That Bristol Palin, US Vice-Presidential Republican Candidate Sarah Palin's 17 year old daughter, is pregnant (and, golly gosh!, unwed) is no secret. It's been out there in medialand for all to read and hear about. The Republicans have been telling the media to keep out of this private family business, and that's a fair enough request. After all, Bristol's pregancy really does have nothing to do with her mother's ability to fullfill the duties of the office of Vice-President of the United States.
Despite this request by the GOP to the media, they have been quick to make the point that Briston will continue with her pregnancy, and will also marry the boy with whom she 'had relations'. Along with the choice of Sarah Palin to continue with her last pregnacy when informed that the foetus, (the now baby Trig) would be born with Down Syndrome, the Palin family has been celebrated by the Right as an example to all that support a 'pro-life' position; that both mother and daughter chose not to abort their pregancies is evidence of the family's comitment to their principles. The media have been happy to dance to this song, and as much as they have made of this story, that is the story the media have been going with.
It is well and good that these two individuals have chosen to live according to their principles, but why is that a story? It would seem rather unremarkable that people would do that. I would think the story would be if either Sarah or Bristol had chosen an abortion in contravention of their 'pro-life' princple and allied rejection of abortion. But since that was not the case, there is no story as far as I can see.
I do have one question though: If abortion was never an option, why does the GOP make the point that both Sarah and Bristol chose to continue with their pregnancies? Why celebrate the choice they made? After all, according the principles of these two individuals, they never had a choice.