Let me tell you a story.
Once upon a time, a girl met a boy. Let’s call them Bristol and Levi. (Really creative, I know.) Bristol fell head over heels with Levi. Although she was just a teen, he was everything she wanted in a guy. He was tall, attractive and athletic. Score!
But Bristol wasn’t the only one who was in “love.” Bristol was a catch, too. She was cute and witty. Yeah, that’s about it. Wait, did I mention her mother was the freakin’ governor of Alaska? Jackpot!
Bristol and Levi spent all their free time together. Maybe too much time. It wasn’t long before Bristol became pregnant. This was bad. Really bad.
Bristol was only 17 years old, and her mother, Sarah (Palin), was just tapped to run as vice president of the United States. It gets worse.
Sarah was totally against abortions. Translation: Goodbye innocence. Hello motherhood!
(Side note: Bristol also said it bothered her to hear that many people thought her mother was making her have the baby, when it was her own choice.) Whatev.
Sarah and her husband issued a statement saying they were “proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents.”
Yeah, right.
Next thing you know, Bristol and Levi are engaged. Like we didn’t see that coming.
Can we say “arranged marriage?” Apparently, that was Sarah’s way of correcting the problem.
It sounds like someone’s PR team didn’t think the situation through. The result was not natural, and it had “set-up” written all over it.
Regardless of my views, Levi claimed something different.
“We both love each other. We both want to marry each other. And that’s what we are going to do.”
I guess.
Fast forward a few months. Bristol gives birth to a healthy baby boy. Congrats!
In an interview, she verbally slapped her mother in the face by saying that abstinence is “not realistic at all.” That goes against Sarah’s stance to teaching abstinence-only education in schools.
Take that, Sarah!
Now, recent news headlines are reporting that Bristol and Levi called off their engagement. We didn’t need to be Sherlock Holmes to figure this one out. At least I didn’t.
I saw it coming, and the statistics weren’t on the couple’s side.
According to teenhealthandmarriage.com, more than 60 percent of teen parents get divorced within five years. If pregnancy is the main reason for a teen marriage, the failure rate can be as high as 90 percent in six years.
So what does this mean? Chances are, Bristol and Levi weren’t going to get married anyway, and if they did, it wouldn’t have been too long before shit hit the fan.
Too make a long story short, Levi is a lucky man. He’s free, and thanking his lucky stars that his ex-future mother-in-law didn’t win the one-way ticket to the White House.
On the other hand, I bet he’s regretting that “Bristol” tattoo he has on his finger.
2 responses so far ↓
Brittany // March 14, 2009 at 7:43 am |
Yeah I think we all seen what the end result was going to be when it first began. I truly wish people would step into the 21st century and not push the marriage issue just because a pregnancy has occurred. It doesn’t matter when you say “I do” because the “sin” of premarital sex and a child being created out of wedlock has already occurred. Nice coverup to the world but God already knows the truth. A child’s home is what you make it. If it happens to be in 2 separate houses then that’s what it is. Marriage based on a pregnancy only creates a bigger problem..a high risk for divorce. Then how do you explain that to your child as they grow older? That mommy and daddy only got married because of them and that’s why they spent the last years of their lives miserable. Now talk about making the innocent child feel guilty.
Alexia Harris // March 15, 2009 at 7:48 pm |
I agree, Brittany. Said simply, this was an arraigned marraige. It was not the wants of the children involved, but instead the parents. But not because it was the best solution, but because it would better the image of Bristol’s mother/politician.
But what’s done is done. The important thing is that the child is loved, regardless of the parents’ intimate feelings (or lack thereof).