucumber would count as "explicit" for these people).

Palin's own clarification of the term explicit is about as useful as most of her clarifications. Once again, from the LA Times piece referenced earlier:

In August of that year, Palin was asked during a KTOO radio debate if “explicit” programs include those that discuss condoms. Palin said no and called discussions of condoms “relatively benign.”

“Explicit means explicit,” she said.

"Explicit means explicit"? Fine, but what does "explicit" mean to you, Sarah? Because, even from the way their questionnaire is worded, there is good reason to believe that the Eagle Forum understands the word "explicit" differently than you do (and I bet it includes condoms).

So I think we've managed to tease out Sarah Palin's true beliefs about sex ed. I guess she does actually support condom education. However, at the same time, she is also happy to suggest to conservative groups like the Eagle Forum that she is against "explicit sex-ed," even though "explicit sex-ed" is a conservative synonym for "comprehensive sex-ed" and comprehensive sex-ed does indeed include condom education. Whew! I may have been wrong about her position, but I think you can see why.

Which brings me to the better question here: why is it that Fosco had to spend an hour parsing scattered quotes in order to arrive at a barely half-satisfying position statement for a candidate for the second-most-powerful elected office in the country? We knew exactly what kind of sex ed programs the other candidates (Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and John "Walnuts" McCain) supported. Once again, Palin is a completely blank space. And why? Two reasons:

1. She never talked about any of her beliefs that she didn't want to talk about.
   
2. No one in the media had the opportunity (or the balls) to make her talk about those things.

No doubt her support for contraception would have been unpopular with "the base"; luckily, she never had to talk about it during the campaign. Maybe Fosco is old-fashioned, but he tends to think that candidates for public office have to be explicit (teehee!) about their positions, even when those positions may be unpopular. Hey, this would have been a great question for Greta Van Susteren to have asked Sarah Palin during her drop in! Hmmm, I wonder why Van Susteren didn't think of that...

Okay. On to the commenter's second objection:

And I'm sorry that people like your mom were in charge of your education in the state of Alaska, thereby preventing you from receiving meaningful sex ed.

Untrue. Bristol Palin attended Wasilla High, a public school in Alaska which does teach contraceptive use: http://joannejacobs.com/2008/09/02/sex-ed-and-the-single-alaskan/#comment-82693

Really? What's your source for that? Ah, here it is:

Hmmm. Maybe I'm being a "source snob," but I am not going to accept the third-hand testimony of the daughter of a "buddy" of a conservative Alaskan blogger, even if his name is "Rory."

Hey, here's a better idea. What if we considered the testimony of the Principal of Bristol Palin's Wasilla high school. According to an article in the Boston Herald, WHS Principal Dwight Probasco (pictured at right) stated that his school's sex ed curriculum "pushes abstinence." Whether or not this means that the curriculum is "abstinence-only," I don't know. I also don't know how whatever curriculum the school board and principal have approved gets translated into everyday lessons by the teachers in the school. And we certainly have no way of knowing what specific information Bristol Palin received in her sex ed classes (without, of course, asking her--another missed question by Van Susteren).

All of which means that Fosco cannot guarantee that Bristol Palin didn't learn something about contraception in high school sex ed (although her principal's quote seems to suggest that she did not). However, I think I'm more likely to be right on this than the commentator's pal "Rory." And I think it is clearly not the case that Bristol Palin received comprehensive sex ed, as the commenter asserts:

So, despite receiving "comprehensive" sexual education, Bristol Palin still got pregnant! How can this be? Shall we use draconian terms like "personal responsibility," or shall we chalk up her pregnancy as failure of "comprehensive" sex ed?

Ummm, can I answer "neither"? All sex ed, even comprehensive sex ed, is going to have a failure rate. The question is not whether a program prevents pregnancy altogether, but whether it does better than the alternatives. And, based on that criterion, there is little doubt that comprehensive sex education is effective.

And yes, of course Bristol Palin bears some personal responsibility for her pregnancy. However, we do tend to believe that ignorance lessens responsibility and if Bristol was kept ignorant of basic facts about reproduction and contraception (and we don't know to what extent she was), I think those people who kept that information from her must be held responsible as well.

submit to reddit